Alex Adelman’s blog

While reading Panopticism, by Michel Foucault I was immediately reminded me of the movie V for Vendetta. In this movie, the British Parliament reigns over the British people. They are always observing everything that the British people do. They also control these people by limiting what foods they can eat, what pieces of art they can keep, and they even work to change history that does not comply with their own views and efforts. The government is in complete control of their people because they are always watching them. It is almost like they are in a minimum-security prison. They can walk around, eat, socialize, work, but every move is observed and regulated. They also know they are being watched, which cause them to act a certain way, just like Foucault wrote about.

This idea of always being watched is also very common in our lives. Although we may not realize it, we are being watched almost everywhere we go and by many different people. When we are browsing the Internet, when you are typing a response to this blog, when you are shopping at Wal-Mart, even when you attend a leisurely event like a football or basketball game. Others constantly observe us and this sometimes affects how we act. Cameras in banks make criminals think twice about robbing them. The government monitoring the Internet makes people cautious of downloading music. It is like everyone is living the Truman show except we are all Truman Burbank.

I noticed that through the invention of web cameras, humans have not only taken a leap in technology, but also created a smaller world. With web cams a person living in the United States can communicate with their friend in China face to face. Country leaders no longer have to make dangerous trips to work out deals. They can simply press a button and communicate just as they would in a conference. Businesses no longer have to communicate via telephone but can create dual office web cams and link two or more offices around the world. This is globalization is its simplest form. A business can have an office in Europe and in the United States and they do not need to make countless phone calls or even travel transcontinental to relay a message. They can look into their television screen or computer and have full-length meetings. This allows for the global expansion of businesses.

I wonder what is in the near future for web cam technology. Although it sounds unbelievable, I always thought it would be amazing to be able to send items across the world like in Charlie and the Chocolate factory. For example, my friends in Switzerland could send me some amazing chocolate with the click of a button. I am sure it will take time to develop that contraption but there is still hope for chocolate lovers everywhere with the human power and drive to invent and innovate.

For the longest time, women have been viewed as sex objects. Times are changing and men are slowly becoming more dominant in the exploitation of the human body. The female body has been used to advertise anything from lingerie to bricks (www.hansonbrick.com). Advertisers are coming to realize that masculinity sells. Yes, a partly clothed, beautiful blond will certainly intrigue the male population but the idea of having the perfect male body is certainly just as important of a selling technique as that of a good looking, partially clothed woman. Men look at these underwear and cologne models with finely tuned abs, rock hard pecs, and large bulges and think they too can look like that if they only lived that lifestyle and wore that product.

When reading Bordo’s article, flashes of various James Bond movies kept rolling through my head. When I watch these James Bond films I always think how cool Bond is. He gets any woman he wants, has the badass job of being a secret agent, and he drives absolutely any car he desires. What are James Bond’s reoccurring physical features? His tan skin, his rock hard abs, and dashing looks, all of which drive the women crazy. Unfortunately, man has not come up with a reasonable way to look like a James Bond type character without undergoing expensive surgeries. Nor has man created a way for a man talk as smooth as Bond does to attract the female specimen. Purchasing good looks and charm are usually out of the question for men, but buying the famous Aston Martin, the stylish clothes, and living the lavish lifestyle of a James Bond character is completely realistic. The reason why Calvin Kline, Hanes, and Giorgio Armani advertisements succeed is because these are all items that people can purchase to look like a James Bond like male.

James Bond links : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Bond (everything you need to know about Bond, James Bond)
http://www.007.info/ (fan site)
http://www.jamesbondwiki.com/?t=anon (shows the cars, styles, fashion, gadgets, and women of James Bond)

Bergers’ Way of Seeing explains how seeing is more satisfactory to a person then simply hearing. He starts by saying “Seeing comes before words. The child looks and recognizes before it can speak.” He builds a pathway for the reader to relate to his point in the simplest of ways. This technique will later encourage us to agree with his other points that we either do not understand of do not agree with. According to Berger, “The way we see things is affected by what we know and believe.” I am in complete agreement with this passage. One example he game was fire. We see fire and immediately there is a negative connotation with fire. For Christians, fire is most closely associated with Hell. Considering that Hell is a horrible, wretched place, when a person sees a painting depicting fire there think that the artist was trying to depict evil. If the artist is of a different religion with beliefs that fire is pure, the wrong meaning is associated with the art.

Berger then begins to talk about how assumptions including beauty, truth, civilization, status, taste, etc. can influence the way we view an image. He states that, “assumptions obscure the past. They mystify rather than clarify.” This statement I find to be true in many ways. For example, if I am looking at a picture of a building painted 1,000 years ago in the buildings prime, my view of it is glorified and I might consider it a magnificent architectural feat. If I were then to visit the building after hundreds and hundreds of years of weathering and destruction I might see ruble or maybe even brand new buildings in its place and my view of this magnificent building is crushed. So is essence, all the painting of the building did for me is mystify.

The author of this piece brings up another strong point saying how our perspectives change with the spoken word. If a piece of art is built up with words for so long, people begin to believe how magnificent it is. The Mona Lisa is perhaps the most famous and popular painting to date and yet it is simply of a plain looking woman lacking extreme detail. Yes, it is fascinating how her eyes seem to always be watching but for the most part, without the hype and words to build it up, I would not think much of the painting if I saw it lined up in a group of paintings.

Berger brings up many good points to persuade the reader what we see is greatly influenced and sometimes destroyed by what we say. His argument is overly complicated at times but in the end, he creates a truly valid argument and in my case, convinces the reader that art is not the same as it used to be because of the way we now view it.

Hi my name is Alex Adelman.

I am an anticipated International Business major at The University of South Carolina.