An interesting take on "breastgate" - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

Charlatan · 02-05-2004, 07:59 AM

I've posted this here rather than the large conglomerated "oh my god she showed her breast" thread in an attempt to talk just about this issues this article raises rather than the conspiracies, rumours and gossip that are the main thrust of the other thread...

LINK

Quote:

Janet exposed our inner Clockwork Orange

By RUSSELL SMITH
Thursday, February 5, 2004 - Page R1

The least interesting thing about the Super Bowl entertainment was Janet Jackson's half-exposed breast. I watched it with a bunch of friends and we all saw it and no one commented.

We were too stunned by the weirdness of the rest of the spectacle. In the crazy quilt of visual references in this show, there were: a uniformed marching band, dancing hip-hop style, a gothy SM outfit, and a lot of jazz dancers wearing white overalls with braces and bowler hats that were inspired by Kubrick's 1971 film A Clockwork Orange.

In the hysteria that followed the sight of half a breast -- less breast than you regularly see on Fashion Television, about as much breast as you can see any weekend on any female bartender in a dance club in Toronto -- no one mentioned A Clockwork Orange. No one mentioned that this film was, at the time of its release, widely considered to be offensive and obscene, and it was banned in several countries.

In case you've forgotten that film's gruesome two hours (and most of us have forgotten, which is why it's on the Super Bowl), the banning was provoked by an extended and graphic rape scene.

The passing of this ultra-violence into the most mainstream, the most mundane, the most unadventurous of all art forms -- the mix of hip-hop and jazz dancing that turns contemporary pop music into Broadway musicals for moms -- is surely evidence of . . . something odd. Of what, exactly? This is such complicated semiotic terrain it's really hard to say.

There are two possible explanations.

1) Violence is part of the Super Bowl, as it is part of patriotism, as it is part of hip-hop. The costume designers of the musical dance number wanted to cleverly underline these shared tropes in a subtle visual joke. The outfits of futuristic thugs on very non-frightening gay dancers echoes the blurring of the ugly and the saccharine that occurs when the menacing Blackhawk helicopters rumble over Beyoncé, who's singing an overorchestrated national anthem. The same overlay of real violence and Hollywood schmaltz occurred when another young pop star sang his new soft 'n' sugary ballad while an actor dressed in a spacesuit planted a U.S. flag on a plastic piece of moon, in an obvious reference to the famous staged photograph of U.S. marines planting a flag on Iwo Jima. The point of the costume designers -- either cynical or subversive -- was that all violence turns into entertainment, and that the line between the frightening and the white bread is blurred right now, or perhaps that this link is precisely what exemplifies the American Way.

2) Nobody thought about any of this. Somebody remembered some cool costumes in an old film. They thought it would be fun. Those costumes have been so copied and pastiched and referenced that they have become simulacra: They are representations of which there is no original. Right now, the costumes from A Clockwork Orange are no longer such; they are free-floating visual styles. To the designers, and most likely to the vast bulk of the audience, they are completely meaningless, just another image. In a spectacle made up of widely disparate visual styles -- marching band, spaceman, pimp-rapper, stripper, real military hardware -- the addition of a really off-the-wall reference is not incongruous, it is actually the point. This is a collage, like a David Salle painting, except it is not conscious, not a point about postmodernism but postmodernism itself. We're living it.

Obviously, I think the second explanation is the more plausible. There isn't much that's self-conscious about this euphoric conflation of a lot of different American aesthetic values. When Janet Jackson sang her song about "gettin' together" to solve the world's problems, in the next breath encouraging us to think for ourselves and be different, she was not attempting to subvert the powerfully conformist atmosphere of a televised, nationalistic sporting event. The words don't really mean anything. They are interjections, rather like the military cheer "Hooah," symbolizing all-purpose good vibes and positive energy. Words in pop songs are not really differentiable meaning-units, but styles. Just like the rapid-fire editing of visuals, their meaning is not lexical. Another way of saying this might be that their meaning is symbolic rather than referential. They only have meaning as part of a total package, a package of surfaces.

The Federal Communications Commission was not in fact outraged by the gratuitous references to ultraviolence, but to half a female breast. They are threatening to fine each affiliate station of the network $27,500. As far as I can make out, their outrage is based on the idea that seeing half a female breast would be harmful to children. Nobody has attempted to explain this, but then explanation is really not part of the American Zeitgeist, is it?

Here's something that needs no explanation: Americans were so outraged by the breast-baring stunt that those who subscribe to the TiVo digital television service registered a 180-per-cent spike in replay activity after the half-time dance. TiVo has said that the incident was the most replayed moment of all TV moments it has ever measured. The second most replayed moments of this year's game were the commercials.

Michael Powell, the chairman of the FCC, is such a big fan of TiVo that he once called it "God's machine."

It is here that the most dedicated and objective of postmodern analysts cannot help but throw up his hands and say quite simply that this is the weirdest culture we've ever seen.

I couldn't agree more with this assesment. The breast is almost entirely beside the point and yet that is all that people can seem to focus on (except maybe artelevision)...

CSflim · 02-05-2004, 10:19 AM

I honestly couldn't care less.

Nanz · 02-05-2004, 10:24 AM

She flashed her tit everyone is talking about it non stop, she got the reaction she desired which is publicity.
end of story.

Its not exactly a big deal imo.
It just shows the lengths people will go to and how the jacksons are more than a little messed up

ARTelevision · 02-05-2004, 10:31 AM

right, it's not the breast...that's a tempest in a C-cup.

It's the ruinous "entertainment" we are accustomed to and it's multi-million dollar, mind-killing and exploitative nature.

Charlatan · 02-05-2004, 10:41 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by ARTelevision
It's the ruinous "entertainment" we are accustomed to and it's multi-million dollar, mind-killing and exploitative nature.

This is exactly the point the article (and by extention I) am trying to make.

...and yet the two previous replies and the many replies to the other conglomerated thread seem to still be focusing on the breast.

There is something seriously wrong with the American (western if that makes you more comfortable) culture when we can be bombarded with a form of entertainment that is rife with symbolic violence and yet all we seem to focus on is a naked breast.

...I am tryly disturbed by the far reaching implications of all of this.

What have we become?

(BTW read the article before you post here otherwise just post on the other thread)

ARTelevision · 02-05-2004, 10:48 AM

I read your thread, thanks.

as in: "right, it's not the breast...that's a tempest in a C-cup"

My statement responds to the continuing attempts at deflection away from the real issue that continue - even in this thread right here...

(read the responses before you post)

Halx · 02-05-2004, 10:58 AM

I dont quite get the point of the author. I mean, I too noticed that the costumes resembled those from A Clockwork Orange, but I don't see the metaphor.

I don't think there's anything new being said - USA is a nation full of sheltered puritan pussies.

Charlatan · 02-05-2004, 11:00 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by ARTelevision
I read your thread, thanks.

as in: "right, it's not the breast...that's a tempest in a C-cup"

My statement responds to the continuing attempts at deflection away from the real issue that continue - even in this thread right here...

(read the responses before you post)

ART... I was agreeing with you. I was refering to the two previous posters who seem to have missed the point and asking that others read it and post on the content as you have... otherwise just go and post in the other thread.

ARTelevision · 02-05-2004, 11:01 AM

I would say this is a redundant thread and could have been added to the ongoing discussion...

In any event - it's a good controversial subject. Opinions are pretty varied, etc.

ARTelevision · 02-05-2004, 11:02 AM

Charlatan - I know - we're almost getting back to the point. Thanks.

Lebell · 02-05-2004, 11:10 AM

IMHO,

The whole episode has just pushed into the face of middle America what has been happening in our culture: sex sells.

Ma and Pa were horrified at Janet's boob and gyrations, but that is common fare on BET, MTV, VH1, etc. Heck, we even are getting shots of flesh on prime time (asses on NYBlue and boobs on ER).

Sex is regularly used to sell beer, cigarettes and fast cars.

But now, with the "boob" incident, people are suddenly surprised.

All of this just reinforces the conclusion I came to several years ago: America is schizophrenic regarding sex.

Charlatan · 02-05-2004, 11:13 AM

The way I read the author is that he is suggesting that American culture is facinated with the Image. The big shiny Image. There appear before our eyes cultural references that should offend and should give viewers pause. But we just let them wash over us.

Clockwork Orange is just one example among many that should cause us to say, "is this truly FAMILY entertainment?" The subtext (hell the text) of the image is completely lost on many.

But why is it lost? There is something much bigger going on in our culture than a simple flashing of breast or a wacky stage show at the superbowl.

We are a nation (nations) addicted to trivial things. We consume our "entertainment" like fast food -- we know it tastes good but try not to thing about what it's made of... and a half hour later we are hungry for more. Empty calories for our minds.

ARTelevision · 02-05-2004, 11:26 AM

Yes exactly. And fast food, etc. is making most of us less healthy. And "fast food" entertainment is making most of us more stupid.

Charlatan · 02-05-2004, 11:30 AM

There is already a Slow Food movement...

Slow Food Slow Food USA

There should also be Slow Entertainment movement.

A movement that allows us to pause and think about what we are consuming...

Media Literacy is the closest that comes to mind.

Bill O'Rights · 02-05-2004, 11:49 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by ARTelevision
right, it's not the breast...that's a tempest in a C-cup.

It's the ruinous "entertainment" we are accustomed to and it's multi-million dollar, mind-killing and exploitative nature.

Tempest in a C-cup!? I love that.
*writes that down to use another time*

Quote:

Originally posted by ARTelevision
Yes exactly. And fast food, etc. is making most of us less healthy. And "fast food" entertainment is making most of us more stupid.

Art...you truly are on a roll today.

ratbastid · 02-05-2004, 11:52 AM

Here's the thing, though. That which shocked us in the early 70's when A Clockwork Orange was released no longer shocks us. We were vastly more conservative then. These days A Clockwork Orange is de rigeur viewing on campuses nationwide. It certainly was on mine.

One thing we deserve to be shocked about is that a cane-wielding, codpieced rapist is any more acceptable now than it was then.

But let's not think about that. Let's talk instead about the boob and how it was Janet's last grasp at relevence. Much better to trade in our stories of shock and outrage than to face the darkness of our own souls.

The boob.. The booooooob....

ARTelevision · 02-05-2004, 11:55 AM

Charlatan, Media Literacy is an excellent movement and should be supported as much as possible.

There's also an "anti-mass-media-mind-control" movement:

http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showthr...=&threadid=911

P.S. I also do want to create some good will among those who think we're full of it for appearing puritanical...

Media Literacy is a great direction.
Thanks for the reminder!

Feel free to jump in any time.

I think there's some progress being made.

water_boy1999 · 02-05-2004, 12:21 PM

As a general population stereotype, I don't think people grasped the whole symbolism of Clockwork Orange and the implications it had in this particular half-time show. So, if people aren't able to readily grasp the concept that was being presented to them, rather, they focus on the entertainment for it's visual grandiour, then why not focus on the baring of Janet's boob?

Charlatan · 02-05-2004, 12:30 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by ratbastid
One thing we deserve to be shocked about is that a cane-wielding, codpieced rapist is any more acceptable now than it was then.

It isn't more acceptable... we just don't seem to be able to recognize it when we see it...

I think the author's point that what we see are "simulacra: They are representations of which there is no original" is quite true.

In a world full of simulacra it becomes impossible to understand what you are seeing (hearing, exeperiencing if you will). Meaning is forever altered into meaninglessness...

As a result we are not fully capable of reading what is being shown to us. The precense of Black Hawk heliocopters is seen as cool. Period. No one questions their presence and that they are symbols of violence and warfare.

A man simulates a sexual assault on a woman and all we can talk about is the fact that a boob was seen on TV and not that there was a disturbing quality to the delivery of that boob.

What are people really reacting to? As Lebell points out... boobs and sex are everywhere. Women's bodies and the sex they represent are used to sell us things all the time. Why is this different? Was it because it was on CBS during prime time? I'm not sure that is the answer.

It feels like there is something else happening here.

Quote:

]Originally posted by ARTelevision
P.S. I also do want to create some good will among those who think we're full of it for appearing puritanical...

I agree... hell anyone who reads my posts will see that I am far from puritanical.

skier · 02-05-2004, 02:40 PM

The superbowl halftime show is another peice of the puzzle that is america's psyche. America is a nation filled with violence, brought to a boil by the media. The helicopters, WWII references, along with the simulated white on black sexual assault. Much like how we gain insight into past cultures through their paintings and other art, Television is the key to america's mind. And I don't like what i'm seeing.

ARTelevision · 02-05-2004, 03:53 PM

It's really what has been done to our minds by the most vast and powerful propaganda machine ever devised by man. To believe that single individuals have the ability to withstand heavily funded and intensively researched and effective psychological manipulation by an all-enveloping total-environment culture of seduction is either the height of hubris or simple naivete.

billege · 02-06-2004, 02:33 AM

Listen, I'm taking my shot...

BANG! SLAM! CRASH! KER_POW!

Very few Americans saw a breast. In fact, they didn't SEE anything.

Americans sat down and ate themselves silly, while getting excited about commercials, because they thought (think) that's what they are supposed to do.

Some people vehemently did NOT watch the SB, because in a desperate attempt at exercising individual choice, they wanted to NOT do what they were told. However, most of them just conformed to the other camp we've been told to pick from. IE: Those who love the bowl, and those who hate it (but still have to pay attention to it so they can relate stories of what they hated, and how much).

My "noises" at the top there, are what the American public saw. The public fully expected to see things flying around, preening charicturatures of real people, and things flashing and popping. That's what they were told to accept, and what they did.

No one saw Apaches as vehicles of death.

I'd like to quickly add, that I'm not making a value judgment on the Apaches as vehicles designed to kill, that's just what they are.

The American public has been trained to like, and with terrorists around, love and unquestioningly accept anything military; that especially includes the hardware.
The American public did not see vehicles designed and produced to kill other human beings from the air. They saw flying things.

Like a cat chasing a flashlight's beam, they were mesmerized.

America saw:

--Play National Anthem
--display emotion
--look at pretty girl making nice singing
--LOOK! flying things!
--put beer down, repeat media sound bite to friends referencing how we must stop those _________.
--friends agree
--nice singing getting louder
--finish singing
--E A T.

The halftime show was more of the same. There were no meaningful references, just shiny things people recognize. (I hesitate to even use "recognize," that implies cognition. I suppose "find familiar" could be more appropriate for what I'm saying.)

The problem was not the breast, it was the interruption in the expected series of events.

The shiny loud things were supposed to do "A," then "B," then "C." All in nice digestible, thoughtless chunks.

Then out came the boob.

--FEEDY THING FOR BABIES!
--SEX THING! LIKE I SAW IN VIDEO!!!

This series of thoughts broke down the expectations, and upset those briefly roused from food induced comas.

<i>That's what people are pissed about.</i>

The shiny things didn't do what was expected/suggested.

For me, I have trouble deciding which it is I'm terrified of.

Is it:

Americans are actually terrified of a human body part?

or...

Americans are terrified of the shiny things not moving as planned?

or...

Americans lives are actually so devoid of meaningful events that we are desperately grabbing anything we can and making it meaningful.

ARTelevision · 02-06-2004, 04:55 AM

There are many voices rising up regarding this.
It does make sense to be aware of and consider what they are saying. A controversy exists and it will not be easily dsmissed.

........................

Pop culture has been in decline for awhile
The Jackson Sun
jacksonsun.com
Feb 6 2004

Blessedly, I was away from the television during the now-infamous halftime extravaganza at the Super Bowl on Sunday, so I missed the "wardrobe malfunction," the "costume reveal," seen 'round the world.

Actually, there was a good reason I was away from the TV. In a rare moment of foresight, I intuited that whatever MTV/CBS was going to serve up, the north Georgia-born, World War II vet, churchgoing father-in-law with whom I was watching the game was not going to enjoy it one bit. So I engaged him in a bit of upstairs billiards during halftime, and we missed the whole thing. Little did I know how very right that intuition would prove to be. Of course it didn't take a genius to know that a show featuring Nelly, Sean "P. Diddy" Combs, Janet Jackson and Justin Timberlake might just prove to be too much to bear for millions of people like my father-in-law. After all, these "artists" have a long track record. Why should we be surprised if their acts on the grandest stage of all are true to what they do the rest of the time?

What happened on Sunday is not just that Justin Timberlake and Janet Jackson conspired to spice up their little dance number, and something did (or did not) go as planned. At a deeper level, what happened is that the rapidly degrading MTV culture in which our youth are saturated met the Super Bowl, a cultural event offered to all Americans - indeed to all the world in America's name. That clash has produced an immediate fallout that may yet prove to be of some cultural value, even while we are still wiping our eyes wondering what our children, our parents and our grandparents have seen.

The fact of the matter is that many Americans are (or have been) blissfully ignorant about the declining moral and aesthetic standards that in recent years have swept across the landscape of mass market television (especially cable TV) and music. Of course, concerned adults have been lamenting those declining standards since the 1960s. This doesn't mean that the concern is illegitimate. What it really means is that the standards have been in continuous decline for more than 40 years.

I was first clued in to how bad things have gotten when my teenage kids stumbled upon the MTV movie awards show at a hotel room when we were on a beach vacation last summer. Just about every award was offered by a foul-mouthed star who seemed to be competing with the previous one to see how many F-words could be stuffed into a 3-minute presentation. Then there was a homoerotic song and dance number involving dozens of young girls in prep school outfits which culminated in their flinging off their skirts. That was the end of that afternoon of television for us.

But it is not the end of the exposure of my children, and everyone's children, to the very same material. We can snap off the TV, but our kids can find the same clip on the Web in a hundred places, like Howard Dean's scream. We can snap off Nelly and Outkast and J-Lo and whoever else is on the radio, but our kids can find their way to the same music online, unaltered by the countless bleeps, blanks, and substitute words that one hears on mainstream radio stations.

To those adults who did not know it, Sunday was a wake up call, saying the following: These are the "artists" whose every song is memorized by our children, whose faces (and barely covered bodies) are plastered on their teen magazines and sometimes their bedroom walls, whose clothing styles and seduction styles are imitated by pre-teens and teens alike. These smirking, boundary-crossing, raunchier-the-better singers, rappers, dancers, and actors are the icons of this generation. Theirs are the songs downloaded by our children off the Internet, or listened to on the most popular Top 40 radio stations in town, or pumped into their ears under those headphones.

What happened on Sunday was simply that the rest of America got a peek (so to speak) at what pop culture looks like right now, at the way sexuality is sold to our children. It seems that a lot of us did not like what we saw.

But lest we allow ourselves too much anger at MTV, Janet, or Justin, we should think about our own complicity. How many of the commercials offered on Sunday contained sexually provocative material? How many of us have watched the Darwinian meat market dating programs offered by mainstream television? How many of us are aficionados of situation comedies that make sex their main topic week after week? How many of us have looked at Internet pornography, perhaps America's fastest growing industry?

The halftime show crossed a line that many Americans had never before seen crossed on "family hour" television. But the really bad news is that such lines are crossed every hour of every day before the eyes and ears of our nation's children, and that the rest of us are too busy being titillated by our own amusements even to notice.

David P. Gushee is Graves Professor of Moral Philosophy at Union University. Write to him at The Jackson Sun, Editorial Department, P.O. Box 1059, Jackson, TN 38302.

Lokus · 02-06-2004, 11:15 AM

I think billege is being overly cynical. You don't think people would be able to decide to watch the Superbowl based on their own like or dislike of football? You're presenting a false dichotomy.

I'm not concerned about the presence of the Apaches. Football itself is a simulation of war so is it wrong that real machines of war show up? As for whether this is indicative of the some sort of moral decay, I don't know. Violence is inherent in human nature and in American culture. People will always be fascinated by violence and war.

I don't understand what you mean by the lack of "meaningful references". Were you expecting some at a sporting event? Or are you commenting on the Clockwork Orange costumes?

I think the reason this bared breast got so much publicity and outrage is partly due to American culture. As obsessed with sex as Americans are, we've still got these leftover Puritan ideals which means that we can have tons of sexual innuendo but showing a lone breast crosses the line. The automatic association of a nude or partially nude body with sex is somewhat troubling.

I'm sorry if this is disjointed and/or doesn't make sense. I'm still recovering from my grueling midterm this morning heh.

quadro2000 · 02-06-2004, 12:59 PM

This seems as good a place as any to post another analysis - it's a bit off-topic but well-written. From yesterday's New York Times:

Quote:

Purity of the Powells
By MAUREEN DOWD

Published: February 5, 2004
WASHINGTON — Washington is in the virtue business this week.

Center stage is a riveting father-son drama. (No, not that one.)

At the Federal Communications Commission, Michael Powell is trying to save America's virtue, while over at the State Department, his father, Colin, is trying to save his own virtue.

They are both obsessing about something that should have been there, but suddenly wasn't.

The son demanded an explanation for Janet Jackson's missing material, while the father wrestled with an explanation for Saddam Hussein's missing matériel.

The son opened an inquiry into something everyone had already seen, as the father defended his speech making the case for war based on something nobody has seen.

(Who could have guessed that Saddam's W.M.D. would be less scary than Ms. Jackson's pierced metal sunburst, a Weapon of Mammary Destruction aimed at the CBS chairman, Les Moonves? Or, as Jon Stewart points out, that a government so reluctant to investigate intelligence lapses is so eager to investigate a breast lapse?)

Asked in a Washington Post interview on Monday whether he would have recommended an invasion if he'd known that Iraq had no weapons, the secretary of state replied, "I don't know," adding that the "absence of a stockpile changes the political calculus; it changes the answer you get."

But the words had barely left his mouth before furious White House aides forced Mr. Powell to eat them. Just as Janet Jackson had to repent for revealing too much, so did the top diplomat. Secretary Powell had to go out and clarify his remarks to reporters, telling them the war was justified even if weapons are never found.

Rummy stuck to his Orwellian guns, telling Congress yesterday that just because we don't find the weapons doesn't mean they're not there. Or, as postmodern professors say, absence is presence. (At least Ms. Jackson, like David Kay, had the grace to say, "Unfortunately, the whole thing went wrong in the end.")

Once more, Colin Powell was left trying to square being a good soldier with preserving what's left of his reputation. His twin concerns — wanting everyone to think he is a man of purity and not wanting to fight a battle he might lose — have come into fatal conflict because of Iraq.

The younger Powell failed to appreciate the consequences of not curbing big media companies gobbling up rivals. Colin Powell failed to appreciate the consequences of not curbing Dick Cheney, Rummy and Wolfie as they gobbled up foreign policy.

The son vowed in 2001 that he would be patient with cultural excesses: "I don't want the government as my nanny. I still have never understood why something as simple as turning it off is not part of the answer."

But here he is, the biggest nanny in government since William Bennett, starting a little culture war to improve his ratings. The F.C.C. asked CBS for a Super Bowl halftime tape to determine whether standards were violated. What, the F.C.C. can't pop for a TiVo? Next, the F.C.C. will ask the C.I.A. to provide satellite photography of the rogue bustier.

The Janet and Justin show was unbelievably tawdry, but also unbelievably banal — another rehearsed pseudoshock that the media, and now the government, gladly play along with. Isn't the power of social opprobrium in a free society enough?

It's already out of control. Ms. Jackson lost her spot as a presenter at the Grammys. And NBC's affiliates forced the network to take out a scene from tonight's episode of "E.R." because a breast was exposed for a second and a half. It was the breast of an 80-year-old woman dying of a heart attack. Sizzle, sizzle.

Besides, should all the indignation be about a "wardrobe malfunction" when there were all those icky ads — financing our annual festival of testosterone — about erectile dysfunction? (One father I know tried telling his curious 10-year-old son the ads were about "electile dysfunction.")

Michael Powell should stop interfering where he doesn't belong. Colin Powell should start interfering where he does belong. The secretary should get off the sidelines where the vice president and Pentagon banished him and stop waiting for them to fail so he can be vindicated. He should get more involved in rescuing Iraq from chaos.

The hawks' war to make Iraq free and secure is slowly descending into anarchy and ethnic conflict. That's indecent.

02-05-2004, 10:19 AM	#2 (permalink)
CSflim Sky Piercer Location: Ireland	I honestly couldn't care less. __________________

02-05-2004, 10:31 AM	#4 (permalink)
ARTelevision I change Location: USA	right, it's not the breast...that's a tempest in a C-cup. It's the ruinous "entertainment" we are accustomed to and it's multi-million dollar, mind-killing and exploitative nature. __________________ create evolution

02-05-2004, 10:48 AM	#6 (permalink)
ARTelevision I change Location: USA	I read your thread, thanks. as in: "*right*, it's not the breast...that's a tempest in a C-cup" My statement responds to the continuing attempts at deflection away from the real issue that continue - even in this thread right here... (read the responses before you post) __________________ create evolution

02-05-2004, 10:58 AM	#7 (permalink)
Halx Please touch this. Owner/Admin Location: Manhattan	I dont quite get the point of the author. I mean, I too noticed that the costumes resembled those from A Clockwork Orange, but I don't see the metaphor. I don't think there's anything new being said - USA is a nation full of sheltered puritan pussies. __________________ You have found this post informative. -The Administrator [Don't Feed The Animals]

02-05-2004, 11:01 AM	#9 (permalink)
ARTelevision I change Location: USA	I would say this is a redundant thread and could have been added to the ongoing discussion... In any event - it's a good controversial subject. Opinions are pretty varied, etc. __________________ create evolution

02-05-2004, 10:24 AM	#3 (permalink)
Nanz Upright Location: uk	She flashed her tit everyone is talking about it non stop, she got the reaction she desired which is publicity. end of story. Its not exactly a big deal imo. It just shows the lengths people will go to and how the jacksons are more than a little messed up

02-05-2004, 11:02 AM	#10 (permalink)
ARTelevision I change Location: USA	Charlatan - I know - we're almost getting back to the point. Thanks. __________________ create evolution

02-05-2004, 11:10 AM	#11 (permalink)
Lebell Cracking the Whip Location: Sexymama's arms...	IMHO, The whole episode has just pushed into the face of middle America what has been happening in our culture: sex sells. Ma and Pa were horrified at Janet's boob and gyrations, but that is common fare on BET, MTV, VH1, etc. Heck, we even are getting shots of flesh on prime time (asses on NYBlue and boobs on ER). Sex is regularly used to sell beer, cigarettes and fast cars. But now, with the "boob" incident, people are suddenly surprised. All of this just reinforces the conclusion I came to several years ago: America is schizophrenic regarding sex. __________________ "Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU! Please Donate!

02-05-2004, 11:13 AM	#12 (permalink)
Charlatan Getting it. Super Moderator Location: Lion City	The way I read the author is that he is suggesting that American culture is facinated with the Image. The big shiny Image. There appear before our eyes cultural references that should offend and should give viewers pause. But we just let them wash over us. Clockwork Orange is just one example among many that should cause us to say, "is this truly FAMILY entertainment?" The subtext (hell the text) of the image is completely lost on many. But why is it lost? There is something much bigger going on in our culture than a simple flashing of breast or a wacky stage show at the superbowl. We are a nation (nations) addicted to trivial things. We consume our "entertainment" like fast food -- we know it tastes good but try not to thing about what it's made of... and a half hour later we are hungry for more. Empty calories for our minds. __________________ "My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars." - Old Man Luedecke

02-05-2004, 11:26 AM	#13 (permalink)
ARTelevision I change Location: USA	Yes exactly. And fast food, etc. is making most of us less healthy. And "fast food" entertainment is making most of us more stupid. __________________ create evolution

02-05-2004, 11:30 AM	#14 (permalink)
Charlatan Getting it. Super Moderator Location: Lion City	There is already a Slow Food movement... Slow Food Slow Food USA There should also be Slow Entertainment movement. A movement that allows us to pause and think about what we are consuming... Media Literacy is the closest that comes to mind. __________________ "My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars." - Old Man Luedecke

02-05-2004, 11:52 AM	#16 (permalink)
ratbastid Darth Papa Location: Yonder	Here's the thing, though. That which shocked us in the early 70's when A Clockwork Orange was released no longer shocks us. We were vastly more conservative then. These days A Clockwork Orange is de rigeur viewing on campuses nationwide. It certainly was on mine. One thing we deserve to be shocked about is that a cane-wielding, codpieced rapist is any more acceptable now than it was then. But let's not think about that. Let's talk instead about the boob and how it was Janet's last grasp at relevence. Much better to trade in our stories of shock and outrage than to face the darkness of our own souls. The boob.. The booooooob....

02-05-2004, 11:55 AM	#17 (permalink)
ARTelevision I change Location: USA	Charlatan, Media Literacy is an excellent movement and should be supported as much as possible. There's also an "anti-mass-media-mind-control" movement: http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showthr...=&threadid=911 P.S. I also do want to create some good will among those who think we're full of it for appearing puritanical... Media Literacy is a great direction. Thanks for the reminder! Feel free to jump in any time. I think there's some progress being made. __________________ create evolution

02-05-2004, 12:21 PM	#18 (permalink)
water_boy1999 Fly em straight! Location: Above and Beyond	As a general population stereotype, I don't think people grasped the whole symbolism of Clockwork Orange and the implications it had in this particular half-time show. So, if people aren't able to readily grasp the concept that was being presented to them, rather, they focus on the entertainment for it's visual grandiour, then why not focus on the baring of Janet's boob? __________________ Doh!!!! -Homer Simpson

02-05-2004, 02:40 PM	#20 (permalink)
skier Rawr! Location: Edmontania	The superbowl halftime show is another peice of the puzzle that is america's psyche. America is a nation filled with violence, brought to a boil by the media. The helicopters, WWII references, along with the simulated white on black sexual assault. Much like how we gain insight into past cultures through their paintings and other art, Television is the key to america's mind. And I don't like what i'm seeing. __________________ "Asking a bomb squad if an old bomb is still "real" is not the best thing to do if you want to save it." - denim

02-05-2004, 03:53 PM	#21 (permalink)
ARTelevision I change Location: USA	It's really what has been done to our minds by the most vast and powerful propaganda machine ever devised by man. To believe that single individuals have the ability to withstand heavily funded and intensively researched and effective psychological manipulation by an all-enveloping total-environment culture of seduction is either the height of hubris or simple naivete. __________________ create evolution

02-06-2004, 02:33 AM	#22 (permalink)
billege Watcher Location: Ohio	Listen, I'm taking my shot... BANG! SLAM! CRASH! KER_POW! Very few Americans saw a breast. In fact, they didn't SEE anything. Americans sat down and ate themselves silly, while getting excited about commercials, because they thought (think) that's what they are supposed to do. Some people vehemently did NOT watch the SB, because in a desperate attempt at exercising individual choice, they wanted to NOT do what they were told. However, most of them just conformed to the other camp we've been told to pick from. IE: Those who love the bowl, and those who hate it (but still have to pay attention to it so they can relate stories of what they hated, and how much). My "noises" at the top there, are what the American public saw. The public fully expected to see things flying around, preening charicturatures of real people, and things flashing and popping. That's what they were told to accept, and what they did. No one saw Apaches as vehicles of death. I'd like to quickly add, that I'm not making a value judgment on the Apaches as vehicles designed to kill, that's just what they are. The American public has been trained to like, and with terrorists around, love and unquestioningly accept anything military; that especially includes the hardware. The American public did not see vehicles designed and produced to kill other human beings from the air. They saw flying things. Like a cat chasing a flashlight's beam, they were mesmerized. America saw: --Play National Anthem --display emotion --look at pretty girl making nice singing --LOOK! flying things! --put beer down, repeat media sound bite to friends referencing how we must stop those _________. --friends agree --nice singing getting louder --finish singing --E A T. The halftime show was more of the same. There were no meaningful references, just shiny things people recognize. (I hesitate to even use "recognize," that implies cognition. I suppose "find familiar" could be more appropriate for what I'm saying.) The problem was not the breast, it was the interruption in the expected series of events. The shiny loud things were supposed to do "A," then "B," then "C." All in nice digestible, thoughtless chunks. Then out came the boob. --FEEDY THING FOR BABIES! --SEX THING! LIKE I SAW IN VIDEO!!! This series of thoughts broke down the expectations, and upset those briefly roused from food induced comas. <i>That's what people are pissed about.</i> The shiny things didn't do what was expected/suggested. For me, I have trouble deciding which it is I'm terrified of. Is it: Americans are actually terrified of a human body part? or... Americans are terrified of the shiny things not moving as planned? or... Americans lives are actually so devoid of meaningful events that we are desperately grabbing anything we can and making it meaningful. __________________ I can sum up the clash of religion in one sentence: "My Invisible Friend is better than your Invisible Friend." Last edited by billege; 02-06-2004 at 02:43 AM..

02-06-2004, 04:55 AM	#23 (permalink)
ARTelevision I change Location: USA	There are many voices rising up regarding this. It does make sense to be aware of and consider what they are saying. A controversy exists and it will not be easily dsmissed. ........................ Pop culture has been in decline for awhile The Jackson Sun jacksonsun.com Feb 6 2004 Blessedly, I was away from the television during the now-infamous halftime extravaganza at the Super Bowl on Sunday, so I missed the "wardrobe malfunction," the "costume reveal," seen 'round the world. Actually, there was a good reason I was away from the TV. In a rare moment of foresight, I intuited that whatever MTV/CBS was going to serve up, the north Georgia-born, World War II vet, churchgoing father-in-law with whom I was watching the game was not going to enjoy it one bit. So I engaged him in a bit of upstairs billiards during halftime, and we missed the whole thing. Little did I know how very right that intuition would prove to be. Of course it didn't take a genius to know that a show featuring Nelly, Sean "P. Diddy" Combs, Janet Jackson and Justin Timberlake might just prove to be too much to bear for millions of people like my father-in-law. After all, these "artists" have a long track record. Why should we be surprised if their acts on the grandest stage of all are true to what they do the rest of the time? What happened on Sunday is not just that Justin Timberlake and Janet Jackson conspired to spice up their little dance number, and something did (or did not) go as planned. At a deeper level, what happened is that the rapidly degrading MTV culture in which our youth are saturated met the Super Bowl, a cultural event offered to all Americans - indeed to all the world in America's name. That clash has produced an immediate fallout that may yet prove to be of some cultural value, even while we are still wiping our eyes wondering what our children, our parents and our grandparents have seen. The fact of the matter is that many Americans are (or have been) blissfully ignorant about the declining moral and aesthetic standards that in recent years have swept across the landscape of mass market television (especially cable TV) and music. Of course, concerned adults have been lamenting those declining standards since the 1960s. This doesn't mean that the concern is illegitimate. What it really means is that the standards have been in continuous decline for more than 40 years. I was first clued in to how bad things have gotten when my teenage kids stumbled upon the MTV movie awards show at a hotel room when we were on a beach vacation last summer. Just about every award was offered by a foul-mouthed star who seemed to be competing with the previous one to see how many F-words could be stuffed into a 3-minute presentation. Then there was a homoerotic song and dance number involving dozens of young girls in prep school outfits which culminated in their flinging off their skirts. That was the end of that afternoon of television for us. But it is not the end of the exposure of my children, and everyone's children, to the very same material. We can snap off the TV, but our kids can find the same clip on the Web in a hundred places, like Howard Dean's scream. We can snap off Nelly and Outkast and J-Lo and whoever else is on the radio, but our kids can find their way to the same music online, unaltered by the countless bleeps, blanks, and substitute words that one hears on mainstream radio stations. To those adults who did not know it, Sunday was a wake up call, saying the following: These are the "artists" whose every song is memorized by our children, whose faces (and barely covered bodies) are plastered on their teen magazines and sometimes their bedroom walls, whose clothing styles and seduction styles are imitated by pre-teens and teens alike. These smirking, boundary-crossing, raunchier-the-better singers, rappers, dancers, and actors are the icons of this generation. Theirs are the songs downloaded by our children off the Internet, or listened to on the most popular Top 40 radio stations in town, or pumped into their ears under those headphones. What happened on Sunday was simply that the rest of America got a peek (so to speak) at what pop culture looks like right now, at the way sexuality is sold to our children. It seems that a lot of us did not like what we saw. But lest we allow ourselves too much anger at MTV, Janet, or Justin, we should think about our own complicity. How many of the commercials offered on Sunday contained sexually provocative material? How many of us have watched the Darwinian meat market dating programs offered by mainstream television? How many of us are aficionados of situation comedies that make sex their main topic week after week? How many of us have looked at Internet pornography, perhaps America's fastest growing industry? The halftime show crossed a line that many Americans had never before seen crossed on "family hour" television. But the really bad news is that such lines are crossed every hour of every day before the eyes and ears of our nation's children, and that the rest of us are too busy being titillated by our own amusements even to notice. David P. Gushee is Graves Professor of Moral Philosophy at Union University. Write to him at The Jackson Sun, Editorial Department, P.O. Box 1059, Jackson, TN 38302. __________________ create evolution

02-06-2004, 11:15 AM	#24 (permalink)
Lokus I can't think of a good title Location: East Bay Area, CA	I think billege is being overly cynical. You don't think people would be able to decide to watch the Superbowl based on their own like or dislike of football? You're presenting a false dichotomy. I'm not concerned about the presence of the Apaches. Football itself is a simulation of war so is it wrong that real machines of war show up? As for whether this is indicative of the some sort of moral decay, I don't know. Violence is inherent in human nature and in American culture. People will always be fascinated by violence and war. I don't understand what you mean by the lack of "meaningful references". Were you expecting some at a sporting event? Or are you commenting on the Clockwork Orange costumes? I think the reason this bared breast got so much publicity and outrage is partly due to American culture. As obsessed with sex as Americans are, we've still got these leftover Puritan ideals which means that we can have tons of sexual innuendo but showing a lone breast crosses the line. The automatic association of a nude or partially nude body with sex is somewhat troubling. I'm sorry if this is disjointed and/or doesn't make sense. I'm still recovering from my grueling midterm this morning heh. __________________ The black wind howls...