Coach Carter – Representation

Most of the characters in this film come from a working class background. The film is about a group of young basketball players at Richmond high school. The kids themselves all come from troubled backgrounds, in a rough estate and attend the same school. The main plot of the film is that the kids only attend college so that then can play basketball. They all have no real prospects in later life, and are likely to end up in prison. When Ken Carter becomes the new bastekball coach, he completly changes their aspirations, making sure they attend class, sit at the from of the class and maintain a C+ grade average. His drills are hard and he is a stickler for manners, a perfect role model for the teenagers that have been lead astray.

One of the main charcters, Timo Cruiz, is presented in the most sterotypical way in relation to the working class. He has had a bad upbrining, lives in a rough area and has been caught up with his cousin selling and buying drugs. He is extremly aggressive and confrontational at almost every oppurtunity, which portrays a bad impression to the audience. I think what does work well in his favour is that Carter sees him as a “very scared young man.” It highlights that kids like these dont behave the way they do because of the sort of person they are, it is because of the social background they come. The transformation of this particualr charcter is an emotional one for the audience to watch. He starts out agressive and agry, gets thrown out of the basketball team. He works unbelievabley hard to get back into the team, showing commitment and resiliance, looses his temper, is removed. He then has his cousin murdered which rocks him heavily, he shows how scared and fragile he is. He again works to get back into the team, and plays at the end. He also stays when they are not allowed to play and have to work on the acedemic work. We see he delivers quite an emotional speech, reflecting  his true self, and showing the bravado we saw early on the film was all cirumstantial.

His speech at the end is as followes – “Our deepest fear is that we are not inadequite. Our deepest fear is that we are powerful beyond all measure. It is our light not our darkness that most frightens us. Your playing small doe snot serve the world. There is nothing enlightened about shrinking so that toher people wont feel insecure around you. We are all meant to shine as children, its not just in some of us; it is in everyone. As we let our own light shine, we unconsiously give people permission for people to do the same. As we are liberated from our own fear, our presence automoatically liberates others. You saved my life sire.”

This sort of speech is not something the audience would expect from a sterotypical working class teenager, and is a massively positive aspect of the film. There are other similar aspects to the film with other characters such as Junior Battle. Another important issue that is touched upon in the film is teenage pregnancy. A young character gets pregnant, and wants to have the babay. The charcter Kenyon is the father. He is a member of the basketball team, and judging from his social groups, he has had a similar upbringing to Timo. What the audience would sterotypically expect to see here would be for Kenyon to turn tail and run, and yet we see he stays with her. He shows how much he wants to support her by saying how he couldnt support the baby, but wants to do what he can to help her. When he gets his college scholarship, he arranges with the college for his girlfriend and the baby to be catered for so that he can look after her and go to college. It is interesting to note the break in the sterotype, in that he does not just go to college and leave her, he makes sure that she is looked after.

I would argue that as a rule, this film represents the working class positively. This is through the changes that the team of players go through. It would seem that society, the school and even some of the families have given up on them, yet all it took was for one person, Carter, to show them discipline rountine and thr right way, and we see how much of a positive young group of men they become. This really is a testimate to positive represnetation, and highlights so clearly to the audience that initial impressions and behaviour that implies stupidity, is not all of the pieces of the puzzle. It would appear that this particular film set the audience up into reinforcing the messgae of the sterotype, however the audience will be educated by the massively positive representation here

Peter Hitchcock – They Must Be Represented? Problems In Theories Of Working Class Representation.

I looked at some sections of Hitchcock’s writing on the working class, and the section that you can see below is one that took my interest. The very first few sentence’s comment on how critics look at the working class, and how they are represented. The word that he uses to describe their response is “wince” which is completely reflection of society’s views on the class system, and is demonstrating to the audience that there is a problem. The fact that he highlights critics do not take to the topic allows the audience to see that even the people that should be leading the fight in tackling the problems, are shying away. We see that their assessments are described as “too easy” and “dismissive” which again highlights that there is a clear problem.

His reference to Raymond William is very interesting and an extremely valid point. He said that “the simplest descriptive novel about working class life is already, by being written, a significant a positive cultural intervention”. That point clearly sums up the point that several professional writers, such as Williams and Hitchcock would not be writing these works if there was not a problem to tackle. Even those who right against these points highlight there is a problem, as people are trying to tackle it.

Hitchcock here wants to focus on what makes class “excessive” which is something that allows him to categorize the theories presented about the working class. We see again and again that the working class are being referred to as though they have been mistreated in the past by society, which in all fairness is an accurate depiction.

The very reason for class in the first place is to keep the most wealthy in society rich, and those the least wealthy poor, which is in fact where all of our society’s social and economic problems originate from. Obviously everyone cannot be exactly the same, as that would not be possible, but as it stands, the gap is far too large

Pursuit Of Happyness – Representation

This film really encases the struggles of a working class individual, Chris Gardener. The film Is based on a true story, how a working salesman, goes through the most incredibly testing and difficult experience, living in poverty, with next to no money, and how he works his heart out to get out of his situation. It proves a point to the world that no matter the situation you are faced with, it is the work that you put in that will give you the end result.

 

The representation of Chris is typically that of a working class black salesman. He does not have much money; at one point in the film has seventeen dollars in his back account. He lives in council residential areas, becomes homeless at one point in the film and has to sleep rough on the streets and in different hostels. Throughout the film he stays positive, hard working and focused on his goal to become an accountant.

 

Despite the impossible situation and odds that he has been placed in, he always makes sure his son is safe and happy, and is only doing all of this work to provide for his son. The representation of Chris is amazing. Rather than give up hope, leave his son and give in to his situation he doesn’t stop working. He is always seen wearing a suit, tie and shoes, and no matter what people say to him, even as in some situations denying him the sale that he so desperately needs, he stays calm polite and friendly, rather than turning rude and aggressive. His attitude is impeccable, and at times truly inspirational. The director of the film has created the clearest impression that no matter what situation are challenges you are faced with the only person that needs to be satisfied is the one looking in the mirror.

 

Something that the audience picks up on immediately, and something that continues throughout the film, is the love and care that Chris shows for his son. Everything that he is doing is to give his son a better standard of living, which is probably where his relentless motivation comes from. The variety of close and mid shots of Chris and his son at key points within the film, such as when they have to sleep in a public toilet, are able to highlight the struggle he is going through.

 

Chris as a character is one that we are set up to like, as is his son. Both of their elements of humour, both have some punch lines, allowing the audience to converge with them. There are points within the film where Chris acts as an anti-hero, and does things that normally the audience would see as being wrong. Such as when he runs away from the cab driver, takes the bone marrow drive off of the homeless man, and makes his son leave his favourite doll that he dropped in the road. These examples are all emotional ones, but because of how the character of Chris has been set up, the audience are able to quickly look over these incidents, because of the bigger picture and the work and effort that Chris is putting in

Shawshank Redemption – Representation

This film was brought out in 1994, and is a prison drama film. The main plot of the film is that the main character “Andy” is convicted of murdering his wife, and is sent to the Shawshank prison, the most renowned prison for rehabilitating prisoners. The prison itself is full of guards that bully and mistreat the prisoners, and completely take advantage and abuse their power.

The story looks at the experience of Andy in prison, and how he goes from a loner, to one of the most popular prisoners in the place, who has massive influence and experience of the goings on. Through is knowledge of accountancy he is able to help out the Warden through a series of illegal transactions, through the prison itself.

The film ends with Andy escaping the prison, as he spent 15 years digging a hole through the wall, and he crawls through a quarter of a mile of excrement. He outsmarts the Wardens, and steals all of the documents that prove the Warden is operating against the law, as well as some of his guards.

The character that I looked at particularly in this film is the character of Tommy William’s. the reason that I decided to pay close attention to him is because he is a character that the audience likes straight away, through his actions he becomes friendly with a click of inmates, and the audience responds to his intentions of decent actions.  Before this character enters Shawshank, he is in another prison, where the prisoner sharing a cell with him confessions that he was the one that killed Andy’s wife, and that Andy took the fall for the crime.

The reasons that this character is positively represented is because he clearly comes from a working class background, with is deduced from the stories that he tells, and the literacy skills that he has, which are practically none existent. He is positively represented because while he is in prison he falls in with some of the older more intelligent members of the prison. He does not take a negative attitude towards them, and Andy even convinces him to take some qualifications, so that when he gets out of prison he will be able to get a proper job. What’s interesting is that his commitment falter’s, and he throws a strop during the test, and puts his test paper in the bin. Despite this, Andy sends it off, and when the results come in, we see that he passes. The sad and ironic thing to his section of the story is that despite attempting to turn his life around, and swearing blind he would testify in court in order to get Andy out of prison, it entices the Warden to shoot him dead, and say that he was pretending to escape, which was done because the Warden needed Andy’s skills. I think overall this is positive representation, as the stereotype would be that in prison that as a kid he would get into more bother, and not properly correct any of his faults. Clearly he is making a personal effort to rehabilitate himself, and therefore positively represents the working class

Proletariat – Representation

The proletariat (from Latin proletarius, a citizen of the lowest class) is a term used to identify a lower social class; a member of such a class is proletarian. Originally it was identified as those people who had no wealth other than their children.

In Marxist theory, the proletariat is the class of acapitalist society that does not have ownership of the means of production and whose only means of subsistence is to sell their labour power^[1] for awage or salary. Proletarians are wage-workers, while some refer to those who receive salaries as thesalariat. For Marx, however, wage labour may involve getting a salary rather than a wage per se. Marxism sees the proletariat and bourgeoisie (capitalist class) as occupying conflicting positions, since workers automatically wish their wages to be as high as possible, while owners and their proxies wish for wages (costs) to be as low as possible.

In Marxist theory, the borders between the proletariat and some layers of the petite bourgeoisie, who rely primarily but not exclusively on self-employment at an income no different from an ordinary wage or below it; and the lumpen proletariat, who are not in legal employment; are not necessarily well defined. Intermediate positions are possible, where some wage-labor for an employer combines with self-employment. While class belonging is often hard to determine in the case of each individual person, from the standpoint of society as a whole, taken in its movement (i.e. history), the class divisions are incontestable; the easiest proof of their existence is the class struggle – strikes, for instance. While an employee may be subjectively unsure of his class belonging, when his workmates come out on strike he is objectively forced to follow one class (his workmates, i.e. the proletariat) over the other (management, i.e. the bourgeoisie). Marx makes a clear distinction between proletariat as salaried workers, which he sees a progressive class, and Lumpenproletariat, “rag-proletariat”, the poorest and outcasts of the society, such as beggars, tricksters, entertainers, buskers, criminals and prostitutes, which he considers a retrograde class.^[2][3]Socialist parties have often struggled over the question of whether they should seek to organize and represent all the lower classes, or just the wage-earning proletariat.

According to Marxism, capitalism is a system based on the exploitation of the proletariat by the bourgeoisie. This exploitation takes place as follows: the workers, who own no means of production of their own, must use the means of production that are property of others in order to produce, and, consequently, earn their living. Instead of hiring those means of production, they themselves get hired by capitalists and work for them, producing goods or services. These goods or services become the property of the capitalist, who sells them at the market.

One part of the wealth produced is used to pay the workers’ wages (variable costs), another part to renew the means of production (constant costs) while the third part, surplus value is split between the capitalist’s private takings (profit), and the money used to pay rents, taxes, interests, etc. Surplus value is the difference between the wealth that the proletariat produces through its work, and the wealth it consumes to survive and to provide labour to the capitalist companies.^[4] A part of the surplus value is used to renew or increase the means of production, either in quantity or quality (i.e., it is turned into capital), and is called capitalised surplus value.^[5] Other part is used for the consumption of capitalists.

The commodities that proletarians produce and capitalists sell, are valued for the amount of labourembodied in them. The same goes for the workers’ labour power itself: it is valued, not for the amount of wealth it produces, but for the amount of labour necessary to produce and reproduce it. Thus the capitalists earn wealth from the labour of their employees, not as a function of their personal contribution to the productive process, which may even be null, but as a function of the juridical relation of property to the means of production. Marxists argue that new wealth is created through labour applied to natural resources.

Therefore, if someone gains wealth through the monopoly of means of production, then those who work to produce that wealth do not receive the full wealth created by their labour, nor do they have a say in the use of the wealth appropriated by the proprietors of means of production. Thus, Marxists argue that capitalists make a profit by exploiting the proletariat.

Marx argued that it was the goal of the proletariat to displace the capitalist system with the dictatorship of the proletariat, abolishing the social relationships underpinning the class system and then developing into a communist society in which “the free development of each is the condition for the free development of all.”.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proletariat

Secret Window – Representation

This film is based around the psychotic breakdown of a professional writer, played by Johnny Depp. The plot itself is very clever, leading the audience into a false sense of security, then shocking them into the truth of something. The basic events of the film are as follows

–          He finds his wife cheating on him with another man

–          He moves away into a secluded house in the middle of a forest

–          He continues to write his new novel

–          A man turns up, threatening and abuse, saying that he is copying a story already written, word for word

–          The man continues to threaten him, killing his dog, and various other members of the public

–          The audience discovers that this man is in fact a figment of the writers imagination, and it is he that has killed all of these people

–          He finally kills his ex-wife and new boyfriend

–          The film end with the local sheriff telling him he will get found out

The character that I picked up on was the writer himself. He has elements of a working class to him. He comes from not the best of backgrounds, and is pretty much completely alienated from society. This aspect is what I found most interesting when looking at the story. I felt that the writers of the plot were trying to highlight the message that when people are alienated from society are heavily affected both emotionally and mentally. The audience is meant to originally converge with the character, and when it it’s discovered he is the killer, he is frowned upon. You can argue that this is negative representation; however i would argue that it is prooveing a positive point to the audience and society. If we continue to seclude minorities and individuals then they cannot be blamed for becoming insecure, and having personal changes that they cannot control.

Obviously the example they use is very extreme, however I think it proves a very good point. The character has had a rough time, and has lost complete control of his mental stability. The audience will not always make this immediate association between seclusion of society, and consequential problems, but if you think closely about how the events have played out, it is clear that the writer has meant thi

Jarhead – Representation

Jarhead is a biographical war drama, directed by Sam Mendes. Anthony “Swoff” Swofford, a Camus-reading kid from Sacramento, enlists in the Marines in the late 1980s. He malingers during boot camp, but makes it through as a sniper, paired with the usually reliable Troy. The Gulf War breaks out, and his unit goes to Saudi Arabia for Desert Shield

The audience is given an idea about Anthony’s life in a series of images describing his background and upbringing. We see that he does in fact come from a very difficult background. His mother is severely depressed, and on medication and alcohol. We also see that his sister is admitted to a mental hospital, because of her condition. His father, an ex-military man and does nothing but reminisce about the past. We see that he finishes college, and goes off to join the army, as that seems the only real option for him.

 

In these opening scenes, the situations that the audience are presented with and how the characters act, I would say that the working class are not being represented overly positively here. I would say that it is a common misconception that those of a lower class are naturally going to join the army as they have no other option work wise, and will have to have some sort of income. We do see a vast majority of extras that look like young working class lads, whom do not have another decision, and college is not an option for them. We also see certain characters that the Marines is a better lifestyle for them. Towards the end of the film, we see cut away to shots of what they do outside of the Marines.  He is stacking shelves in a supermarket, clearly quite alone and extremely bored with what he is doing. It is interesting that at this point Swofford is narrating about how none of the Marines will ever really leave the dessert, and this is quite clearly backed up by the man working in the supermarket

V For Vendetta – Representation

V For Vendetta is a modern Action Sci-Fi Thriller that has been adapted from a graphic novel. The film is set in the near future, whereby society has become totalitarian based, with one high chancellor, conformity, routine and extreme regulation to every day life.

I looked at a section in the film where V is broadcasting a message to every TV in London, commenting on such issues, and what is really wrong with current society. There are various camera shots, jump cutting from set to set of different people are sitting in rooms watching the broadcast. There are a group of OAP’s in a home, a middle class family, and a group of working class men and women in a pub.  The director James McTeigue has created the mise-en-sene of the sets to create this impression to the audience, which in my opinion has worked as that is what I deduced from the moving images.

It is interesting to note that all of the above classes pay the exact same attention to what is being said by V. not a single person interrupts, questions or discusses with anyone else what is being said while it is being said. They all have a similar glazed look of bedazzlement at what is being said, as though they were all thinking it and understood the truth in it, but shocked that there is someone brave enough to say it, and say they will act upon it. The separation of the classes, but the clear consistency of the response shows me that the director here is highlighting that no matter what your class or age or intelligence, the understanding of a situation can apply to anyone, and they are equally responsible in changing the crises they are in.

The protagonist, V, is being represented as an intelligent man. He is extremely intelligent, and uses a high class of vocabulary in context, which creates with the audience awe about him. Despite the obvious clue that he is an upper class individual because of his language, I would argue that it is not clear. He is able to converge with all of the classes, and is equally respectful and inclusive to them in his plans. It is my understanding that he would not be condescending towards anyone upon meeting them. He would not have one group of people in charge of everyone, and would seem to seek a much more democratic government, without corruption, blackmail and violence.

Despite V is acting as a “Terrorist” he is presented in a way to the audience so that they converge with him and support him. In the opposite to this, the government are presented to us as being evil and the problem with our society. It could be argued that this is a link to modern society, but more importantly this film breaks the trend of Terrorists always being the antagonists. The word “terrorist” is branded around often in modern society, often in a misguided manner, and this film helps demonstrate this fact

This Is England – Representation

This Is England is a UK developed, low financed, socially realistic independent production. The film was auteured by Meadows, where he set the film in northern England in the 1980’s, so around the time of the Falkland Wars. Thatcher would have been PM at this time.  Being a social realism, the film tackles various issues within society, and looks a the points of view of different generations and classes from the same era. The reason for the film being named “This Is England” may well have been chosen as it could be seen as a mirror to the society we live in today. 2010 England is the same as 1980’s England.

To begin with the film is representative of different ethnic minorities.  The first of which is Milky, a Jamaican British. Milky is the only Jamaican British in the group, so he is isolated in that sense. What is important is that Milky is in no way bullied by the rest of the group, he is in fact second in command. What makes his involvement especially interesting with their gang is that it is a skinhead gang, whom you would assume would not want a black person around them constantly. Woody, the leader of the gang constantly looks to milky for reassurance or approval, which is greatly positive representation for this minority.

The main protagonist in this film is Shaun, who comes from a working class background. His father has been killed in the Falklands, and he has just moved to a new area with his mother, so has just started a new school as well. The audience immediately falls in love with Shaun for a variety of reasons. He is an extremely brave boy, highlighted when he is in the playground being picked on, he dives right into a physical fight with a boy twice his age and size. This sort of behaviour, which Shaun repeats throughout the film, wins the audience over straight away. One of the most important winners with Shaun’s character is cute, boyish giggle, which shows the audience how young and innocent he really is. We see him deliver various punch lines in the film, like when he is talking to his mother about the “flares” which is another tool meadows has used to make to audience side with Shaun. We see from the beginning of the film Shaun is a very isolated young boy, who has not been brought up in the best conditions, with one of the opening shots showing his room, whereby the paint is faded and peeling. The long shots of Shaun on his own amusing himself by throwing rocks and playing with slingshot help the audience understand how really alone Shaun is.

Woody is an unemployed working class older teenager or young adolescent, the same as the rest of the group. He is also the leader of the Skinhead gang. Immediately this would lead to audience members creating certain opinions of him before encountering any of his actions. A typical prediction would be that he would be ill mannered, linked to drugs, obnoxious and various other appropriate condescending terms. However Meadows smashes these stereotypes through Woody’s actions. The first time we see him, he meets a strange lonely boy whom is tearful and upset. He comforts him, and is inclusive towards him, does his best to cheer him up and gets him smiling. We see this is not a one off action when Woody meets Shaun’s mother, where he is perfectly polite, apologetic, asks for her name and cannot be faulted in any way for his actions. This is fantastic representation of the working class, and breaks the trend that has been set throughout recent decades.

We see that the middle classes are represented clearly in this extract, however they are again, against the stereotype represented very poorly. We have the middle class teachers, who are violent and abusive towards children, and are clearly abusing their position of power over these young men and women. The close up of Shaun’s face where Harvey is in the office being whipped highlights the amount of fear these middle class teachers have struck into the children, of which in my opinion is far too drastic.

As an extract in itself, there are various different groups that are represented, most of which in reverse to what the audience would actually expect, which is why this film has done so well in breaking traditional trends

Class War

The organisation had its origins in Swansea, Wales, developing from a group of community activists who produced a local paper called The Alarm, which focused on issues such as corruption within local government. Following a move to London, the London Autonomists (including Martin Wrightand Pete Mastin) soon became involved and a decision was made to produce a tabloid-style newspaper which would reach a wider audience, particular aimed at young anarchists, including followers of the anarcho-punk band Crass.

The articles in Class War, issued bi-monthly when its profile was at its highest, criticised pacifism and the Peace movement, arguing the idea that violence is a necessary part of the class struggle. This stance was further justified with the statement that “democratic systems are all supported on a basis of coercion sanctioned by the use of force”, and “the ruling class are never more dangerous than when they are doing impressions of human beings”.

Class War’s attitude to violence was summed up in ‘Britain’s most unruly tabloid’: “While not giving unqualified support to the IRA you don’t have to be an Einstein to realise that a victory for the armed struggle in Ireland would be a crushing blow to the ruling class and to the authority of the British state.” 1992 (Class War No.52).

The group maintained that the vast majority of people in Britain remained exploited by the ruling class and their official literature has long stated that about 75% of the country is working-class. Most other estimates put a much lower figure on the proportion (although it should be remembered that other estimates may not use the same definition of ‘working class’ as Class War).

Stand up and Spit was the title of another early Class War magazine, aimed at inner city youth.

I have been continuing to research relating organisations helping the working class. I came across Class War on Wikipedia, and i took a snipet of the information abouve from the site to give you some ideas of what they stand for. If you wish to see more about Class War follow the linkhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Class_War.

I will be looking into detail about what they stand for, what they are trying to achieve and to see if any of these goals are relayed in film and television