Is it Worth It? Final Paper

Analysis of The Girl who Leapt Through Time

The Girl Who Leapt Through Time, a Japanese animated film loosely adapted from the 1967 novel of the same name written by Yasutaka Tsutsui, is a science fiction film about a young girl who experiences the phenomenon of time traveling but sooner than later realizes that everything happens for a reason and that many things are tied in with fate.

(In this scene, Makoto, the protagonist, debates whether or not she should go back in time to change the end result, not considering how it may affect everything else just yet. )

Throughout the course of this semester, I felt that most of the topics we covered in class were generally of things that regarded to modern society and societal values, touching upon ideas of modernism and postmodernism; more recently, we discussed more about future occurrences and talked about technological advances and whether or not they were truly good for us as people. I chose this film specifically because I believe it perfectly depicts the fact that actions have consequences and that us, as a people, need to take our actions into consideration before we decide to jump onto an idea.

(In this scene, Makoto, after time traveling too many times, used up her last leap and cannot make it in time to save her friends from dying in front of her eyes. )

How does this relate to our recent talks about technological advancements? Well, I believe that at the pace we are currently moving, an event much similar may just be around the corner: time traveling. The basic summary is just about a high school girl who discovers that she has the ability to time travel. Thrilled that she can leap through time as she pleases, she uncovers she could not leap without causing occurrences that would soon begin to pose as problems to her daily life.

Within the first half hour of the film, we get a peek at the life of Makoto, the protagonist of this movie. She is a bubbly young teenager who has a relatively positive outlook on life. She has 2 close friends whom she talks to a lot about the future and just life in general. One day, specifically the day that the movie begins on, shows her experiencing something that is not of the usual. Many things happen and we can say for sure that based on the events, the things that occur on this day are not of the norm. After going through a lot of things, she discovers her ability to time leap, something that apparently many girls her age can do.

Makoto is discovered by Chiaki, her best friend, when Chiaki asks is she has been leaping through time and changing things.

After a certain event occurs, which urges her to learn how to control her ability to time leap, Makoto, after many attempts, succeeds in leaping. She begins to leap through her days, constantly leaping back and forth whenever she experiences something inconvenient to her. For example, she completely restarted the bad day she was having and managed to not oversleep, wake up early, passed the surprise pop quiz, succeeded in not making a fool of herself in cooking class, avoided getting injured, and manages to avoid the biggest incident of them all: dying. Slowly, she gets arrogant, and starts to use it willy nilly. So far, she’s just leaping for small things like, going back in time to eat a specific meal, or doing karaoke over and over again, or succeeding in besting her best friends at baseball. Sooner than later though, she begins leaping in order to escape certain things, things that have a lot more meaning than just karaoke, or eating her favorite meal again. Slowly, as the movie unfolds, more and more things happen and occur after one another and soon, Makoto’s life has changed drastically, and she instantly regrets it. After discovering that she doesn’t have many leaps left, she tries to use the last of them to set things right again, but unfortunately, she doesn’t succeed in changing everything. The one time she needed a leap and couldn’t because she had none left. She discovers the truth about her best friend and regrets everything she has done up to this point, after seeing what a mess she has caused. She is given one last chance to set things right and she succeeds.

A Chiaki from a different future tells her the truth about everything.

Although the ending is a bit melancholy, it is still mysteriously beautiful and leaves you with the hope that that’s not the end of it. It certainly is a rather moving ending.

As outrageous as this movie may seem, it is still understandable in certain parts of the film. It is easy to tell that throughout it, there were many instances where time was mentioned. Whether it was in the context of plans for the future, or what they’re doing at the moment, or what occurred in the past, time was always in the conversation. I believe that this was a way for the writer to tell us that time is a standstill and none of us could ever predict what will happen in the future. I want to relate this topic to what we discussed some weeks ago when we were assigned to watch Conti’s Tedtalk about the future of technology and virtual reality. One of our assignments was to predict what may come in the future if we were continue on this path we currently are on right now, and I responded that it was hard to say because no one can predict the future. My response ties into the moral of this movie and that is: despite everything, we should let things act on its own in the flow of time and we shouldn’t affect the way things are, lest it affects us in the process. To further prove my point, in the words of a professor by the name of Nick Bostrom, “We need realistic pictures of what the future might bring in order to make sound decisions.  Increasingly, we need realistic pictures not only of our personal or local near-term futures, but also of remoter global futures. Because of our expanded technological powers, some human activities now have significant global impacts.” If we were to make decisions now, we would need to figure out if it will impact the economy, or environment if we decide on some drastic change. Even though this topic is far out from what I was talking about before with time travel, a creation of a time traveling device may as well affect a lot of things–there is not sure fact that it won’t. I certainly believe that at this rate, humans can improve faster than we have before but it’s still the safer choice to consider all things before we act on a final decision. In conclusion, consequences cause issues, and whether someone deems anything worth it, it is always best to decide with consequences in mind and not get involved into something not worth pursuing.

Aren't We All Monsters Deep Inside?

After reading Cohen’s Seven Theses, I tried thinking of who might be a good example and had a bit of trouble coming up with one. Though, after much consideration, I decided that I might go with a literary monster, one that could actually be a pretty good example: Frankenstein. I want to be clear, I did not choose Frankenstein because he is literally a monster; in fact, I want to analyze both Frankenstein and his creator, Victor Frankenstein, as examples of a “monster” to Cohen’s theses.

First off: Victor Frankenstein. I’d like to think that Victor may be the perfect depiction of society. I first thought of using him as an example because he is the embodiment of what societal values are like if it were a person. He is the cultural moment. Victor, in pursue of a better understanding of what life is, pursues his dream, only to find that he has made a horrendous creature. In Cohen’s theses, he talks more of the monster itself, but in describing the monster and what is is and does, he also talks about how culture is the culprit in this creation a monster. Now if you could think of Victor as a personification of “culture”, then his creation, Frankenstein, would be the “monster”.

Frankenstein: In Shelley’s novel: Frankenstein; or, The Modern Prometheus, Victor Frankenstein, a scientist in pursuit of his dream, creates a being by studying a technique to transmit life to a non-living matter. Thus, the creation of the monster is born. Horrified of what he has created because of how disproportionate it is to the normal human being, Victor flees and leaves the monster to fend for himself. Other than the fact the monster is a literal monster, I want to focus that despite this fact, his mindset is as human as any of us can be. If you look at it that way, the monster may not be a monster at all. Anyways, just as Cohen’s states that society creates monsters, Victor is the creator of his monster.

“Monsters must be examines within the intricate matrix of relations (social, cultural, and literary-historical) that generate them.”

In the novel, we get a glimpse of the life that the monster had lived, in the 4 months that Victor was gone. We get to see that the monster, in fact, had developed humane feelings and only wanted to befriend people, even though they rejected him. It’s interesting to see that despite being a monster, he had the ability to develop fondness over the humans that he lived with and he actually felt lonely without his master. Like Frankenstein, we are the monsters that society/Victor created. Though they see us as atrocious, we are still deep down beings with emotions.

Analysis of Monster Culture

Monster Culture (Seven Theses)

By Jeffrey Jerome Cohen

Monsters. Vampires, zombies, wendigoes, yetis, Bigfoot, werewolves–monsters. In his first thesis, Cohen states that we humans are essentially monsters, in this particular instance, a vampire. As monsters, humans should be buried at the fork of the road so that if we were to come back to life, we would not known which way to go. Drive a stake to the heart to kill us, to kill the vampire, so that we will be forever buried there, haunting it to the end of our days. This monster is born at the metaphorical cross of roads from a place of time, whether it be culturally or mentally. The body is the embodiment of a certain culture–the monstrosity of a culture. We see the chaos that culture leaves behind, like a Yeti in the mountains. We know that the Yeti exists but it only vanishes, only to appear in the legends of King Arthur, as the ogre of Mount Saint Michael. No matter the culture, no matter the country, monsters are born from cultures. As monsters of created from society, humans dislike order. We resist the attempts they used to include us in a system. And so, because of this, we are dangerous; we are a being that threatens to smash the distinctions that are supposed to define us. Monsters tend to be things on the Outside, that have come to dwell among us. They are the incorporation of the “Beyond” as Cohen states, and are distant and distinct from Within. The monstrous body is cultural, political, racial, economic, and sexual. The exaggeration of culture makes up the monster inside of us. For example, in the Bible, the aboriginal inhabitants of Canaan are perceived as menacing giants –this justifies the Hebrew colonization of the Promised Land. In another example, medieval France celebrated the crusades by transforming the Muslim race into demonic characters who lack the mentality of humanity as was forced to succumb to their bestial attributes. Monsters are created from within all of us, forced to squeeze out because of the expectations of society. Born from war and political relations, monsters are us. They are our children. They can be pushed as far away as possible, but they always return. And when they come back, they bring with them more monsters that we have created and put away. And they ask that we reevaluate what it is we do and why we create them. But that is us. Humans that wreak havoc wherever they go. It is we who created the monsters inside of us.

The Betrayal

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wagn8Wrmzuc

Judas - by Lady Gaga

The music video begins with the members of a motorcycle gang cruising on the freeway and we essentially see Gaga, who’s the only one in color at the moment, wearing a cross on her sitting behind the leader’s motorcycle––the leader most likely representing “Jesus” himself. We get a glimpse of the names of all the gang members and they all seem to coincide with the names of all 12 disciples of Jesus Christ. According the Bible, Judas was only known for one thing: betraying Jesus. In order to understand the music video, we need to gleam into the facts about Judas’s betrayal of Jesus Christ. Judas, the son of Simon Iscariot, was a lover of money; he was a thief, and according to Matthew 36: 13-15, the priests paid him “thirty silver coins” to betray the Lord. From the start, Jesus had known about Judas’s intentions. Jesus told his disciples, “Have I not chosen you, the Twelve? Yet one of you is the devil!” (John 6:70). At the Last Supper, Jesus predicted His betrayal and identified the betrayer: “Jesus answered, ‘It is the one to whom I will give this piece of bread when I have dipped it in the dish.’ Then, dipping the piece of bread, he gave it to Judas Iscariot, son of Simon” (John 13:26). Judas Iscariot was not “clean”; he had not been reborn and was not forgiven of his sins (John 13:10–11). In fact, it would seem as if Judas was seduced to do what he did by the devil himself: “As soon as Judas took the bread that Jesus had given him, Satan entered into him” (John 13:27). No one had suspected Judas. He was a trusted member of the Twelve.

It was known to all that Judas betrayed the Lord with a kiss. After committing this atrocious act, Judas “was seized with remorse and returned the thirty silver coins to the chief priests and the elders” (Matthew 27:3). But we learn that the feelings of remorse he had would not equal his repentance and so rather than making amends or seeking forgiveness, “he went away and hanged himself” (Matthew 27:5). Given the fact that Judas had grown close to Jesus during those 3 years of guidance, it is hard to imagine how he could cause such a betrayal. Judas teaches us to beware the small and gradual incidents in our lives, for fear that it may turn into something greater and more devious. His story is also a great reminder that looks can be deceiving.

Now, back to the music video. When getting a closer look at Gaga, she is completely covered in crosses in jewelry from head to toe. The leader, who bears a crown on his head, displays calmness in his actions, something that the Lord himself often did. The gang enters a town that looks somewhat middle Eastern, and Gaga begins to sing and dance. She dawns an extremely revealing red flowy dress with a crosses attached on the cloth on both breasts. At 1:32, it shows Gaga following closely behind “Jesus” going down the stairs and lightly pushing the man who represents Judas. Though I have observed the video throughout, I have still yet to come to a conclusion on who Gaga is supposed to represent. She seems like a bystander in the midst of all this chaos in the video, and it almost seems as if she’s not there. I think that Gaga represents the evil that grows inside Judas–possibly even the devil himself that is trailing behind everything. We see that she does dawn a red dress–the color that is the devil. At 2:05 we see Jesus eyeing Judas in the crowd below, and Judas coming out of with with two girls on his arms, signifying that maybe he’s losing himself to temptation. This little bit, I feel, represents the fact that Jesus knew about Judas’s betrayal, as he is constantly eyeing him, and Judas, himself, is completely unaware, possibly even about the fact that he is going to betray the Lord himself. At 2:38, it is shown that Jesus is guiding Judas away from Gaga, possibly saying that Jesus is asking him to stay away from his inner evil. At 3:29, Gaga is dawning to infamous red color yet again, and we see her holding a pistol in her hand, pointing it as Judas. Later on, we find out that the gun is actually a lipstick that she uses on Judas, signifying the devil telling Judas to give in. Lipstick is used on lips so I thought maybe since Judas betrayed Jesus with a kiss, it might possibly be alluding to that. The water that floods in around 3:43-4:17 signifies Jesus trying to “purify”Judas, and succeeds in bringing the devil down but this does not stop Judas from betraying Jesus with a kiss at 4:22. The water represents purification because when people get baptised, part of them are often submerged in water to “clean” out their sins. The music has also stopped in this time period, possibly to magnify the intensity of the moment. Towards the end of the video, Gaga is shown falling to her knees, as Jesus kisses her forehead and at the very end, Gaga is stoned to death by a crowd and the video closes with her sprawled out on the ground in a white dress.

The Way Society Sees It

In today’s day and age, it almost seems impossible to leave the house without any sort of technological device on you, be it a cellphone, a tablet, a smartphone, any sort of wifi enabled appliance…..it’s just impossible. I have to be honest, I personally am not too addicted to technology myself, BUT I will say that, despite this, I do still use my smartphone outside for more important things such as receiving important calls, looking at the map, checking emails, the list goes on and on. My point is, even if someone isn’t addicted to the point where they’re constantly glued to the screen, technological devices have quite literally embedded themselves into our daily lives. This being said, this particular image stuck with me because of how unreasonable it is. These days I constantly see kids running around, with a smartphone or ipad in their hands and their eyes completed attached to the device. I disapprove of this entirely; I don’t feel that kids need to have any sort of that with them since they shouldn’t need it at all. This image shows a teacher, possibly a representation of the school system in general, being a little judgemental and up front to the parents about their child. It may also be that the parents want their child to know how to use a mobile device and maybe are shocked that their child can’t learn it. In any way, because schools are meant to teach us about the real world, this image is making the assumption that the real world requires children to become adults that should be able to use technology efficiently, and it hints that unfortunately, their child could have their success rate affected just because he isn’t tech savvy. In their eyes, the child is not as smart since he isn’t receiving the education as well as others. It almost seems as if knowing how to use technology becomes a factor in determining the capabilities of a single individual. This in itself is kinda funny, though may cause some angered arguments in the real world. I know that technology is also used as a way for kids to connect with one another these days, and thus becomes an important part in their social life; but I still feel that just because a child asks for something they want but can’t have, parents shouldn’t give in as quickly. It seems almost ridiculous that the society has come to view its people that way but unfortunately new times calls for new environments and thus, maybe this image isn’t as outrageous as it is.

From Past to Present: Why are we still here?

You Say You Want a Devolution?
http://www.vanityfair.com/style/2012/01/prisoners-of-style-201201

Kurt Anderson's stance in his article regarding the ever changing styles of cultures through the decades has me persuaded into agreeing with his statement. I wholeheartedly agree that the cause of all the idleness that has developed and settled into the new generation is caused by the constant exposure to new things that come across our paths daily. Because we, as a collective generation, are constantly experiencing new things that are thrown into our faces, it becomes relatively difficult to ascertain what it is we should be liking or rejecting. To be honest, I think most of the time we enjoy it for a split second, and then our attentions pan elsewhere.

The cause of this can be directly linked to multiple reasons. First, in my opinion, overpopulation is the leading cause of the declining of cultures within the United States. With a hodgepodge of cultures constantly flooding in, it's hard to find one specific thing that stands out. This pertains to all departments, whether in fashion, music, entertainment, food, whatever, you name it: there is simply too much. With crowdedness becoming too big of a problem, it's hard to find jobs and make money. I think most of the newer generation is stuck on finding ways to either repay their student debt or try to make it out in the real world to survive. I'd like to believe that change is provoked in two ways: either by prodigies who introduce "never before seen" ideas into the world OR by fostering and caring a singular idea that could have the potential to grow into be the ultimate "new and improved" of the generation. Now, when overpopulation becomes too common, it almost seems to cancel out any sort of possibility of either of these things from happening. Change is expected when life is stagnant for a while, and something drastic is brought in; but with the constant influx of the "new" pouring in, it's hard to take notice the things that seem more new and thus nothing feels like it ever changes. New and fresh ideas should come naturally, not by fostering and forcing it to squeeze out. Secondly, I would say that the new wave of technology that has bombarded our country for the past few decades would come only second to overpopulation. Anderson has even stated it in his article: "now that we have instant universal access to every old image and recorded sound, the future has arrived and it's all about dreaming of the past". Simply, it states that because of the introduction of technology into our lives, suddenly everything is possible at our fingertips. This leads to ideas that become unoriginal, taken, and not thought out. Even if someone had come up with something, it would most likely be labeled as stolen.

Everything has already been done.

I have generally come to believe that culture has essentially stopped changing because everyone is content with the way things are. Of course small attempts have been made to change or add to what society has become, though all has produced fruitless results. I've come to realize that culture doesn't change simply because the people aren't making an effort to bring upon change.