The Graduate; 'Good girl, Bad girl'

Released in the 1960s, the film, The Graduate does not follow the conventional terms addressed in Tamar McDonald's book, "Romantic Comedy." In her book it states that in a Sex Comedy, "men were supposed to have pre-marital sexual experience, and women were not" (McDonald 41). This information came from a report done by Alfred Kinsey's on Sexual Behaviour in the Human Female.

Thus, women who did have pre-marital sexual experiences created "a new moral climate which no longer assumed 'nice girls' would insist on marriage before sex," forming the 'good girl, bad girl,' motif in films (McDonald 42). Eventually, it is the 'good' girl in the film, the one who does not give into the mans seductive influences, who ends up marrying him (McDonald 46). In The Graduate, it is unique in that it does not follow much of these reoccurring themes, however, it does fit into some of the sex comedy themes.

Ben Braddock, portrayed by Dustin Hoffman, is trapped in a dilemma. Soon after graduating from college, he is faced with dealing with what to do with his future, a daunting task that is universally relatable. However, this becomes a minor, insignificant problem when it comes to his love life.
Pursued by an old family friends wife, Ben is faced to with decision of either to have a love affair with an older-aged woman, or not and defy the results of Kinsey.

First, Ben rejects this notion, but eventually, he attempts to fit into the definition of what a man is supposed to do, despite how afraid and uneasy he felt. The woman in question, Mrs. Robinson, is essentially the 'bad girl,' in this film. Already married, although unhappily, she pursues a man decades younger than her by seducing him with a tempting offer.

It is already know that the 'bad' girl won't get the man, therefore, we can assume that the daughter is the 'good' girl who will eventually marry Ben, no matter to obstacles he faces. Elaine is Mrs. Robinson's daughter who unlike her 'cougar' mother, is genuine and real in Ben's eyes, never giving into his advances until the offer of marriage. In closing, though Ben does portray the assumed pre-martial sexual experiences that men should do, he does it reluctantly for a time. Additionally, although there is a 'bad' girl in the film, she does not pursue for marriage as she is already married and she may already know, he is too young to marry. Though this film does fit into some of the sex comedy themes, it is also revolutionary in showing a male character that is reluctant for pre-marital sex, and a female character that knowingly pursues it.


McDonald, Tamar Jeffers. Romantic Comedy: Boy Meets Girl Meets Genre. New York: Wallflower Press, 2007.

Ethnography

For my ethnography I found myself at the Americana at Brand, an outdoor shopping center popular with couples for its romantic atmosphere. I began by slowly exploring the shopping center and observing couples as they passed me by. By doing this I was able to observe their expressions and body language. I first saw a young Armenian couple silently walking towards the escalator to leave. Both of their expressions are hard and serious. The girl appears to be annoyed or slightly angry, perhaps having a fight before this. The boy has a serious, almost angry look on his face. Like a lion protecting his pride, he is surveying his surroundings looking for anyone that may be looking at his girl. Soon afterwards I saw an interracial couple of a Filipino woman and a Caucasian man walk by while holding hands. The woman has a bright smile on her face, she appears to be filled with contentment and love.  They seem relaxed together, perhaps a long term relationship of a few years.  They are enjoying the time they are sharing together on a breezy afternoon.

After observing these two couples, I then went to Barnes and Noble to sit and observe couples for a longer period of time. Soon after entering, I found an elderly couple sitting together by the window, reading silently. I chose a seat by them and sat for about an hour to survey this couple. They both wore white and were a Caucasian couple perhaps in their eighties in account of their primarily white hair. They sat by each other in a very relaxed state, unhurried with their time together.  I enjoyed their leisurely nature as they enjoyed the pleasure of reading silently. Sometimes, I would hear them speak to each other quietly, like the wife asking about the music playing in the bookstore. Her husband spoke gently and quietly, speaking to her like a guardian or a protector, calmly answering her simple questions. Passing by, I recognized a gay couple shopping for books. Not clearly obvious at first, but at close observation they appeared to be closer than friends. However, though they did not show any sort of signs of affection, they body language proved a great respect for each other and their opinions as they spoke in conversation. Though they left as quickly as they came, a sense of association and appreciation was felt. Soon after, a young couple in their mid-teens sat by us. Observing them, they appeared to be a couple very early in their relationship, with lots of giggling and excitement. For them, every moment is new, fresh and exciting. In contrast to the quiet nature of the older couple, who were so at ease with each other to just sit in silence for many minutes, the younger couple was in constant conversation as they giggled and joked with each other.

What is considered radical or normative, when it comes to love and romance? In my standpoint, I define radical as a sort of “contemporary” love that is unique to recent generations. Some examples to demonstrate this thought are gay couples, interracial couples and couples of vastly different ages. Each one is radical because they are still newly recent our society which the majority has grown up in a different generation and time.  Examining my observations, the strands of love that I encountered, including normative as well as radical, can be applied to several theories. In Chris Barker’s book, “Cultural Studies: Theory and Practice,” it says that under Hall’s essentialist position, identity is regarded as the name for a collective ‘one true self’ (Barker 227). He goes on further to say that identity is thought to be formed out of a common history, ancestry and set of symbolic resources (Barker 227). Therefore, Hall would consider a American to be associated with football, the Declaration of Independence and Democracy. However, to express an identity based on this ‘one true self,’ would contradict the couples that I observed. Clearly demonstrated through my ethnography, an American can be young, old, of a different ethnicity and sexual orientation. Consequently, their cultural identity is not fixed, but a natural sate of being, or a ‘process of becoming,’ as stated by Hall (Barker 229). Therefore, each individual’s identity is constantly being discovered, through this romance of love and marriage, the identity of each couple is continually being produced.  Further, identity is a ‘production,’ which is shifting and fragmenting identities (Barker 229). This theory thus reasons that the identity of each individual I observed was a ‘production,’ created for that certain situation; dating. Each person is a different identity in different environments, and with romance and love, a specific identity is made for that situation.

This ‘fragmented,’ identity is similar to Woody Allen’s character in the movie, Play It Again Sam. While preparing for a very important date, Allen’s character, Allan, takes lengths to create a persona that he believes will impress her. He basically changes everything about himself, even about his ex-wife and her ‘death,’ just to impress a girl into thinking he’s not as pitiful as he thinks he is. He puts on layers of popular shaving lotion and cologne on himself, and displays his home with open books and fake medals, saying that he needs them to “make an impression.

This sort of ‘act’ created to impress significant other is similar to the teenage couple that I observed. With the teen couple, the girl would tease and lead him on, leading him to make jokes that would make her laugh. Even the way she dressed was part of this formulated identity to create a persona that would make an impression on him. She wore a short skirt and tight top, both designer and high quality garments, with makeup and straightened hair, perhaps carefully planned to make a big statement of how much she likes him. This attention to her appearance is similar to the Gramscian concept that advertising stressed not only the selling of commodities, but also of ways of looking at the world. For example, the job of advertising is to create an identity not only through consumption, but also by buying into lifestyles and values (Barker 69).  Therefore, the teen girls identity is basically an advertisement of products, which were each designed to construct a certain image. She has essentially, ‘bought herself into,’ this lifestyle, by presenting herself in this identity that was pre-constructed.

          Ultimately, I believe each couple is in equal-standing relationships. This greatly varies to Simone de Beauvoir’s theory that women are regarded as the “Other,” while man is regarded as the Subject, the Absolute (Beauvoir). Published in 1949, it can be seen that this theory is less relevant through the examples of several of the couples, including the interracial couple, older couple and even the gay couple. It also shows that through these “radical” relationships, there is equality between them, as the acceptance of variation in our society shows respect and civility for each other.

Works Cited

Barker, Chris.  Cultural Studies: Theory and Practice.  Los Angeles: Sage, 2008.  
Beauvoir, de Simone.  The Second Sex.  Trans.  Jonathan Cape.  Penguin, 1972.  

Jerry Maguire vs. Simone de Beauvoir

Simone de Beauvoir’s position in her work, “The Second Sex,” is that women have been defined as the “other sex,” which is nonstandard to the "normal" male sex, who is in the role of the “absolute.” In it she asks, “what is a woman?” “Tota mulier in utero,” or “woman is womb,” is the answer. In essence, woman is defined by biology. Yet, she argues, is women’s femininity found in the ovaries? Is that what makes us women or even human?

In the film, Jerry Maguire, by Cameron Crowe, we are shown two women of the opposite spectrum. Dorothy Boyd and Avery Bishop are two representations of the traditional and modern and woman. Dorothy has had an infatuation on her boss, Jerry, for a long time and faithfully, she stands by his side through thick and thin. On the other hand, there is Jerry's fiance, Avery, who, like Jerry, is in business and basically always gets what she wants.

After watching clips from the film, I am torn between these two characters. Whose side am I on? Whose side should I be on? The filmmaker makes it seem that we want to root for Dorothy who is the more traditional, romantic character, who is the one that waits for Jerry to come back to her. She is the standard damsel in distress.

 Thus, Avery represents the modern woman. She is a tough, headstrong, businesswoman who takes no for an answer. She is essentially, the opposite of what women were like at the time of Simone de Beauvoir’s article. Assertive, progressive and commanding, she did not let her “ovaries,” define her. Case in point, here is a quote said by Avery after responding to Jerry and his predicament with his unemployment;

“There is a sensitivity thing that some people have. I don't have it. I don't cry at movies, I don't gush over babies, I don't buy Christmas presents 5 months early, and I DON'T tell the guy who just ruined both our lives, "Oh, poor baby." But I do love you.”

 Yet, in this quote, she sounds harsh, emotionless and demanding. So, what is the screenwriter hinting at? Should we not support Avery? Is she supposed to be the antagonist of the film? Because she sounds and acts like an emotionless jerk, does that mean she was wrong in the way she acted? This viewpoint is similar to a point Beauvoir made in her argument saying that, “A man is in the right in being a man; it is the woman who is in the wrong,” it is in a woman’s own nature that imprisons, hinders her in her subjectivity. So essentially, no matter how Avery acted, her actions would be wrong because inherently we are all on Jerry’s side.

 Ultimately, Beauvoir would see Dorothy as the woman who is stuck in this "passive" role, whereas Avery is the woman who has removed this role and created her own. Yet, both characters are distinctively more stronger, powerful and radical than the majority of women during Beauvoir's time. 

Beauvoir, Simone de. The Second Sex. 1972.  Print.

American Psycho; Identity and Existence

Does Patrick Bateman exist?

That is a question that may be asked about the protagonist of the film, American Psycho. In the start of the film, Bateman declares, while peeling off a face mask,
"There is an idea of Patrick Bateman; some kind of abstraction. But there is no real me: only an entity, something illusory. And though I can hide my cold gaze, and you can shake my hand and feel flesh gripping yours and maybe you can even sense our lifestyles are probably comparable... I simply am not there."

By him stating that he is "simply not there," is to say that he does not exist. Yes, there is a flesh and blood, but within, he is hollow, unidentifiable, an illusion. In class, a quote was mentioned; "the one thing, one can be in sure of, is ones existence." That is to say, "I think, therefore I am." Yet Bateman had stated that he does not exist. There is no "real him," or an identity of him. For Bateman, he created an existence solely by forming an image or a facade. For him, he considers this image that he has formed to equal identity. Bateman is essentially all exterior; a composite of many things, where none of them are truely him.

                                                             

Similar to the mind of a psychopath, Patrick Bateman has no real emotions or empathy. Psychopathy is defined as a personality disorder characterized by an abnormal lack of empathy combined with strongly amoral conduct but masked by an ability to appear outwardly normal. Essentially, Bateman and psychopaths create a facade that may appear normal on the outside, but in actuality are completely abnormal on the inside. Yet, in the book, Cultural Studies: Theory and Practice," by Chris Parker, it states that "identity is best understood not as a fixed entity but as an emotionally charged discursive description of ourselves that is subject to change" (216). Would this mean that all psychopaths including Bateman do not have a true identity because of their lack of emotions? I'll let you answer that.

Barker, Chris. Cultural Studies: Theory and Practice. Sage, 2008.