Singing To A Different Tune

     This weekend I finally got to watch the movie Moulin Rouge! with my friend, which I had been looking forward to doing for awhile. The movie is sort of a musical about love, however the majority of the music is remixes of 20th century songs. At first, I didn't like the mix of the old time period setting of the movie (it is set in Paris 1900) and new music, but I came to love it because the songs were all so different from their originals it worked.
      I decided to analyze some of the differences between the song Roxanne by The Police and the song El Tango De Roxanne that was in the movie. I cut both of the songs to about a minute long so you can watch and see the differences. The second song takes a bit longer to get to the singing part, but I thought it was necessary to keep the beginning part because it adds to your understanding of the song.























      Both songs are describing a story about a man who falls in love with a prostitute. However I think that El Tango De Roxanne, although it is the remix of the orignal song by The Police, it captures the emotions of the situation better than the original did. As explained in the beginning of the tango, "When love is for the highest bidder there can be no trust...jealousy will drive you mad." He explains how you can never trust that a prostitute loves you because their job is to make men think they love them. Also you will feel extreme jealousy because they will have to sleep with other men. He is singing to warn the listener against falling in love with a prostitute because it will only "drive you mad."
      The tango song from Moulin Rouge demonstrates the anger and frustration that the man would feel perfectly. The background music is sharp and full of tension. The main male singer uses a raspy, guttural voice that sounds more like growling than singing. The dancing is quick and precise with movements that are both passionate and violent. Every part of the video demonstrates the internal battle between the love and anger the man feels. In comparison, the other song Roxanne has a relatively slow tempo with the chords in the chorus almost seeming upbeat and happy. The video is just one of the band performing that doesn't really add anything to the song.

What do you think of the two different versions of the song? Do you notice any other differences between the two videos? Would you agree that one portrays the story better than the other? Why or why not?

A Sort Of Meta-Post

      I've been putting off writing my meta-post for awhile simply because writing about my own writing didn't seem very appealing to me. As students at New Trier, we've had to do similar reflections on our writing every year. We've had to do our "writing portfolio" and basically write an essay about previous essays we've written in the year and how we'd improved and grown as writers. I've never particularly enjoyed writing about my own writing and that might come from the fact that I don't like being wrong, so I have a hard time admitting that I've made mistakes.
       However, I think the real reason I have trouble reflecting on my own writing is because I'm not extremely interesting in improving or changing the way that I write. I'm not saying that I think I'm a perfect writer so there is nothing to improve, I don't believe that at all. I do think there is a lot I could learn to do in order to improve my writing. The problem is I'm not interested in writing. I don't enjoy writing because I feel like I'm better at getting my point across if I talk to someone rather than writing it down and having them read it. So for me, the only reason I want to improve the way that I write is to get a better grade. Which I know is awful, and I probably shouldn't admit that to my teachers, but I feel like I should be honest. Because I want to change that. I want to want to get better at writing because I used to love writing when I was a kid and I want to love it again. 
       So now I'll bring this all back to how it relates to blogging. I think that my blogs are better when I write about my opinions and feeling on a topic. I'm more expressive when I'm passionate about the topics. I always get frustrated because I'll have ideas about things I want to write about on my blog, but I can't write about them unless I find a text or some piece of evidence to relate my points to. I feel limited by this because sometimes I can't find a piece of evidence and then therefore can't write a blog post about what I wanted to. Although I do understand that having evidence really helps argue your point and make it stronger, like in the various posts where I have a video or a picture I'm analyzing the reader can really follow along with what I'm saying, I would still like more freedom with what I can write about. I think with more freedom I'd want to improve my writing because I would be passionate about my writing.
       I think that myself, as well as others, would benefit if we didn't always having to write a blog post with the standard claim, evidence, explanation format. I know it's important to practice our skills writing in that style, but I also believe that there are other ways to get your opinion across and everyone has a different way that they do that best. Sometimes I would just like to post a poem I wrote and maybe explain why I wrote it or possibly write the beginning page of a book and see if people like it. For others, being able to post a rap they wrote or the painting they created and talk about it would be a great way to practice their writing and have it be about something they love. I think people would find it easier to log on and write a blog post every week if there was more freedom in the way they wrote their blog. I want to want to blog, but I'm having difficulty finding inspiration.
      I'm sorry this is a lot to read, but I wanted to get my point across. As I said earlier, I'm better at writing when I'm passionate about the topic. If my teachers don't believe that I fulfilled the requirement for my meta-post I'd be happy to write another one. The assignment was to read previous blog posts and reflect on your writing and this was all inspired by my frustration with my blog posts.

IAIN BAXTER&

       This post is also inspired by my trip to the Museum of Contemporary Art in Chicago and focuses on a man named Iain Baxter, or really I should say IAIN BAXTER& since he legally changed his name to include the capital letters and the &.  He added the & to his name because he believes that art and life are about connectivity.

Photo taken from his exhibit at MCA.

      After learning about IAIN BAXTER& and his obsession with the symbol & I decided to research it a little bit. I found that the & symbol was actually called the ampersand. The & symbol used to be the 27th letter of the alphabet so children would end saying "and, per se, and" which means "&, meaning, and." The part got mixed together to create the word ampersand. 

      Although I found learning about the creation of the & symbol interesting, I was mostly fascinated with Iain's idea about it's importance. "And" is the word that we used everyday all the time in all languages. Not only does it connect words together in the literal sense, it also connects ideas and people. I can't imagine where we'd be without this important word that often seems insignificant and small. I probably wouldn't even want to count the number of times I've used the word in this blog post, let alone how many times I say it in a day. I think it's important to recognize the little things that keep our language together like the word "and". People tend to focus on how to make a piece of writing sound good with multiple adjectives when sometimes all you need is just a simple way for everything to connect to make a good piece of writing. 

If you want more information about IAIN BAXTER& you can visit the MCA website to watch a video of him explaining his work. Click HERE

What do you think the importance of the word "and" is? How do you think you're life would be different without this word? What do you think about the & symbol connecting the world?

It's Not For Women

      So recently as I was watching commercials today I remembered a funny Dr. Pepper commercial I had seen awhile back. Basically the commercial is about how a new Dr. Pepper drink called TEN because it has only ten calories in it is for men only. The commercial is very openly sexist, but I think that is almost to it's benefit. Watch the commercial below and see what you think.

      The commercial starts off in a forest where a battle is happening and guns firing everyone. The main man of the commercial, says to the camera, "Hey ladies, enjoying the film? Of course not." Even the first few lines are playing off the stereotypes that men like action-packed thriller movies, while women only prefer romantic comedies. The whole commercial plays off of stereotypes like this, but in a way it works. The commercial is something new, bold, and fresh. People watch endless amounts of commercials a day, so it is important for a company to make one that stands out.
      I'm sure the commercial generated tons of publicity and talk for the drink after the commercial was released because it hits on issues of gender stereotypes. Also, it is found that men don't like to drink "diet" drinks because they don't find it manly. Only women go on diets, while men work out and don't need to. So the commercial takes the essentially "diet" drink with only ten calories and makes it seem manly and exclusive. The video alludes to the fact that only men can handle this new drink. It appeals to the male audience very well.
     At first I was annoyed by this because I thought it was odd they were seeming to exclude women from their marketing techniques. It didn't make sense why a company would want to get rid of half their costumer population. However as I thought about it more, I thought that this commercial also in a way targets women. Women always are looking for ways that they can prove themselves to be just as strong as men in the world. So then women purchase this drink that supposedly only men can. Overall, I thought it was a entertaining, effective commercial.

What do you think of the commercial? Is the audience really only limited to men? How does the commercial use gender stereotypes to its' advantage? Or do you think it's a disadvantage?

Jesus Vs. Religion Video

      Today I noticed a video that kept popping up on my Facebook feed so I finally decided to watch it. Basically it is a man who wrote a poem to express his views on religion and jesus. The poem itself contains a very beautiful and strong message. Although there are a lot of aspects of religion I don't understand, I do think that this man has a point. I would suggest you watch the video linked below before reading on.

"See the problem with religion is that it never gets to the core. It's just behavior modification, like a long list of chores. Like let's dress up the outside, make it look nice and neat, but its funny, thats what they used to do to mummies while the corpse rots underneath."

      His message is basically that Jesus is better to follow than religion itself. In his description under the video he writes that "Religion either ends in pride or despair." He means that either you accomplish the "behavior modifications" and standards of how you should live as dictated by the church, or you fail to follow them. Even when you succeed you are filled with pride, which is a sin. And if you fail you feel as if you are not worthy enough for God. Either way you are like the mummies, you look "nice" because you are trying but you are "rot underneath" because you are still unhappy.

      However, Jesus makes people happy because "He represents you...and His sacrifice is perfect putting us in perfect standing with god!" I think what he means by this is that we don't have to worry about getting into God's good graces because Jesus made the ultimate sacrifice for us and released us from that duty. As he says in the video "Because when Jesus said IT IS FINISHED, I believe he meant it." The "it" is the struggle for trying to live a sin-free life and win God's graces. He made the ultimate sacrifice so that we could live our lives however we chose. The struggles was finished, but today with religion we still act as if it is not.

What do you think of the idea that Jesus is greater than religion? Are people freed from their responsibilities because of Jesus's actions? Do you agree with the way he portrays religion as a "list of chores"? Feel free to comment on any part of the video that strikes you.

Is the Glass Half Empty or Half Full?

      Over winter break I visited the Museum of Contemporary Art in Chicago with my family. I was skeptical of the artwork at first. I don't tend to understand how a painting of a green square can be considered a high value piece of art. Even though I don't quite understand or like contemporary art all the time, there was one painting that caught my attention.

      The painting is by an american artist Jo Baer. It was painted in 1967 and simply called Untitled. The painting is of two boxes outlined with two borders, one black one red, and a white center.

      At first, I didn't understand the painting and was about to ignore it write it off as just another "green square" painting with no meaning. However, when I read the description the painting made much more sense. The painter is basically asking the question: Is the white part of this painting EMPTY or FULL? The center does have white paint covering it, but white is often connected with emptiness. When I first observed the painting I thought of it as having a blank, empty middle. Upon further reflection I realized that the border almost is signifying that the middle area is important or else there wouldn't be a frame, making me think that the center is full.

What do you think of this painting? Is the center full or empty? What do you think the artist thought of the center? Would you consider this a "good" piece of artwork?