Writer’s note: First, I would just like to mention that I am currently a fugitive of the law. The sheriff is ga ga about finding me and I haven’t yet let him. Life has never been better. And now for something completely different.
Every hundred years or so, a masterpiece is created; something comes into existence that stirs the heart, delights the eyes, and blows the mind, entangling all the instruments of the imagination into a euphoric psychological orgy. Van Gogh’s “Starry Night” is a perfect example of this. It exhibits the potential greatness of human productivity while showing the beauty and slight insignificance of our existence.
Britney Spears' “Oops, I Did It Again” video, however, is the absolute antithesis of this greatness. First off, why the hell is the man landing on Mars at the beginning of the video? I spent a good 8 minutes pondering on this (six more than I believe anything to do with Spears is worth) and came to the conclusion that maybe it had something to do with the ‘Men from Mars, Women from Venus’ thing. But in that case, shouldn’t she be on Venus if the man is discovering her world? It would work on Mars if she was a transvestite and he was exploring his sexual preferences for the first time, but I think we left Spears in the dust about 224 words ago with the thought train, so I’m putting that idea in the ’about as likely as Hilary Clinton having a heart’ tray. In either situation, I have one word for that young man; turnthefrickaround.
Granted, this video was made years before the baby dangling, 18 marriages in six hours, car crashes, and public indecency happened, but the omens for what to come were clear. There is a path that one can take to make this a decently good music video… press mute.
Wednesday, November 14, 2007
Sunday, November 11, 2007
World on Fire
As a student of history, peering into the lives and culture of people who have long since passed from our presence, I have always found it amusing to imagine how my own life and culture will be looked upon by the generations of those to come. It's disheartening, however, to realize that scholars of the past focus primarily on the flaws that men foster rather that the virtues that they uphold. Wars, scandals, the barbarianism of ancients; these are the things we study. How then, will we be remembered by those who study us?
LYRICS
If one from the future or present were to look at pop culture (a music video, per se) it could be assumed that we are very materialistic people. This isn’t news to most people, but the problem that it causes is quite often misunderstood. There is no misdeed in taking pleasure in some thing; the self-transgression occurs when we allow gadgets to suppress our personal relationships. If you look at a music video, chances are you will usually see someone obsessed with the b
ling dangling around their neck, their clothes that cost as much as some houses, or their cars with a hot tub in the back. In her video of the song “World on Fire,” Sarah McLachlan tries to show the flaw in this standard of producing videos, and does so very effectively.
In the beginning of the video, McLachlan uses the simplistic setting to establish an ethos persona that eliminates any possibility of hypocrisy in her message. It begins very simply, with a somber McLachlan sitting in a modest room, amber guitar over her lap. The room looks like an average apartment, or possibly a hotel room. There are white walls, a tan carpet, and brown furniture; everything is very lackluster. McLachlan is wearing a tank top, jeans, and no shoes. Her hair is done very casually. It’s almost as if the cameraman entered the room a few minutes ago and surprised her. The lack of impression is rather shocking, ironically.
The video is shot in very poor quality, probably by a machine that one could get their hands on at Wal-Mart. There is no camera movement, only straight forward shots. The first text that appears is very simple, yet blunt. “This video cost $150,000.” The dollar amount is in bold red font, augmenting the first thought that comes into the mind of the viewer; “That’s a lot of money for a video.” It’s rather surprising in an illogical way. The delay that comes next has perfect timing. It shows nothing but a straight shot of McLachlan, sitting strumming and singing. Twenty seconds later, as most people would be almost ready to change the video, text appears once again, but this time in pure white. “What’s wrong with this video? Well it only cost $15 to make.”
Up to this point, the set up for the argument has been completely logical, but with the next image, it begins to turn to a more argument which utilizes pathos. Almost instantly, an image of a world map appears with many of the globe’s poorest areas highlighted. This shifts the readers attention in a very rapid, and nearly uncomfortable fashion, from the artist’s face to the realization that there is a massive world outside of the white walls of that apartment. Overshadowing that image is a text that reads “$150,000 could make a difference to over 1,000,000 people.”
The rhetorical appeal of pathos aforementioned is amplified by the music being played. It is a somber, slightly sad, and almost tired song, but has a spark of hope somehow wrapped within the music; a hopeful lift after the minor 'fall', if you’re looking intimately at the music theory. (If you are into the theory aspect of music, the writer stratigically placed progressions as follows; C Major, D Minor, C Major, and later, F Major, A minor, G major. Somber lyrics and pictures are placed specifically at the minor 'falls' {where the music gets 'more sad'} and more hopeful lyrics and images are placed where the Major resumes.) Even though that by now the music has taken a back seat to the images due to the speed that they are coming at, it is grabbing the emotions of the viewer and telling them that there are major problems being addressed here, but somewhere down the road, the specifics unknown to the viewer, there is hope.
The text mentioned previously forces the viewer to ask themselves how $150,000 could affect one million people. This time, the audience isn’t kept waiting long, as a laundry list of ‘this is how’ soon follows. Text appears and makes a comparative statement that claims that $200 (in bold red font) could either be used in LA to pay a production manager for one day, or in Ethiopia to pay for 100 children’s school fees for a term.
It is a logical appeal that also employs pathos, as this seems very drastic and logical at the same time. The observer is forced to feel pity for the children that are shown because they have heard of the hardshi
ps that they have grown up with in their childhoods. It is also only logical that if one had to choose where the money would be better spent, most minds would put a higher precedence on tuition for 100 than advice on how to make a video from one. People watching understand that if a person in a third world county doesn’t go to school, they will most likely end up making sneakers for Nike. The great thing about people realizing this is that they are not thinking about themselves at this moment in time.
Several more texts appear, mentioning the $5000 for hair and make-up that was used to pay for 150 Afghani girls to go to school and the $500 for a studio playback that was used to buy enough nuts and bolts to hold together 50 houses in tsunami hit areas. The video always seems to be a few seconds ahead of the person watching it, because it was at this time that I was watching and wondering how much they wanted me to donate, and slightly after, a pure white text appeared and stated that they wanted no money. This plays onto the character of the artist, reassuring everyone that they aren’t running a con.
Possibly the best use of pathos in this video was the instance that a single African mother is introduced. At the moment they introduce her, the words “don’t want to be left alone” are sung in the background in a dual-media comination. The video mentions that the mother works two jobs, 16 hours a day, seven days a week to raise the $200 she needs to send her son to school for a year. When watching her, one notices that she cracks a smile, even in her pitiable situation. Immediately after, one can see that the words “Psalm 118 5-12” are painted in bold on her tin front door. At first glance, the verse shows that she is Christian and therefore relates her to many of the viewers that would be watching this video. But if one gives in to their curiosity and looks up the verse, they can find out why she is smiling. The gist of the verse states that despite the impoverished region to which she was born and the mistreatment that political entities have given her, she understands that they can do nothing to her soul, and that her happiness stems from the core of herself and her family that remains.
At this point in the video, the slides start to roll almost too fast to read. Two hours of film stock costs enough to build six wells. The money for a production supervisor could give independence to 100 Afghani widows. The catering to the studio for a day could buy 10,950 meals for street kids in Calcutta. The high rate of change gives the viewer a sense of just how many problems there are in the world.
The best logical argument came late in the song, when they mention that the $15,000 that would be used for styling costs could be used to help many of the 12 million people who are blind because of cataracts. It is an ironic statement that the money could be used to make something more aesthetic, or be used to allow people to see anything, aesthetic or not.
At the apogee of the song, the artist once again engages in a argument of pathos, by changing the pictures to more uplifting scenes; dancing, bright lights, people clasping hands, and clean running water. This gives people a slight hope that although there is bad, there is also good.
In her video, McLachlan urges viewers to understand the frailty of their existence; that rather than LA or NYC, they could have been born in Calcutta. She does not say that we are morally obligated to donate to any cause across the world, but just asks her audience to accept the realization that our problems would be considered luxuries to others in the world. The argument is the siren for a counter-culture. Look at the most famous cultural art set in LA right now; Nip Tuck, The Hills, Dr. 90210. It’s a very self absorbed culture. She’s not saying that you need to save the world, but don’t act like it revolves around you. And oh, does she argue it well.
If one from the future or present were to look at pop culture (a music video, per se) it could be assumed that we are very materialistic people. This isn’t news to most people, but the problem that it causes is quite often misunderstood. There is no misdeed in taking pleasure in some thing; the self-transgression occurs when we allow gadgets to suppress our personal relationships. If you look at a music video, chances are you will usually see someone obsessed with the b
ling dangling around their neck, their clothes that cost as much as some houses, or their cars with a hot tub in the back. In her video of the song “World on Fire,” Sarah McLachlan tries to show the flaw in this standard of producing videos, and does so very effectively.In the beginning of the video, McLachlan uses the simplistic setting to establish an ethos persona that eliminates any possibility of hypocrisy in her message. It begins very simply, with a somber McLachlan sitting in a modest room, amber guitar over her lap. The room looks like an average apartment, or possibly a hotel room. There are white walls, a tan carpet, and brown furniture; everything is very lackluster. McLachlan is wearing a tank top, jeans, and no shoes. Her hair is done very casually. It’s almost as if the cameraman entered the room a few minutes ago and surprised her. The lack of impression is rather shocking, ironically.
The video is shot in very poor quality, probably by a machine that one could get their hands on at Wal-Mart. There is no camera movement, only straight forward shots. The first text that appears is very simple, yet blunt. “This video cost $150,000.” The dollar amount is in bold red font, augmenting the first thought that comes into the mind of the viewer; “That’s a lot of money for a video.” It’s rather surprising in an illogical way. The delay that comes next has perfect timing. It shows nothing but a straight shot of McLachlan, sitting strumming and singing. Twenty seconds later, as most people would be almost ready to change the video, text appears once again, but this time in pure white. “What’s wrong with this video? Well it only cost $15 to make.”
Up to this point, the set up for the argument has been completely logical, but with the next image, it begins to turn to a more argument which utilizes pathos. Almost instantly, an image of a world map appears with many of the globe’s poorest areas highlighted. This shifts the readers attention in a very rapid, and nearly uncomfortable fashion, from the artist’s face to the realization that there is a massive world outside of the white walls of that apartment. Overshadowing that image is a text that reads “$150,000 could make a difference to over 1,000,000 people.”
The rhetorical appeal of pathos aforementioned is amplified by the music being played. It is a somber, slightly sad, and almost tired song, but has a spark of hope somehow wrapped within the music; a hopeful lift after the minor 'fall', if you’re looking intimately at the music theory. (If you are into the theory aspect of music, the writer stratigically placed progressions as follows; C Major, D Minor, C Major, and later, F Major, A minor, G major. Somber lyrics and pictures are placed specifically at the minor 'falls' {where the music gets 'more sad'} and more hopeful lyrics and images are placed where the Major resumes.) Even though that by now the music has taken a back seat to the images due to the speed that they are coming at, it is grabbing the emotions of the viewer and telling them that there are major problems being addressed here, but somewhere down the road, the specifics unknown to the viewer, there is hope.
The text mentioned previously forces the viewer to ask themselves how $150,000 could affect one million people. This time, the audience isn’t kept waiting long, as a laundry list of ‘this is how’ soon follows. Text appears and makes a comparative statement that claims that $200 (in bold red font) could either be used in LA to pay a production manager for one day, or in Ethiopia to pay for 100 children’s school fees for a term.
It is a logical appeal that also employs pathos, as this seems very drastic and logical at the same time. The observer is forced to feel pity for the children that are shown because they have heard of the hardshi
ps that they have grown up with in their childhoods. It is also only logical that if one had to choose where the money would be better spent, most minds would put a higher precedence on tuition for 100 than advice on how to make a video from one. People watching understand that if a person in a third world county doesn’t go to school, they will most likely end up making sneakers for Nike. The great thing about people realizing this is that they are not thinking about themselves at this moment in time.Several more texts appear, mentioning the $5000 for hair and make-up that was used to pay for 150 Afghani girls to go to school and the $500 for a studio playback that was used to buy enough nuts and bolts to hold together 50 houses in tsunami hit areas. The video always seems to be a few seconds ahead of the person watching it, because it was at this time that I was watching and wondering how much they wanted me to donate, and slightly after, a pure white text appeared and stated that they wanted no money. This plays onto the character of the artist, reassuring everyone that they aren’t running a con.
Possibly the best use of pathos in this video was the instance that a single African mother is introduced. At the moment they introduce her, the words “don’t want to be left alone” are sung in the background in a dual-media comination. The video mentions that the mother works two jobs, 16 hours a day, seven days a week to raise the $200 she needs to send her son to school for a year. When watching her, one notices that she cracks a smile, even in her pitiable situation. Immediately after, one can see that the words “Psalm 118 5-12” are painted in bold on her tin front door. At first glance, the verse shows that she is Christian and therefore relates her to many of the viewers that would be watching this video. But if one gives in to their curiosity and looks up the verse, they can find out why she is smiling. The gist of the verse states that despite the impoverished region to which she was born and the mistreatment that political entities have given her, she understands that they can do nothing to her soul, and that her happiness stems from the core of herself and her family that remains.
At this point in the video, the slides start to roll almost too fast to read. Two hours of film stock costs enough to build six wells. The money for a production supervisor could give independence to 100 Afghani widows. The catering to the studio for a day could buy 10,950 meals for street kids in Calcutta. The high rate of change gives the viewer a sense of just how many problems there are in the world.
The best logical argument came late in the song, when they mention that the $15,000 that would be used for styling costs could be used to help many of the 12 million people who are blind because of cataracts. It is an ironic statement that the money could be used to make something more aesthetic, or be used to allow people to see anything, aesthetic or not.
At the apogee of the song, the artist once again engages in a argument of pathos, by changing the pictures to more uplifting scenes; dancing, bright lights, people clasping hands, and clean running water. This gives people a slight hope that although there is bad, there is also good.
In her video, McLachlan urges viewers to understand the frailty of their existence; that rather than LA or NYC, they could have been born in Calcutta. She does not say that we are morally obligated to donate to any cause across the world, but just asks her audience to accept the realization that our problems would be considered luxuries to others in the world. The argument is the siren for a counter-culture. Look at the most famous cultural art set in LA right now; Nip Tuck, The Hills, Dr. 90210. It’s a very self absorbed culture. She’s not saying that you need to save the world, but don’t act like it revolves around you. And oh, does she argue it well.
Thunder Rolls, Sims Style.
This isn't the original video for this song, but the original is my favorite and the remake is hilarious, so I decided to take some writer’s liberty. So, why is this video the most amazing thing on the planet since sliced salami and Bacardi Malts(not in the same sitting)? It all begins with our man of the hour, Garth Brooks. I’m not a huge fan of country, especially all that twangy Gretchen Wilson crap, but this man is my favorite artist and hero. We could have done without George Washington, but where would this nation be without Garth??? Then there’s the actual song, which is scary as hell, unhealthily energetic, and sends a stronger message than monks in red togas lighting themselves on fire: “Guys, watch the fire truck out, if you get caught cheating, Hell hath no wrath like a woman with a shotgun.” There’s also a very touching sentimental message about domestic abuse, but that’s uncomfortable for everyone to talk about so we’ll do the right thing and sweep it back under the rug. Then there’s the fact that this very emotionally charged situation is being played out by the Sims. Maybe it’s some ridiculously deep philosophical thesis on the quasi-psychological laws that govern our inconsequential ahegenometic cybernetic existences. Maybe it’s just funny as hell to see soft core computer animated porn. I don’t know, but the fact is that it is a great contrast to hear really serious music chastising the wrongs in our society and seeing our animated creations attempting to do the same, possibly even trying to procreate. (PS, I added a word to the English language in this last paragraph. 1 EC point if anyone figures out which it was.)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)