POST 14: Elephant, a Gus Van Sant movie (2003)

ELEPHANT

QUESTIONS

1) What struck you most in the film?

The thing that struck me in the film was how easy it was for the two young students to order guns in the USA. They just ordered them online, as if it were an ordinary delivery, and had them delivered to their house without having to prove anything. 

2) What also impressed you?

What impressed me was the topic chosen for the movie. The shooting is told through the eyes of some students or teachers who passes by in order to show how it have been lived that terrible day. The film maker is ready to show everything he can about the school and the problems it faces and so show this big "elephant in the room" from which comes the name of the film.

3) Did you find anything more particularly upsetting?

I find upsetting the fact that some parts of what happened in real life have been changed in the film: the film shows one killer shooting the other, when in the real event both killers committed suicide. 

4) What did you find very disturbing?

What I find very disturbing in the film was the way it was filmed. We expect  something to happen as the camera slowly follows the students, but it is never happening until the school "shooting scene". This movie follows the characters just showing their daily life making it banal and abstract. 

5) What was most shocking?

The way the other students were portrayed was too caricatural in my opinion. The nerd being bullied, joks dating pretty girls, mean girls who put their fingers in the throat in order to make them throw up their lunch after school. 

6) What does the film suggest about the two school shooters?

The film suggests that the two school shooters were being bullied at school, had lots of interest in Nazism, and both played violent aggressive video games, that may made them more into the idea of killing people. 

7) What's more, what does the film director make clear about the two killers?

The film director makes it clear that the two shooters felt nothing during the shooting, they show no pity or any sentiment of any kind for that matter. They target anyone and spare no one. 

8) What kind of approach to the school shooting itself did Gus Van Sant opt for?

Gus Van San approaches the school shooting in a very "simple" and interesting way. It is almost a documentary approach, showing an ordinary school day in an american high school. The problems of the Columbine High School, such as bully, are approach by Guy Van Sant. He shows the normal day to day life of most american teenagers.

9) Moreover, what's the main consequence of the realistic treatment he uses? What about the 'poetic' touches he instills throughout the film?

The film director uses a realistic treatment, which the public isn't used to anymore in this day. The characters seem real, since they dont have exaggerated personalities of traits.The main consequences are that it takes away some of the sentiment of the film. But  it still has a poetic touches and attention to small detail that aren't easy to pick up on in a first viewing. The poetic touch of always filming people from behind, one again makes the movie very realistic, because it makes the viewer feel like another student walking around the school.

10) As a conclusion, what must we admit about the way in which the killing and the killers are perceived by the film viewers?

The killers are no more perceived as two victims having revenge of the bullied, but rather two disturbed boys who kill because they want to "have fun". Before the shooting, the film viewers can feel sorry for their condition, but at the end of the film, the killers and the killing are both perceived as horrible and unforgiving. 

POST 13: THE US GUN CULTURE

The Founding Fathers of the United States are the individuals of the Thirteen British Colonies in North America who led the American Revolution against the authority of the British Crown and established the United States of America. The term is also used more narrowly, referring specifically to those who either signed the Declaration of Independence in 1776 or who were delegates to the 1787 Constitutional Convention and took part in drafting the proposed Constitution of the United States. A further subset includes those who signed the Continental Association or the Articles of Confederation. During much of the 19th century, they were referred to as either the "Founders" or the "Fathers".

The National Rifle Association of America (NRA) is an American nonprofit organization which advocates for gun rights. Founded in 1871, the group has informed its members about firearm-related bills since 1934, and it has directly lobbied for and against legislation since 1975. It is also the oldest continuously operating civil rights organization in the United States.

                          

Steve SACK, on www.startribune.com,

Gun Lobby and Congress (2010)

This caricature is called Gun Lobby and Congress, was mad by Steve Sack, and published on the news website star tribune in 2010. On the foreground, we can see two men in suits talking in front of the American congress. One of them (on the left) represents a gun lobby and he is giving a bribe to the other man (on the right) who represents the congress. They both do not seem to bother about the long trail of blood running down the stairs of the congress. The congress seems to care more about the money he makes out of the Gun Lobby than the consequences. 

Because of that, United States of America have an extremely big number of gun violence per year. In 2010, 67% of all homicides in the U.S. were committed using a firearm, 358 murders were reported involving a rifle while 6,009 were reported involving a handgun; another 1,939 were reported with an unspecified type of firearm. Gun Lobby's bribe the congress, in order to do well on the market. They aren't thinking about the huge consequences  and aren't preoccupied about the victims, they are only focusing on the amount of money they are making out of it.

This image illustrates the corruption that takes place in congress and the pressure they receive from gun lobbyists. We can interpret this image as an criticism of American gun culture.

Dave GRANDLUND, on www.davegranlund.com, 

Second Amendment and NRA (2013)

This caricature is called Second Amendment and was mad by Dave Grandlund in 2013. We can see two statues side by side. The statue on the left is holding a gun and  represents the Second Amendment defined by the Founding Fathers. The other statue (on the right) is in gold, standing on top of a pile of ammunition boxes and is holding multiple guns. It represents the  Second Amendment defined by the NRA, National Rifle Association of America. This caricature shows us how the perception of the American on the Second Amendment has change over the ages. 

The Second Amendment was created in 1791 and gives the right of American people to keep and bear armst for security. However the NRA, an American nonprofit organization which advocates for gun rights, is overusing this right. They are using the Second Amendment as an excuse to take possession of plurality of arms. The NRA statue is shown holding an multiple of guns, when they would only need one. Originally the Founding Fathers wanted to support the natural rights of self-defence, resistance to oppression, and the civic duty to act in concert in defence of the state. They never promoted the idea of buying tones of weapons. Legalized gun possession can be dangerous as the government haven't seem to got much control over the laws imposed to American citizens.

We can interpret this image as an criticism of the abuse of the Second Amendment by the NRA.

POST 11: Individual document on Exchanges in Real and Virtual Spaces

INDIVIDUAL DOCUMENT ON EXCHANGES IN REAL AND VIRTUAL SPACES 

The trouble with virtual reality

As virtual reality simulators become more realistic and immersive, people may lose touch with actual reality. The cartoon shows a person in a virtual reality headset stepping of the edge of the word ‘reality’ into some sort of unstated post reality void.

Virtual reality redefines and reshapes the privatization of public space. It brings people new forms and practices with technologies. The user accesses a computer-simulated world which presents "perceptual stimuli" to the user, who in turn can manipulate elements of the modeled world. Such modeled worlds and their rules may draw from the reality or fantasy worlds. 

These new forms and practices extend the flow of information which originally and mainly within the digital spaces to physical spaces, leading to the blurring borders between digital and physical spaces.

POST 7; THE IDEA OF PROGRESS: QUANTITY vs. QUALITY

 QUALITY VS QUANTITY

The difference between quantity and quality is that quantity is a forward movement toward a goal, as quality is a progressive improvement towards society

Major challege for food industry is to maintain the food quality by producing big quantity. But it is harder than what it looks

http://www.slideshare.net/athensmallari/objectives-of-quantity-food-production

As we can see in the article on top, food produces in a large quantity and outside the home is often followed by a low quality. They are treating the food with GMO's and other type of pesticide which causes the nourishing elements in the foods to diminish and disease causing to rise. Meat, fish and fresh food are placed in special conditions, like frozen, so that they can be exported in big quantity all across the world. But this could affect the quality of the food because of the bacteria that often develops in animal products and can cause foodborne illnesses to occur.

But we can see in this second document that "good quality" food tend to be more expensive as we notice that people tend to make the decision to eat fast food because of his low prices. We notice that high-quality, fresh food is the most important factor measured at both fast-food and fast-casual restaurants, which mean that people are at least aware of the risk of bacteria in process food. 

As fast-food and fast-casual restaurants should each works on their weaknesses and tout their strengths. It will push consumers even more into wanting, and making it possible for them to have, the best of both: quality and quantity. They should increasingly demand a strong value proposition and fast, fresh, high-quality ingredients and healthy options.

To conclude I should say that quality should be something to take very seriously in food industry. But I must admit that nowadays it very hard to achieve as the human population keeps rising and need more quantity.

I think that as the time passes, operators who can deliver the best combination of these needs, quality and quantity will come out on top.