Fight Club

Fight club is a film that follows the life of a character that is unnamed, because of this it can be seen to regarded as a film that is easily relatable to others watching because his identity is anonymous. His goal is to challenge the power of capitalism in the United States as he leaves his formal and routine job behind. It makes the ambitious attempt to imagine a world without capitalism. The characters that follow the fight club are against cooperations and materialistic things and it clear that the film attempts to point out the absurdities of these modern traits. It does not necessarily attempt to imagine an entire, modern human race without capitalism, this could be too controversial or complex to attempt to make, it instead creates a minority that are against it. It does highlight the monotonous nature of capitalism and the holes in it, rather than bringing to light perhaps the more positive aspects of American life which other pieces of film, tv, music etc may attempt to do.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SUXWAEX2jlg

FRIENDS

 

Friends is an American sitcom and I think that the TV series offers a critique of America today. It is still a popular TV show with many and it is in their hearts, creating fans all over the world as it is still relatable and you find aspects of yourselves in the characters s after nearly 10 years of its first original showing back in 1994 and will still do so in the distant future. Friends represents well the people of America and their aspirations, trying hard to work from the bottom, taking any opportunity that they are given to try and achieve the best and more prosperous life they can have. The characters have that determination, much like Americans, too keep fighting in hard times, stick together and push on. They dealt with everyday problems that Americans could face from deaths in the family to job opportunities, from relationships to creating families.  

Nike (Football)

Nike is a brand that has many aspects that can be seen to be comparable to many American principles. One of which being the American dream. The reason for this is that the makers of the brand got the brand started by only dealing with shoes and only grossing $8,000 in it's first year. To go from these humble beginnings to becoming one of the biggest and most recognisable brands in the world is a perfect example of the American dream. This is very much replicated in its advertisement. It's been disputed by some, but it's rumoured that the first pair of trainers used in the Olympics helped Otis Davis win 2 gold medals, who was coached by one of the founders of the brands Bill Bowerman. It's both lucky and a credit to his product.

  In this advert for Nike football, it's clear to see that the idea of being able to achieve your goals from from humble roots is very present. The footballer starts in what looks like very shabby surroundings and then ends up playing for Arsenal and Holland. He gets this through hard work and plenty of training. Also gains fame and fortune because he uses a Nike product as well as hard work. It also promotes the idea of luck playing a role, as the right people were there to scout him. So, in as sense, is saying you need luck, as well as hard work to achieve your goals. So shares some ideologies with the book Ragged Dick.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lZA-57h64kE

Apple iPhone 5

Apple has become one of, if not the biggest, leading brand for technology recently, boasting products such as the iPhone, the iPod and the iPad as well as the Mac.
Apple was founded in 1976 by Steve Jobs, Steve Woznaik and Ronald Wayne and was called Apple Computer Inc. The word 'Computer' was removed from the company name in 2007 as the company started to work on the idea of the iPhone. Since, Apple have also extended into software such as safari and iTunes and the iTunes store.
This advertisement is a minute long montage of images of people using their iPhone's to take pictures. These people range in age, gender, and in their locations and what they are doing. This aims to show the versatility of the iPhone, and how it can be used by virtually anyone. This links to the key American idea of freedom, as the iPhone allows the consumer to use it and take pictures however and wherever they chose to do so. Therefore, the advert aims not just to sell the product, but the idea that by owning this product you can do whatever you like or be whoever you want to be, allowing yourself to start anew and improve yourself.

Chrysler

Clint Eastwood Chrysler Superbowl Commercial 

This particular commercial featuring American legend, Clint Eastwood, explores the strength of American values and beliefs. I think that the fact that Clint Eastwood is the primary subject in this advert, appeals to more people as he is a public figure that people will look up to, and in hand, promoting these products whilst making this message inspirational.  

I think that when Eastwood, talks about being stronger and fighting and the idea that America is coming back for round 2, suggests that, that is a significant factor in American values. The strength and belief, that the people have in their country. A belief that, obviously, through this video is held exceptionally dear to the Americans. 

This ad, is said to have caused controversy politically, as it is subtly echoing some of the president's major reelection campaign themes.

G I Joe

G.I. Joe is a line of action figures produced by the toy company Hasbro. This US commercial for the Action Figure G I Joe, symbolizes the culture in the US. This action figure was a huge success in the US in the 80s and 90s and is still popular today.

They were meant to represent the military in the US, with the action figure covering all the different aspects such as: Foot Soldiers, Navy Sailors, Pilots… etc. The amount the US spends on its military budget is 48% of the world’s military spending and is the size of the next 7 countries after them forces combined together. Many people in US want to support the US Army, more so than here in the UK, as supporting their military seems to fall into the category of being very patriotic. Also with the camera angle looking up at the action figures it shows there power and dominance - in this sense of the US military not just the action figures as it is know that the US military is world leading and dominate in: size power and technology

The Advert is centred around the historical event that was Pearl Harbour, a major event in the US Military history, and is remembered today. With the US Flag constant in the background, it allows anyone around the world to know that no matter what language they are listening the advert in, they will all know that it is supporting America and it is part of the US Culture.

Levi's

It is an advertisement for Levi's jeans, which originated in America and has now become very popular and common to wear. The advert displays American values, such as equality and freedom, which it can be suggested that's what jeans represent as all social classes and genders/ races wear jeans and so they are equal. It also hints at the Revolution (fireworks/ 4th of July/freedom).

The idea of the American Dream is that anyone has the opportunity to make themselves successful in life. These ideas are embodied in Ragged Dick as he is a poor street boy who with determination and hard work managed to turn himself into a clerk.

A contemporary example of this is The Pursuit of Happiness (2006) - which in relation to 'ragged dick' he is homeless and in order to be successful he works as an intern at a brokerage, he works very hard and eventually gets employed and becomes rich (rags to riches). And so it relates to the idea that if you work hard and are determined you can achieve the American dream.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_xcZTtlGweQ

Contemporary statement of the American Dream

The American Dream is the idea that anyone can achieve the best opportunities, through the notion of hard work. Ragged Dick as a text deals with this notion with the portrayal of a young boy who goes from working and living on the streets to achieving his dream of owning his own space and having a good job. Dick has much luck along the way, which helps him to gain his happy outcome eventually, which can be seen as a challenge to the American Dream, indicating that it is perhaps it is lucky circumstances and being in the right place at the right time which is the key to achieving the American Dream. Nevertheless Ragged Dick is a useful text which suggests that the American Dream can really be achieved by even those it seems hopeless and likely for.

One contemporary example of the American Dream is the film Legally Blonde (2001) which stars Reece Witherspoon.

Legally Blonde is about a girl whose boyfriend breaks up with her, so to get him back she works really hard to get into Harvard Law School. This film shows the American Dream, as Elle, the lead character gets into one of the most prestigious schools in the country and becomes an outstanding lawyer, despite being unlikely to. She achieves this through hard work and determination, proving that anyone can really achieve anything if they put their mind to it. This relates to the ideas portrayed in Ragged Dick, as both lead characters are advocates of the unlikely success story, proving that the American Dream is accessible to all who wish to seek it, all you need is the believe in yourself and from others to earn it.

Dick & De Crevecoeur VS Society

Horatio Alger's 'Ragged Dick' explores 'rags to riches' theory throughout the novel, a young homeless orphan who eventually flourishes to a respectable clerk by working hard to achieve an education and takes every opportunity that is available to him, which is (fictional) proof of De Crevecoeur's theory of 'handwork'. De Crevecoeur states "idleness is the most heinous sin that can be committed". He also suggests that hard-work and determination is the only way to get anywhere in the United States of America. 

The idea present in Ragged Dick, is the notion that education is the way forward. However, a modern social issue that challenges this idea, is that after leaving education it is harder for one to gain a job. A film that challenges Ragged Dick, especially in today's society, is 'The Internship' (2013).

There is a scene within 'The Internship' in which the characters talk about the 'fantasy' that is the American Dream. Young, tech-savvy geniuses are fighting for the same job, because they feel as though, it is hard to get a job, even after being educated. There is also the idea that people who aren't educated, can try and work there way up, although being extremely difficult in todays world. 

Realistically, the idea that in order for someone to succeed they have to be educated, yes is still present, for those who are not may have difficulty, but on the other hand, even if you are educated, the American Dream, isn't so readily available.

Gun Control

http://dailycaller.com/2012/12/17/why-im-against-gun-control/

This article is not wholly against gun control however it does explain that gun control will not work and does not make people safer. Peter Tucci suggests that restrictions on gun control such as background checks would not work as there are many owned guns in the country (270 million) in which criminals can get there hands on with no background check, through family and friends or theft. Also the fact that there are so many firearms in the US makes it hard to ban guns as not only will that violate the 2nd Amendment but it will be hard for the government to eliminate every gun. He also states that gun control will affect law abiding citizens and will remove the protection they feel by having a gun.

http://www.demandaction.org/issues

This is an activist website who want tough action on gun control, they have three plans of action, make background checks needed for all gun purchases, ban military weapons and high capacity magazines, make gun trafficking a federal crime.
1. it is necessary for background checks as 40% of guns sold are online or at gun shows with no background checks - as of 2012 that is 6.6 m guns.

2. military guns can be purchased by people even with criminal record or mental illness by an unlicensed private seller (no background checks) which is a problem as between Jan 2009 -  Sept 2013 14% of mass shootings were with military style assault weapons.

3. there is no clear effective statute against gun trafficking however thousands of guns are purchased out of state and in cities like New York 90% of gun violence are from weapons from outside the city. No one is keeping track on the export of theses weapons.

I agree with demand action and that there should be more enforcement from federal law to keep records and tracks of guns, even if guns can never be banned entirely there should be definite restrictions on who can sell and buy guns and where the guns go.

Safe and secure…???

ANTI-GUN CONTROL http://www.armedandsecure.org
Armed and Secure is a website, TV commercial and radio ad that is Anti-gun control, it believes that the right to own firearms, is the only way to protect oneself. An example of that is posted by 'Armed and Secure is a video that can be found on youtube.  http://youtu.be/4-CU0PmzET4

"

http://www.demandaction.org/">http://www.demandaction.org
Whereas, Demandaplan.org explores the millions that want to take action against gun violence and put a stop to any gun related tragedies that occur just because people are allowed by the second amendment, to own a gun. Here is a highly popular commercial, made by demand action, featuring celebrities and their view on gun culture. http://youtu.be/1SqDocHFJ8k

gun control

http://www.comeandtakeit.com/index.html

The first of the websites I have chosen to discuss is "come and take it", which in itself sounds confrontational and stubborn already. The website is keen to point out what is said in the constitution and how to go against the constitution would be un-American. another of it's focuses is to tell the people that it is particularly important for an American to defend themselves. Rather than highlighting the role guns have in making an American feel safe, it's instead more worried about making you more conscious and afraid and that to be an American without a gun means you're not safe, almost to say to not trust your fellow countrymen. Their aim is to make the people who view the website to be scared and feel afraid if they do not have a gun on the person, which is a desperate attempt to make people believe that guns are a positive thing.

The website generally seems to be hugely right wing and massively patriotic. It sells American flags and states that all the "goods" sold are 100% American material and used American workers to make them. It states that they do not advocate the use of slave labour from the "communist countries". This to me is a ploy of heightening the person, who views the website, level of patriotism as a way of converting them onto their side to make them a pro gun campaigner.

http://www.gun-control-facts.com/Anti-Gun.php

I think that the US has not wanted guns to be part of their way of life for some time. This website states that even in the 1930's heavy taxations and strict regulation laws were put in place to make gun control more manageable. This ploy of making the availability of guns recede is a sign that the US doesn't actually want guns. They are merely stuck with an amendment, which some see as a bible, that means that they have to put up right wing citizens which leaves a country with regulations that it doesn't really want.
However, this website does not want a ban on all guns; it would rather have the screw tightened as far as the regulation and distribution of guns is concerned. The reason it gives for this is so guns are kept out of the hands of "shady dealers" and "dangerous individuals". Other reasons it gives is that the statistics of children and women murdered are quite shocking. I believe that this is a ploy that makes the viewer of the website feel sympathy and gain an understanding that the most innocent are getting killed by irresponsible, mental (couldn't think of a more PC word) individuals.

Should Americans be allowed guns?

The Second Amendment to the United States Constitution is the right to bear arms, an amendment which has caused much debate. Owning a gun is seen as a given right, in the land of the free, with gun ownership being traced back to the times of settlers. However, many argue that although guns can be viewed as quintessentially American, they have no place in society today, and view them as unnecessary and dangerous, which has been highlighted in cases such as the Sandy Hook school shooting.

For Gun Control: http://www.policymic.com/articles/72067/gun-control-debate-the-argument-that-every-gun-owner-needs-to-start-making
This website allows people to post their perspectives on topical arguments, giving balance and incite into issues. This particular article interested me as it pointed out why it would be a good idea to allow for gun control, highlighting all the benefits that would be gained from this. The writer discusses the notion that more guns means more crime, and therefore the best way to solve this is to have no guns at all, but also realises that this means that crime will still continue in other means. Having no guns just means that people who really want to commit a crime will find another way to do so. The writer also identifies that Obama, who said that it is an 'obligation' to try and save one child if we could, is making a promise that really cannot be fulfilled. While the writer is saying that gun control is a good thing, I believe what they are really saying is that it is down to the people who own and use guns to be responsible for their actions.

Against Gun Control: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/07/12/movies/assaulted-civil-rights-under-fire-is-a-paean-to-the-second-amendment.html?ref=guncontrol
The New York Times is one of the most iconic newspapers within the United States. This article is written about a documentary about defending gun control called ‘Assaulted: Civil Rights Under Fire’, directed by Kris Koenig. It details how the documentary talks about how gun ownership is the only way to defend those who are vulnerable, such as women and the disabled. They even go as far as to liken gun control laws to that of Hitler and Stalin. This shows that some Americans feel very passionate and strongly about defending their rights of gun ownership, as they feel it is their personal responsibility and their right to protect themselves and their families. After all as Thomas Jefferson said (Proposed Virginia Constitution 1776) "No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms".

Gun Control in the USA

Having the right to own a gun in the US, and actually owning one is seen as the normal as it is part of the country’s history and culture relating back the second amendment. In the past, owning a fire arm was a way a man got his power and respect – i.e. in the Wild West with Cowboys – but in today’s society they are seen more of an item to defend yourself with and a necessity to have like the latest iPhone.  Although owning a gun still today does bring power and authority but, people today abuse that power with examples such as: Colorado Cinema shootings, Sandy Hook shootings. Hence why gun control is so controversial. Below are some links for and against Gun Control:

FOR GUN CONTROL

http://listverse.com/2013/04/21/10-arguments-for-gun-control/

This website published by Listverse is seen as reliable and unbiased source that looks at all the facts equally and uses them to supports arguments. With the link above it talks about the 10 main arguments for gun control, looking at a range of different aspects such as: deaths, crimes, political and cultural negative connotation and how these views and opinions change internally with in the USA and how other countries around the globe view gun ownership and control. It highlights on how by people owning guns to feel safe and protect themselves, only leads to more homicides, then equally it leads to more suicides. If people buy guns to protect themselves, it argues that if guns were nationally banned then everyone would feel safer as they would be living in a better society – a gun free one, but at the ratio of gun to people I don’t think this will happen as the ration is high as there are 270 million (that we know of) out there.

     I personally understand the views of this website. How that guns do generally have a negative connotation of death and violence around them and usually they do get used in the wrong way. That is why having them banned in the USA you would expect the death rate and violence to go down as you wouldn’t get meaningless and random attacks such as the ones that were mentioned earlier, as the people that committed them would never be able to obtain a gun or firearm of any sort at all.

AGAINST GUN CONTROL

http://www.buzzle.com/articles/arguments-against-gun-control.html

This website published by Buzzle – a company that researches and develops ideas, which they then write about on their site making it a source of free unbiased data on a range of topics – explains some of the main reasons why Americans should be allowed guns. It relates back to a point in my preliminary saying that guns are part of the country’s history and culture relating it back to Thomas Jefferson. It talks about how people need guns to defend themsleves and helps them to reduce crime levels – which makes the people of the US feel safer and happier.

 

Here is just a link of a website I found interesting about guns in American giving me background knowledge for this blog:

 

http://americangunfacts.com/

 

Dance Hall in Arizona 1884

(http://www.archives.gov/research/american-west/images/168.jpg)

After the Louisiana Purchase, exploration to the West boomed, and more and more people moved westward. This opened up more opportunities to Americans, with more land to occupy.
This is a picture of a dance hall in Arizona taken in 1884 by Anton Muzzonvich. I chose this picture as I found it interesting as there are both white and coloured people included in the image, which you would probably not expect to see. They are also all mixed together, instead of being separated into groups, which is also not expected.
I also found it interesting, that they are setting up places such as dance halls in the west, so soon after moving there. It shows that life there is not all about hard work, and that the people like to relax, unwind and socialise.

Impact on Native Peoples

This painting by Charles M. Russell explores the forced relocation of Native American Indians during American expansion westward. The fact that the native American peoples are being overpowered in this image by the landscape their moving away from, can be interpreted as a means of an end, the end of their home and their lifestyle in the west. The fact that expansion is literally pushing them, is an example of the force and ruthless determination of the settlers. 

American West

pictify.com  

This picture shows how America will continue to expand because it has developed in the East and now it is moving West and will probably start to create towns and cities too. I particularly like how in the distance there are cities and its faded so is thought of as old and the fields are almost yellowy gold so they seem new and rich to invest in which would of attracted a lot of peoples attention.

A family group poses with dog, Indian domestic, and young children

This picture I found  has significant features as it is a demonstration of the relationship between the white settlers. The description of the picture that is given is "A family group poses with dog, Indian domestic, and young children outside a log cabin in New Mexico Territory, ca. 1895." I think the title  itself shows the dismissal of the status of the native Americans as they are seen to be, in this picture, on a par with the dog and the young children, which is particularly interesting.
 
Also the physical act we see of the woman putting her hand to almost hold down the native American demonstrates the power that the settlers had over the natives. It's as though she is metaphorically and physically holding down the native and will not let her stand so she can be free to move where she wants. The dog too has hands that on it but it looks more a sign of affection rather than a metaphorical symbol of oppression.

Also the Native American has her head facing the ground. It looks like a sign of submission and loss of hope, as she no longer has the will power to raise her head. The white settlers look more confident which is reflected in their stance and the way they look, almost menacingly, into the camera.

American moving west

http://fineartamerica.com/featured/remington-indian-warfare-granger.html 

As the people of America moved westwards in exploration for land and wealth, nothing was gonna stop them and get in there way. The men leading the frontier were ruthless and persistent especially with the Native Americans, who were either forced to move on westwards running for their lives or they were simply killed on the spot.

The picture I have chosen by Remington: Indian Warfare  (1908) is a prime of example of the movement. The setting you can tell is in the West with the open grass land plains, where you have no natural or man made structure as far as the eye can see. In the foreground you have the stereotypical image of Native Americans, riding horses firing rifles - how factual this is to be decided as before the English came Native Americans didn't ride horses as dictated in this painting - but nevertheless you can see the panic and confusion amongst then as they are fleeing while being shot at by the Americans. In a way it can been seen that Remington is showing this movement from the Native American point of view as it is said that, 'His focus was firmly on the people and animals of the West'. Just by showing a view point like this you get a better understanding as the viewer of this painting to how the Natives may have felt. Fear. Panic. Confusion some of the many emotions shown on their faces. 

The American people, that you can see in the background, out numbered the Natives, were more skillful than the natives, out gunned the Natives which all contributed them to being more powerful then the natives. American people explored the west saw the land to free and open, not owned by anyone and there for it was there 'God given gift' to take and have which is why they were so ruthless as they saw it as their right to have it. In a way it can be seen that by the moving on and killings of Native Americans it was as a form of pest control as they were unwanted and not seen a part of the new image forward for America.