PR Industry (Post #3)

I remember learning about a certain actress (I believe it was Mary Pickford, but don’t hold me to that) who died a very untimely death right before her film was supposed to come out in the 1940’s. The public was shocked by this tragedy and massive amounts of people flooded into the theatres to see her movie. However, the studio was merely pulling a fast one on the public and later announced Mary had actually survived her “accident” and was alive. Of course, Mary never got into an accident this was the studio’s rather sick way of hyping up her film. This just reminds me that the PR stunts we see going on today have been going on for decades, albeit they are a little less messed up at this point.

The reading talks about how these days rather than famous people being the stars of industry, they are the stars of the media. From what I’ve learned the stars of the first quarter of the 20^th century were industry giants like Andrew Carnegie and Rockefeller and now they are people like Tom Cruise and Will Smith. Of course, the advent of the different forms of media in the mid and late 20^th century caused this change, but it is a fascinating dynamic nonetheless.

The reading also makes you realize how extensive the job of a PR man in Hollywood has become. The agent has to market his/her client to all media forms not just the one they are known for. Movie stars must be integrated into TV commercials, consumer products, and even music. This job especially applies to sports stars, because their true careers are limited by their physical capacities. Thus, when they are done with their craft, it’s important that their PR agent has sculpted out a fine career for them either on TV, in film, or in music.

It is interesting to read about the career of Marilyn Monroe. For example, Monroe was obviously marketed as the sex symbol. It is up to not just the actress, but also the agent to help pick roles as well as marketing opportunities that can market this image further to the public.

How does one go about picking this role?

Does the role even have to match their personal identity?

What does one do when their current persona gets fractured?

Marilyn Monroe the Iconic Sex Symbol (Blog #2)

When Marilyn Monroe’s name is mentioned the first thing that pops in to most people’s head is how she is a beautiful iconic sex symbol of the fifties. The majority of the roles she played allowed her to be seen as a male gaze. The image that she held on screen was also seen off screen in her normal everyday life. While I was reading Richard Dyer’s Heavenly Bodies he mentions that she is seen as a victim as a sex object, Megan Fox and Anna Nicole Smith came in to mind. Megan Fox is not necessarily thought of as a great actress, but is someone who is sexy and carries the same kind of qualities Monroe upheld to contribute to the male gaze. On the other hand Anna Nicole Smith, seen as less of an actress than Megan Fox, holds the image of the over the top dumb blonde that Dyer mentions, which is more of Monroe’s onscreen persona.

I feel like the Dyer’s theory on the dumb blonde character that relies on men for money and stability has changed dramatically through the years. One movie that immediately popped into my mind was Legally Blonde. This movie tried to play against the typical blonde stereotypes that had been enforced in prior movies about women. I think that the “dumb blonde” is talking about any attractive women who are seen as only people who get by based on their looks and purely that. Like Monroe’s role in Gentlemen Prefer Blondes her character relied on men for money and attention to feel good about themselves. This reflects the issues that were present at the time in the fifties where women were the homemakers and the men were the breadwinners and they had to rely on them for money and dependence. Unlike Reese Witherspoon’s character in Legally Blonde she demonstrated that girls do not have to be objects of the male gaze and they can be self-sufficient, which shows how dramatically times in society have changed.

The male gaze that Monroe demonstrates onscreen by through the handsome men memorization by her stunning looks. The male gaze consists of a shot of the woman, in this case Monroe, a shot of the men looking at her stunning looks, and then a shot of the woman from their point of view. As I watched Gentlemen Prefer Blondes I noticed that they whenever there would be a setting with new characters Monroe would be shown in a captivating light that would then show a man or group of men noticing her stunning looks, and then they would approach her.

Monroe’s star persona and image that Dyer said how “pretty girls are sought out in films” reflects the understanding of how an image can be so influential that fifty years later we still look to her as one of the greatest sex symbols.

1. Who else can be seen as someone who represents the same qualities on and off screen like Monroe?

2. Why are women criticized as being gold diggers?

3. What are men criticized for?

Reading response 2-Marilyn Monroe and Sexuality

The 1950s were a time of great change in America. Post-WW2, the soldiers were home and women were starting to become more free and independent having worked domestically during the war. Leisure activities were at an all time high and, as a result, the film industry had to react. Gentleman Prefer Blondes exemplifies this new kind of movie, and its star is the symbol of a generation.

Marilyn Monroe came into the public eye notorious for her looks and her charm, and she personified the foundation of the upcoming sexual revolution. The 1950s were the first time sex became a topic that was talked about publicy, rather than just a taboo. In the Heavenly Bodies reading, Dyer discusses Foucault and his ideas of the repressive hypothesis--the idea that sexuality has been so taboo that it is difficult for people to talk about it. This idea came out in society through Monroe and through publishings such as the Kinsey Report and the Feminine Mystique. Rather than hiding her sexuality, Monroe exemplified the repressive hypothesis by flaunting it and using it to get ahead. By being so free with her body, Monroe made sex not as taboo. Furthermore, as discussed in the reading, Monroe's sexuality came naturally--that is, she did not have to try and be sexy, that's just how she was. In a time of leisure and fun in America post-war, Monroe personified this new free environment. This is also seen through her film roles. The character of Lorelei is carefree and uses her looks and charm to attract men. She doesn't have much drive in life other than to find a rich man who will cover her in diamonds. But she also uses her sexuality to get ahead, much like Monroe. Her sexuality seems normal and fun, and by playing the 'dumb blonde' it seems very natural that she would also look like such a bombeshell.

All of these ideas are exemplified in the scene of the film where Dorothy acts like Lorelai in the courtroom. In portraying her friend, all Dorothy has to do is put on a blonde wig, say some cutesy, silly one-liners and start doing a dance in sexy outfit. Even though they are able to solve the problem by presenting the judge with the tiara, it is still the sexy dance and actions of "Lorelai" that get her off the hook for stealing it in the first place. A character like Lorelai was so similar to Monroe's real life persona and she was an example to women in America that they could use sexuality outside of the home (in the bedroom with their husbands) in order to get away with whatever they wanted and achieve great means in life.

Questions for Discussion:

1. Could the outcome of the trial turned out differently had it gone accordingly, rather than Dorothy causing a scene?
2. Would Monroe have been as successful had she not had blonde hair?
3. If Monroe were alive today, what would the tabloid reaction to her be? Would she be so idolized by the public or was this only the case because in the 50's she was the first woman to truly act that way whereas today, we expect this sort of behavior from our female "celebutantes"?

The Twitter Effect (Supp.Post 2)

I recently joined the dark side and created a Twitter account. I did so because I was curious about how it works and because a few organizations I am involved with are using the site as a communication device. While I have not yet "tweeted" anything myself, I follow a few users--mainly celebrities. After being on the site for about a week, i still can't figure out why twitter is such a big deal. Most of the famous people tweet about something they are involved with, linking to pictures or videos of projects. But others will just describe their day, for example many stars in New York City spent most of the end of this past week tweeted about the horrible snowstorm. What i can't help but wonder is why do we care? Twitter seems to be the most extreme form of celebrity stalking--now we can now what a star is up to from the minute they wake up to when they go to sleep. But no one seems to be saying anything of relevance. Basically what twitter does is show us the human, normal side of celebrities--we are now all on the same page because we can use the same electronic device to communicate and share news about ourselves.

The site also seems contradictory for so many celebrities because many of them spend significant amounts of time complaining about all of the attention put on their personal lives. But if you want your personal life to remain private, why are you advertising everything you do to the entire world (in 140 characters or less)? Certain stars, such as Ellen DeGeneres or Ryan Seacrest seem to keep their twitters professional, promoting all of their various projects they are involved in, but many others (the Kardashians, the stars of "Glee", etc.) are merely tweeting about what they are doing at the current time. In revealing these facts about themselves, the celebrities are essentially giving people the go ahead to be curious about their personal lives, thus giving them no right to complain when things get out of control. We are now able to interact with them in a very direct way and thus the feeling that we "know" a celebrity becomes even greater. It seems like through twitters, stars show us their "true" selves, but on the other side, twitter is just a greater way of reinforcing their star persona to all of their followers.

Hilary Duff Engaged? More Importantly Who Cares? (Supplemental Post #1)

I know I don't. All week I kept hearing more and more stories of former Disney IT girl and her recent engagement. I kept thinking to myself, what was the last project she did that would make the general public care about her and her love life. Sadly, Hilary Duff peaked at 13 with her Disney series 'Lizzie McGuire' and after a short string of music hits, she seemingly fell off the face of the earth. Then I started to realize that in the discussion of Duff's impending nuptials, what was hiding underneath was the fact that Duff's marriage was huge in a way that the girl who ushered in the Disney of the new millennium, the one where the girl had to lead a comedy series, star in countless original Disney movies, release albums filled with forgettable, cheesy pop tunes, then go on tour, was finally moving on. The marriage of a wholesome, virginal, star at such a young age (Duff is only 22) is the end of the goody two shoes brand. Duff started the whole trend, and has since passed the torch to the likes of Miley Cyrus, Selena Gomez, and Demi Lovato, who arguably do not share the same good girl image as Duff. Whether they are canoodling with Jonas Brothers, are publicly making fun of the other one, or taking risque pictures in showers, the new girls don't have the wholesome appeal that Duff had. Her engagement symbolizes the end of this Disney sitcom/popstar brand era,as it shows that she has finally moved on and Disney can't replace her with the new Miley Cyrus's who are in a rush to grow up and are trying to sexualize themselves in an attempt to break the Disney girl image in order to translate into a long career. Duff's enagement proves she'll finally shed this image, and subsequently will end Disney's brand. It's quite similar to how the minute we found out that Britney was no longer a virgin, the pop bubble burst. The fun part now will see how Miley Cyrus, Demi Lovato, and Selena Gomez will grow up and what their future careers will bring if they are able to transition from being child stars.

Marilyn Monroe and Sex: Reading Post #2

As I first started thinking about Marilyn Monroe as a celebrity, I attempted to figure out a contemporary celebrity who was relatively similar to her. Megan Fox came to mind, but she clearly has a completely different look than Marilyn Monroe, and she is not known for her acting talent as Monroe was. Angelina Jolie is also similar, but not the same by any means. I realized that Marilyn Monroe stands in a category all by herself, even to this day, more than 50 years after her prime.

Marilyn Monroe still represents sexuality because she was the first real celebrity to bring sexuality to the forefront of American culture in a positive way. She was revered by both men AND women even though she represented sex during a time of close-mindedness towards the subject. The Heavenly Bodies article brings up Kinsey's research and The Feminine Mystique, which were all done during the time of Marilyn Monroe. Marilyn's image, I have to think, had a large part in the sexual discourse that was starting during this time period. For a long time, sexual repression was seen to be relatively normal, but obviously it was not very healthy. Women were supposed to be perfect housewives, but Marilyn Monroe represented a sexual woman who was also a great talent and a seemingly amazing woman. The sexual revolution began not long after the period when Marilyn was the biggest movie star. The Heavenly Bodies article also discusses her Playboy spread at length, which I think is incredibly important because it shows that Monroe was not afraid to push boundaries, and to change and shape American culture forever. Playboy was a giant leap towards the sexual freeing of the American public, especially regarding American women.

While Monroe really helped make strides for sexual freedom in America, it is also important to discuss the dichotomy that existed and still exists in America regarding sexuality. Monroe was lauded and revered for her sexuality, yes, but she was often seen in a negative light. Monroe was often not taken seriously because she was solely seen as "The Body," and was completely sexualized. People were fascinated by her and what she stood for, but still had relatively negative and prudish views on sexuality. I think still to this day, this dichotomy exists. People are fascinated by sex and sexuality, but are relatively afraid of it. Sex is often seen as something negative, but American culture is extraordinarily obsessed with it.

Stars as Ideal (Supplemental Post #3)

I was watching the Tyra Banks show the other day and she was promoting her BIO campaign, which has to do with changing the idea of beauty not only around the world but also within the film, TV and modeling industry. She then interviewed random people on the street and asked them what they would like to see more in the industry. Some of the answers were stars without make up, and heavier women. The idea of wanting to see celebrities without make up reminded me of the conversation we had on Monday about Tiger Woods and the image he portrays. I believe that celebrities have certain images they have to portray and showing them without make up or picking apart every aspect of their lives challenge that image and break down the idea of the celebrity.

Celebrities are idealizations of ourselves and since they show an idealization we do not want to know their flaws. Jennifer Aniston is supposed to be the beautiful girl next door and I think that breaking her down and showing her cellulite and sun marks because people want to find her more “relatable” is a terrible idea. If we knew what celebrities really looked like we probably wouldn’t look up to them or even want to watch them on the screen. There are reasons for why they are popular whether it is for their talents or their beauty. If we took away their talents or their beauty then how would they be any different from us? I think that the majority of people want to look up to celebrities because they provide a model for what we can strive for. However, I do believe that there should be more celebrities that are heavier and of varied ethnicities so that everyone regardless of their size or ethnicity can have someone that is an idealization of themselves.

Some questions:

Do you think that celebrities should be equivalent to the general public or kept at a distance?

What would you like to see more of in mainstream media in regards to physical beauty?

Ian Farwell - (Misc Post #4) - Southland

Another Television Symposium Class in the past...
This weeks class included the top three cast members from the new television show Southland. The cast that showed up were Michael Cudlitz, Benjamin McKenzie, and Regina King. Also, the Emmy winning writer of the show Anne Biderman showed up to talk with us too. The show Southland, for those who are not familiar, is a series about LAPD uniform cops and detectives. It was canceled from NBC and has found a new home on TNT.
The reason I thought this was relevant for our Stars class is that Southland is a rugged cop show that reminded me of the success of the western. During one of my classes it was mentioned that cop shows (From Dragnet to Southland/NYPD Blue/The Shield/&All the CSI's) have been some of the most successful plot lines in recent history. It seems to me that the modern day cop story parallels that of the western. Today's industrialized no-man's-land is only found in the world of the beat cop. Many of us don't have to directly deal with crime in our day to day life, but the cop story revives the western notion of the wild frontier in a non-frontier era. Cops shows show many of the same plot lines as the western such as good cop gone bad and other interesting story lines.
Also, one last side note...(slightly off topic, but having to do with westerns)
I was thinking further about the idea of what modern character could represent the western hero John Wayne, and although I struggled to find a specific actor, I was thinking about how the character representation of Batman illustrated many of the Ideas about what John Wayne. I mean even the character for Batman carries the same last name bruce WAYNE. Coincidence?
Batman is the rugged figure set out to clean the wild streets of Gotham. Maybe a stretch, but in many ways the uncontrollable Gotham mirrors the wild wild west. I could be completely wrong, but just an idea, and a good conversation starter as clearly batman also differs in many ways from previous western depictions.

Misc Post #1- The Celebrity Culture in Aspen

I was in Aspen this weekend, and it seems as though the celebrity culture has completely taken over that place. I grew up in Los Angeles, so I am incredibly interconnected to celebrity culture and wannabe starlets. Los Angeles, particularly Beverly Hills, is associated with wealth, snobbery, and of course celebrity (since being a celebrity partially entitles you to be both wealty and snobby).

Aspen used to be a place of extraordinary natural beauty. While it still is one of the most beautiful places I have ever been, it is now a hotspot destination for the rich and famous. Even though I saw no celebrities while I was there, it was clear that the many celebrities who have visited Aspen have left their mark (and probably have marked their territory). Pictures of celebrities in Aspen were on almost every wall of each restaurant and store I went into. The most interesting celebrity that kept popping up was the infamous Mariah Carey.

Mariah Carey is known for her over-the-top, diva behavior. Her obnoxious and arrogant persona has clearly dribbled into the personality of Aspen. The people were clad head to toe in shiny Montcler jackets ($1500 a pop) and I have never seen so many fur coats (all floor length, all probably close to $10,000). "Celebrity" can be so closely associated with entitlement and snobbery, and I think this is incredibly unfortunate. I was in one of the most beautiful, remote places in the world, and all I could think was, "Get me out of here!"

Ian Farwell (Core Post #2)

An interesting read indeed... Monroe, Grace Kelly, Desire, Narcissism, Objectification, Family Structures, Historical Relevance, and how it all relates to notions of Human Sexuality.

Human sexuality appears to be much more complex than its surface appearance will allow. Upon review of the Dyers literature on this matter, it seems as though our notions of sexuality are caught it a push/pull relationship between traditional family values and progressive ideas about the nature of desire, objectification, and gender differences in this area. Dyer's seems to dissect the issue of human sexuality from many different fields of study in relation to Monroe and other developments of the 1950's (such as the Kinsey Report.)

Families structures have been with us for a long time (despite varying forms across cultures), and it appears as though in cultures that benefit from monogamy, non-conforming ideas of sex have been a force that threatens the institution of marriage for many. Thus, figures like Monroe not only reveal the thin line between excitement and anxiety, but also draw ideological lines of what a culture defines as appropriate and inappropriate.

Monroe isn't just a representation of sexuality, she seems to have stood for it philosophically. As quoted by Monroe from the Dyer Reading, "But if I going to be a symbol of something, I'd rather have it sex" (Monroe). Monroe pushed the envelope and promoted the idea that sex isn't bad. She raised the interesting question (that remains controversial even today) of whether or not objectification is bad when a person desires it. She brought to light the contradiction between sex and American social norms.

Kantian thought offers us the idea that treating another as a mere means is unethical, and that we should treat others as ends in themselves. Thus, according to Kantian notions, objectifying another (whether is be sexually or otherwise) is morally wrong. But, is it more complicated than some universal law? Clearly, I think Dyer's would say that it might be. We can see this when desire comes into play. Let's take S&M for example. Often people who engage in S & M surely have a desire to be objectified, and many argue there is nothing morally wrong with S & M because there are two willing participants. This gets at an interesting idea. If some women or men want to be the object of a sexual gaze is it morally wrong to objectify them? This is the often uncomfortable question that Monroe presents and Dyer's illustrates.

Why is it Ok for men in our society to be sexual creatures, but not women. I must draw upon feminine theory, and say that it is because women have been given the responsibility of holding morality in our society. This is where the Grace Kelly star image comes into play. Industrialized men are sent into the cut-throat capitalist world of bottom-lines and profit margins, while women have traditionally been pushed to stay at home and guard the children. Ah the children, our little projections of innocence and morality. And, who is responsible for teaching the children about this morality? Grace Kelly not Monroe. Why? Are they not both attractive objects of the male gaze? And here we find the contradiction that Monroe so eloquently brings to light. The duality of femininity in our society, and it is virtually impossible to be both Grace Kelly and Monroe at the same time (Although I am sure the studios have tried to make many women appeal to both.) Good fathers/husbands only have to show up to be consider good, but good Mothers/wives are pushed to be so so so much more.

I think all of this is ironic. Society says mothers shouldn't be sexy, yet mothers by definition have to have had sex in order to be mothers (except for the Virgin Mary, go figure).

Questions:

1) Why do we make fun of mom pants for not being sexy? And, if they stopped wearing them would we be outraged?

2) Do working actresses that play characters representations of non-working mothers undermine their own existence?

4) Is it acceptable for women like Monroe to become mothers, and who would object?

The Construction of Sexuality: A Marilyn Monroe Story (Post #2)

If we look at celebrities, most of them have an image to their character. For example, Brad Pitt is the all-American good-looking guy who is tough as displayed by his characters in Troy and The Fight Club. This image that stars portray has to do with the theory of fandom and stardom. With fans following celebrities’ every move, they need to hold on to something that represents them. In other words, they need to possess a trait to symbolize them, some sort of motif.

In the 1950s, Marilyn Monroe, one of the biggest female stars of the time had an image to rely on – sexuality. Thomas Harris mentions in his article, “The Building of Popular Images: Grace Kelley and Marilyn Monroe,” that the star system relied on creating an image for the stars so that the audience can relate to the characters that these stars played on the screen to their off-screen persona, such as in TV appearances, magazine articles and newspaper stories. The image that was constructed for Marilyn was that of an over-sexualized female, as her work out of film allowed for this. Marilyn was known for her racy pictures in Playboy and “the circumstances of her birth, her youthful trials and her early marriage,” which allowed her in the eyes of the public to be a sexual rebel without being morally condemned.

With this, how did Marilyn become a sexual symbol in the media, which even to this day is still prominent? First of all, her characters in films allowed her to be the “eye-candy” of the film for males. This related to Laura Maulvey’s theory of the male gaze, in which the female is what captures the gaze of the male spectator. This is evident in Gentlemen Prefer Blondes in the sequence where she is dressed in a bright pink dress, singing and performing for a male audience. The iconography of the scene allows for Marilyn to be the center of attention, focusing the gaze on her.

Furthermore, many of her characters like Richard Dyer argues in Heavenly Bodies, had no biographical information. A lot of her characters had no depth, which can be inferred that her presence in these plots was not to add importance, but only to sexualize them. In some instances, her characters did not even have names.

All of this worked in 1950s society because of social changes happening. For instance, in the media, film had to compete with other leisure activities like television. If film had something that television did not have (sexy females flaunting their bodies) it could attract more spectators. Also, this is when the censorship code began to collapse and films were able to be more explicit in terms of showing off the human body and expressing immoral themes. The 1950s was also a very sexual decade. This is when the Kinsey Report was published, which talked about the human sexual experience. In this same decade we also the first issue of Playboy, in which Marilyn was the first centerfold model. The change in sexuality in America can be portrayed with Marilyn as she did not care about exposing her body and taking very controversial pictures.

Although Marilyn has become a sexual symbol for America, she can still be seen as innocent. Her blonde hair gives her the leeway to the stereotype of “dumb blonde.” Dyer mentions that “The dumbness of the dumb blonde is by tradition natural, because it means that she is not touched by the rationality of the world” (34).

As we can see in this slideshow, Marilyn Monroe is in no form ashamed to show off her body in a sexual way. Her sexuality transgresses her body though. As we see in Gentlemen Prefer Blonder, Marilyn uses her femininity to get what she wants – money! She uses her voice to attract men. She uses her wit (which contradicts the dumb blonde stereotype) to convince her father-in-law that she is a good fit for his son. This sexual image captures one of the ideologies that is evident in 1950s America, and this is one of the reasons why the name Marilyn Monroe is recognized nationally and associated with sex.

Questions

1. Do you think that the character of Dorothy Shaw, based on her appearance as a brunette, could have had the same success as Lorelei (Marilyn Monroe) who was a blonde in terms of sexuality?

2. How can Monroe’s sexuality be seen as both dirty and clean? How can there be two different approaches to a celebrity’s image?

3. Aside from sexuality, is there another image that Marilyn Monroe could have embodied based on her performances?