My Victimization to Hyperreality

My victimization to hyperreality took place as a child. When I was a little girl I loved to watch disney princess movies and any other movie that had to do with princesses. These movies told me that I can live "happily ever after" ("Snow White"). I believed that one day I would find my prince in shining armor and live in a giant castle and live happily ever after. I figured he'd come and save me from some great injustice like the hero he is. Also, I believed that I could be as special as a princess when I was little, and have a perfect ending to my story because "All girls are princesses" ("The Little Princess"). In this movie, the little girl wasn't actually a princess, yet she was at the same time. Her Daddy told her she was a little princess, so she was. And in the movie this idea is established in every little girl in the story. The little princess is constantly daydreaming and going into the world in which she is a princess, even though in real life she is being put through harsh treatment as a servant in a girls school. My childhood consisted of fantasizing about how I was a princess who would someday be rescued by my prince in shining armor.

Hyperreality

Hyperreality has greatly affected America's view and expectations of love and relationships. First of all, hyperreality "characterizes the inability of consciousness to distinguish reality from fantasy," (Wikipedia). The two ideas of love and relationships in America have been depicted as something free and having a "happy ending" and no boundaries in today's media. This perception has blurred the reality of these subjects and brought Americans to believe that they can achieve these hyperrealities of a paradise of love and relationships. A good example of a hyperreality is "a magazine photo of a model that has been touched up with a computer," (Wikipedia). The magazine picture shows the hyperreality of a flawless model, where in reality she had some blemishes when the photo was taken. The same goes for love and relationships. The media makes them or their endings look flawlessly achievable, but in reality it can be very difficult to achieve such goals. Hyperreality has hypnotized the American mind into believing that love is free and that relationships can have inexplicable happy endings.

Jack Sparrow

Why is Jack Sparrow postmodern? This pirate is most definitely postmodern because he thrives off of the disorder of his era. He rejects the order of the world, and cannot live without the freedom of piracy. He simply cannot live within the boundaries of the orderly system of the world. He happily celebrates all that is outlawed, which is basically his entire lifestyle. "Take what you need, give nothing back," as Jack Sparrow says it. Also, Jack Sparrow goes through life doing whatever it takes to reach his goal, and whatever he has to do to get there is fine with him. He is an example of moral relativism. However, at the end of Pirates of the Caribbean, At World's End, Jack had the struggle between right and wrong, whether to let another character die and reach his ultimate goal, or to help that character live, and by doing so sacrificing one of his sure plans to ultimate freedom. I'm not going to expand on that any further because of those who might not have seen this movie yet. If you haven't, GO WATCH IT RIGHT NOW! It's really worth watching.

Breaking out of the ant colony

Today I was at Southcenter, and I was there late, so people were closing up their stores and kiosks. On my way out of the mall I saw a woman looking a little confused while trying to put the tarp up on her kiosk for closing, so I decided to help her. I went over and offered my assistence, and she allowed me to help. She was working a toy kiosk. I asked her how she was doing, and if she had any good sales today. She said she did have some good sales, and that she was tired. She had been there from the mall openning time to closing time. I told her my name and shook her hand, and she told me her name was Aiayla (sp?). I said it was really nice to meet her, and she thanked me for my help. Although I didn't feel like I was a ton of help considering she was a little taller than me, so she could've reached the hooks easier than I could have, but I guess I was able to help make sure we were getting the hooks linked to the right rings, and then I was able to help pull it tight on the other side so she could make the ends meet. Anyway, after we had completely finished we said goodbye as she went to go help the short man having to use his chair to reach rings for the hooks on his tarp at the next kiosk over.

Why play "Questions" in a movie about existentialism?

In the movie "Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead", the two characters play a game of Questions. This is because existentialism, I believe, is based upon asking questions. Questions like "why am I here?" which lead to deeper questions that lead to existentialism's conclusion that we can only prove so much of our existence to ourselves, and that beyond that there is nothing more. In the movie, Rosencrantz and Guildenstern start realizing that they don't remember their existence at all before the messenger came for them. They kept asking more questions, and came to realize that they themselves don't even know which one of them is Rosencrantz and which one is Guildenstern. I think that their game of Questions was included in the movie for the afore stated reasons, and because it spurred their discoveries about their existence and helped with their thought progression drastically in only one scene. It also shows the thought process put into questioning everything in existence, even ourselves, in order to try and find the right answers.

Rosencrantz and Guildenstern's death

I don't think Horatio has any opinion of approval or disapproval on Rosencrantz and Guildenstern's deaths. He doesn't seem to care because all he says is that one line, yet he cares enough to say it at all. I guess he has to say it because these were people who died, even though they don't have any significant purpose. And their insignificance is exactly why there is not much of an opinion on Horatio's part. Horatio had no relationship with these two men anyway, and they aren't needed in the story, thus Horatio has no opinion either way on their deaths being good or bad. This also ties in with Hamlet's lines that we focused on today. With the fall of the sparrow and how there is an inevitability. Death is inevitable. Rosencrantz and Guildenstern's deaths were inevitable, and their disappearance from the story does not make the play lose anything in its structure or quality. In the end, I guess what I'm trying to say is that these two aren't important enough to me missed or to have their deaths considered bad, and considering all the circumstances of the play and Horatio's role and interaction with these two being none, zero, nothing, there is no way that I can see Horatio having an opinion on these two strangers.