Little Miss Perfect

Recently I’ve gotten into the habit of watching a show called Little Miss Perfect, which airs on the Women’s Entertainment channel. It available on my cable’s on demand, and whenever I’m bored/don’t feel like doing work, I always watch an episode. The concept of the show is that every episode follows two little girls (usually under the age of 12) and their parents as they prepare for the Little Miss Perfect pageant in their respective cities. The pageant is just like every other glamour pageant for young girls—mildly disturbing and creepy, while at the same time so intriguing that you can’t take your eyes off the screen. All of the discussion in class yesterday about scopophilia and voyeurism got me thinking about how even at a very young age it is clear that our media, as well as our society, put females in the category of objects, and more importantly, objects to be looked at. The children on the show put on so many pounds of make-up, self-tanner, fake hair, and sparkly dresses that by the end of the process they look closer to 25 years old as opposed to 8 or 9. I think this idea goes along with other images that can be seen throughout the media in print ads, commercials, and television shows, where it’s not only the idea of looking at women as simple beautiful objects to stare at, but there is also great importance placed on the youthfulness of these women. The younger and more child-like the girl, the more beautiful she is considered, and in turn the more she is objectified.

FNL in a whole new light

My roommates and I recently finished watching season 4 of one of my favorite shows, Friday Night Lights. I have been a huge fan of the show ever since season one for multiple reasons. The characters and the dialogue always feel real, I always love a good family drama, and t top it all off, I am a huge sports fan. But it wasn't until this week that I realized another main reason that I love this show. After reading more about semiotics and how images and the layout of a show can work to convey a certain feeling or underlying meaning, I realized that the unique semiotics within Friday Night Lights is what keeps drawing me, and many other viewers, back to the show. The show is often shot with a handheld camera, creating what some people complain to be a "shaky shot." However, this is one of my favorite parts of watching the show. I think that the shows trademark "shaky" and extremely close-up shots are what give it its unique, raw feel. And though the camera techniques have gotten criticism, the connotation behind the scenes would be completely altered without them. The close-ups also enhance the dialogue, which is often spoken at a softer, more intimate level, like two people having a real conversation would speak. I know understand that all of these factors play into the semiotics of the show, or how the meaning of the show is conveyed, and as a result, I can better understand why I am so drawn to it.

GLEE is back!!

One of my favorite shows this year, Glee premiered its spring season last night, and I couldn't be more excited. The pop culture references were just as witty, shocking, and hilarious as usual, the songs were great, and all of the original characters were back in action. Despite being one of the more offbeat shows on television today, what stood out to me while watching the episode last night was how diverse of a cast Glee has. This got me thinking about our topic of identity, and how one of the aspects that may draw people to the show is the fact that they are almost sure to find one character that they can relate to either in looks, personality, sexual orientation, economic status, etcetera. After noticing this, I tried to pay more attention to how each of the different characters were portrayed and whether or not they find any types of stereotypes relating to their identity. Mercedes, one of the featured African American cast members, has a larger than life personality, and is known for her amazing voice, sassy attitude, and brightly colored ensembles. I feel that this is the way most African Americans are presented in the media, but that is not to say that it can’t be a realistic depiction. I just feel that there should be just as much variety in the personalities of black characters, as there are for white characters. Another member of the cast, Kirk, is a gay teen. He is without a doubt my favorite character on the show, but it is not lost on me that he fits the mold that most of us see when we think of a young gay male. He is flamboyant and not very strong or athletic. I think it’s important to point out that some, but not all members of the gay community look or act in that manner. There are other minorities on the show including a glee student of Asian descent, and Rachel, who is Jewish. I’m sure anyone could find stereotypes within these characters as well, but I think it’s also important to question whether all of these stereotypes are negative and should be criticized, or if some of them have a different meaning.

TLC- the modern day “traveling circus”?

It seems as though every time I watch TLC now, they are bombarding me with another show about a family with way too many kids, or another special about someone who weighs 3,000 pounds and has a third arm (okay maybe not that specifically.) Although at first glance I would say that TLC offers a non-hegemonic look at families and people in America, the more I think about it, the more I disagree. I think the shows have gotten somewhat ridiculous and over the top to the point that I don’t think they are doing those people who are considered “different” in this society any justice. In I fact, I would say that TLC is going along with hegemonic norms by portraying little people, or devoutly religious families who pop out a kid every year, as being so odd or different that they become a spectacle, much like the bearded lady or Siamese twins of classic sideshows of the past. Our society likes to look on in awe at lifestyles and people who deviate from the norm—hence the success of shows like Little People, Big World or John & Kate plus 8—but that doesn’t mean they aspire to be like them. What makes TLC so popular is that one can watch the shows and be entertained, but at the same time find comfort in knowing that they are “normal.”

Ridiculous Reebok Commercial

Recently I’ve been seeing some of the most ridiculous and idiotic commercials ever. And just when I think they can’t get any worse, the next one comes on my television screen and proves me wrong. The commercial that has been annoying me the most lately is one for Reebok’s EasyTone sneakers, which more closely resembles a soft-core porn than an advertisement for running shoes. I understand they are trying to attract audience’s attention by showing a practically naked women in bed wearing only sneakers, but give me a break. Reebok’s slogan for the campaign is that buying these shoes will give women “better legs and a better butt.” But here’s a concept: go buy any pair of workout shoes and start working out for an extended period of time. I can almost guarantee you will end up looking “better.” Reebok also claims that these shoes will “help you make 88 percent of men speechless and 76 percent of women jealous.” (I’m sure a very well-respected researcher came up with that statistic.) On another note, this commercial goes along with most of the hegemonic images of women that are shown in the media. The woman in the commercial is faceless, and thus reduced to an object whose only valuable attributes are her toned body. By no means do I claim to be a radical feminist, but it seems that the objectification of women for an ad geared towards women doesn’t make much sense. I guess what I’m trying to say is this commercial just plain weirded me out.