“The Beautiful, Unattainable Trophy and Beast” by Haley Ecker

Pretty? Check. Skinny? Check. Successful and smart? Check and check. This criteria makes up the modern day “trophy wife.” The term was coined in Fortune Magazine in 1989 as, “a woman who is a decade or two younger than her husband, sometimes several inches taller, beautiful, and very often accomplished” (Friedman, par. 11). For the average man, attaining a woman like this seems impossible. Getting a woman extremely out of his league would be a massive achievement and elevate the man’s status.

This pursuit becomes the goal for Gennarino, a communist, Sicilian deckhand who gets trapped on a deserted island with a beautiful, wealthy woman in Lena Wertmüller’s film, Swept Away. The object of Gennarino’s desires, Rafaella, comes from a life of leisure and luxury as opposed to his lower class background. When stowed away on the island, Gennarino abuses and assaults Rafaella multiple times in an attempt to make her want him as a potential partner. He does not do this out of love, however, as he, like many lower-class men, wants her as an object to boost his prestige. Obtaining her affection is nothing more than a way to increase his confidence and status rather than pursuing her for love.

At the beginning of the film, Gennarino is a servant to Rafaella and her husband while on their yacht. She bosses around Gennarino while she and her rich friends lounge, swim, and eat on the deck of the boat. Rafaella has complete agency over the deckhand, at this point, and does not consider him to be anywhere near as impressive as her own wealthy, intellectual husband. Gennarino complains about Rafaella behind her back, irritated by the fact that a rich woman has the audacity to boss him around, and there is nothing he can do about it (Wertmüller, 00:08:50). He loathes the pretentious, political conversations Rafaella has with her husband and shows no fondness towards her whatsoever, since she represents something he knows he can never attain.

There is a change of power, however, once the two are swept away to an abandoned island in the middle of the Mediterranean Sea. Gennarino finds himself in power since he is the only one who knows how to perform manual labor and feed himself. Whenever Rafaella demands help, he rejects her and forces her to do demeaning tasks to earn her food. He is able to get away with things he would never have been able to do had they still been on the yacht, such as forcing Rafaella to clean his pants (Wertmüller, 00:53:00) and kiss his hand (Wertmüller, 1:00:51). Although these are traditionally flirtatious actions, Gennarino’s demand for such actions comes off as him getting Rafaella to no longer consider him as a servant but rather a master. He wants her to feel the way he felt when she was bossing him around on the boat, such as when she complained about his pasta not being edible for her (Wertmüller, 00:12:32). He does, however, eventually go on even further than the point of just getting back at her for the mistreatment. Anna Rudegeair compares Gennarino’s taming of Rafaella to be resonant of Katherine in The Taming of the Shrew. Both Katherine and Rafaella are considered challenges for their male counterparts to pursue, with love and power being the prizes at the finish line. Petruchio, Kate’s partner, “insistently flatters and threatens Kate despite her protests” (Rudegeair, par. 3). Petruchio tries to tame Kate for the purpose of winning her affection while Gennarino just wants to make Rafaella his subordinate and elevate his status by getting her to do demeaning tasks.

Gennarino’s poor treatment of Rafaella is out of frustration since she represents everything he detests about upper society. While he beats her, he screams, “that’s for causing inflation and not paying taxes and hoarding your money in Swiss banks instead… That’s for the hospitals where the poor can’t even get in… That’s for raising the prices of meat and cheese” (Wertmüller, 1:09:18). By putting her in her place, he is able to gain revenge for the lower class and feel successful in his status as a man by dominating her. There is a purpose to this domination, however, as it not only allows for Gennarino to get revenge for his lower class but also get Rafaella to look at him as a macho man rather than just a lowly deckhand.

He continuously beats Rafaella like a broken toy to the point of submission so that she wants him more than her wealthy husband. In normal circumstances, Rafaella would never bat an eye at Gennarino. On this isolated island, he finally has the opportunity to express his masculinity and dominance without any repercussions. He believes that breaking her down to the point where she sees how much bravado he has will show Rafaella that just because he is some poor Sicilian deckhand does not mean he cannot satisfy her. He is trying to prove that he is more competent and masculine than her wealthy Milanese husband. Earning her affection would boost his confidence and show the world that he is capable of wooing one of the most unattainable and untouchable women in the world.

Gennarino is trying to add another trophy to his collection, and he is aiming for the most difficult trophy in all of Italy. She presents a challenge to Gennarino because she is the kind of woman someone like him would never be able to have. Turning her into a quasi-trophy wife would allow Gennarino to feel that “he has been able to snag, in a sense, a spouse or a wife that other men are envious of” (Friedman, par. 26). No one amongst Rafaella’s rich socialite friends would be able to imagine her with someone as grimy and plain as Gennarino, which only further motivates him to get her to fall in love with him. She is unlike his ordinary Sicilian wife back home because Rafaella is “highly educated, self-assured and able to hold her own financially.  She’s also not afraid to intimidate any male” (Houghton, par. 7). These are qualities that modern day men search for when hunting for their trophy wives; they do not want just some plain Jane who does whatever he wants.

Women such as Amal Clooney, Michelle Obama, and Melinda Gates are like Rafaella in their elite status amongst society, intelligence, and ability to speak their minds. Rafaella’s verbal skills become apparent in her debate with her husband and his friends about the legality of abortion (Wertmüller, 00:04:18). She is able to carry any intellectual conversation and defend her opinion without any worry (that is, until Gennarino starts chasing her across the island). Dr. Dion Metzger, a psychiatrist and expert in couples therapy, states that “powerful men [search] for a trophy wife to accompany their wealth and prosperity” (Dixon, par. 4). On the island, Gennarino finally gets to be the “powerful man” (finally something prosperous for him) and claim Rafaella as his. The reaction he would receive back in Italy should they remain together would flabbergast his and Rafaella’s family and friends. The pursuit of Rafaella as a personal trophy serves as a way for Gennarino to exert agency over her. She represents everything Gennarino could never attain. Assaulting her and getting her to refer to him as her “master” would prove to him that he is as valuable and capable as all the elites who Rafaella associates with (Wertmüller, 00:59:44). The island is the only place on Earth where the tables are turned and she is found begging to be with him. 

Leaving the island together was supposed to be the final test to prove to the aristocrats of Italy that he is just as masculine and desirable as they are by returning home with Rafaella. He calls this the “ultimate proof” to have her show how much she wants him (Wertmüller, 1:37:58). The journey home would be the official confirmation for Gennarino that he is as good, if not better, than the elite men that Rafaella surrounds herself with. She is simply a tool for him to show the world how much of a masculine, domineering man he is. For Gennarino, having Rafaella tell her husband she prefers the Sicilian deckhand rather than her wealthy husband would be the ultimate middle finger to the upper-class folk he has been oppressed by for so long. It would put him on equal footing with the wealthy men who treated him poorly in the past.

Rafaella has the opportunity to give Gennarino the validation he craves should she leave her husband for him, but she rejects him in the end. This rejection denies Gennarino of the satisfaction and power he would have received if she chose to stay with him. Love was never the end game for Gennarino – it was all about leveling his status with the wealthy elites that have mistreated him for so long. It is understandable to empathize with him for wanting to get back at the upper class, but Gennarino’s conquest of Rafaella as the hunt for the most valuable trophy around is all for his own selfish reasons.

Works Cited

Dixon, Carole. “The Modern Day Trophy Wife Is All About Goals, Not Gold.” Bravo TV Official Site, 13 Oct. 2016, www.bravotv.com/blogs/the-modern-day-trophy-wife-is-all-about-goals-not-gold. Accessed 1 Apr. 2019.

Friedman, Emily. “Blond and Beautiful? What Really Makes a 'Trophy Wife'.” ABC News, ABC News Network, abcnews.go.com/US/story?id=3372209&page=1. Accessed 1 Apr. 2019.

Houghton, Kristen. “The New Trophy Wife.” HuffPost, HuffPost, 25 Jan. 2015, www.huffpost.com/entry/the-new-trophy-wife_b_6207364. Accessed 1 Apr. 2019.

Rudegeair, Anna. “The Same Old Story: Tamed Women and Their Misogynistic Counterparts.” Blogspot. N.p. 28 Feb. 2018, http://giantstepspress.blogspot.com/2018/02/the-same-old-story-tamed-women-and.html. Accessed 1 Apr. 2019.

Wertmüller, Lena (Dir.). Swept Away. Perf. Giancarlo Giannini and Mariangela Melato. Romano Cardarelli, 1974. Film. Accessed 1 Apr. 2019.

The Delicate Art of Communication by Ashley Orellana-Melendez

It is truly a beautiful thing to feel understood. As social creatures we crave this kind of companionship; it is in our nature. We are most comfortable in environments in which we can share our ideas, values, and beliefs with others free of the fear of being oppressed or judged. As a result, we seek out this safe haven anywhere and everywhere that we go. However, while this level of human communion is a common goal amongst our species, it is not easily attained. The problem that often arises is that we listen to react instead of listening to understand; we speak with the intent to dismiss instead of uplift. Lina Wertmuller’s Swept Away subtly hints at the breakdown of communication that has been occurring in Italian society. Through displays of both physical and verbal abuse, Wertmuller ably proclaims the lack of understanding as the root of sociopolitical turmoil. This film shows that communication is one of the most powerful weapons in our arsenals that could lead to devastation and destruction if abused.

In order to completely grasp the message that is being transmitted through Swept Away, it is vital to understand 1970’s Italy. At the time, Italy was a hotbed of social and political activism. Stark differences in the end goals of many individuals lead to the division of the country into two extremist parties, Socialists and Communists (Weston, par. 23). And while both groups were on completely opposite sides of the political spectrum, they did share one thing in common: the inability to give an inch. This impotence on their behalf opened the floodgates for violence. Bombings and shootings began to take place under guise of the greater good.  “Right and left wing extremists took arms to try to transform the Italian state according to their own visions” (Ancos, par. 4). In the midst of these countless acts of domestic terrorism, the Italian 1970s were fittingly coined with the term “Anni di Piombo,” which translates to “Years of Lead” in English. As these events continued to occur, it seemed as though compromise was unattainable, creating an atmosphere of severe animosity. 

It is evident that Wertmuller draws inspiration from the tensions that were rising in the 70s. The opening scene cleverly mirrors the hostile undertone of the Years of Lead while portraying the breakdown of communication that continuously plagues generations. Swept Away opens with a compilation of beautiful oceanic shots. The camera shifts from boats gliding along the water to families of people snorkeling and exploring caves. The scenic views are backed by an acoustic soundtrack, creating an ambience of serenity. Just as the wave of tranquility begins to set in, we become disoriented by the squabbling of Rafaella and her husband. The camera veers away from the picturesque coastline and becomes fixated on the bickering couple. The two argue over political issues such as abortion and divorce, failing to see eye to eye on these matters. It does not take long before their somewhat civil dispute turns into a full-fledged yelling contest. The husband, representing the Communist party, goes from saying “Alright, Rafaella let’s enjoy this beautiful place—please, it’s a paradise just as you said” in an attempt to diffuse the quarrel, to shouting “That is nonsense! You’re crazy, try and discuss something you know” (Wertmuller, 00:04:03). This dramatic change in tone from prudence to condescension causes viewers to feel uneasy, leaving us with the urge to pick a side in this argument. 

Not only does this scene expose viewers to a broken form of discourse, but it also reflects the communication styles that were prevalent amongst members of both the Socialist and Communist parties at the time. Rafaella, a progressive socialist, continues to push on the leftist front and shouts out to her husband, “You Communists are all the same. To conciliate the priest, you were ready to oppose passing a divorce referendum” (Wertmuller, 00: 04:15). It is clear that she has an undeniable passion for social reform; however, the way she goes about voicing this passion falls flat due to her inability to keep her feelings in check. This is known as the “attitude barrier.” It occurs when one feels strong emotions like anger or unhappiness, resulting in the halted effectiveness of communication. This barrier makes one less productive and cooperative (Vu, par. 9).  Her husband responds to her remarks angrily, saying, “Thanks to ten million Communists votes pushing the whole thing through, you’ve got divorce in Italy!” (Wertmuller, 00:04:19). Instead of recognizing the effort that the Communist party made to get divorce laws, Rafaella brushes it off and moves on to the next item on her list. She says, “Yes, that’s fine, but how about abortion? No one mentions it!” to which her husband replies, “How ignorant you are. You don’t seem to understand anything. The Communists are considering a bill right now on abortion. But you can’t mean free abortions! Now look.”  Perhaps predictably so, Rafaella retaliates with: “Free, that’s right! All abortions at no cost, or you must allow us the right to advertise contraceptives on TV.” Having had enough, the husband dismisses her and says, “Screw off; go on, Rafaella” while motioning her to leave him alone. It is important to note that the two failed to come to a consensus, as if they had learned nothing from one another. After having gone through that whole ordeal, they are both still stuck in their ways.

This short but intense interaction parallels the real-life exchanges that happened between the rival political groups of 1970s Italy, due to the fact that they were also unable to work towards a solution together (Weston, par. 18). It can be said that this scene is not exclusive to the communication, or the lack thereof, between the Socialists and Communists at the time. In a way, this small part of the film is a call to action that is still ringing in the ears of today’s generation. The only real difference, though, is that instead of debating divorce and abortion, we are struggling to come to a terms on immigration, gun laws, and so much more. The same problem remains: we fail to let go of our addiction to being right in order to effectively express our ideas. As a result, we move further and further away from compromise and closer to mutual devastation.

As the plot progresses, we are introduced to a new dynamic: the interactions between Rafaella and Gennarino, an alpha Communist crew member. Starting out as an emotionally strained relationship, Rafaella demeans Gennarino in every interaction. She lets her stereotypical thoughts take control of her conversations with Gennarino. After a while, it seems as though she purposely approaches him in ways that are sure to ruffle his feathers. For example, she makes Gennarino re-cook the spaghetti to her liking. Later, she makes him change out of his shirt because it is too “sweaty” and “smells.” These bossy behaviors on Rafaella’s behalf are clear exploitations of her social power. Wertmuller portrays this class gap by keeping Rafaella and her friends on top of the boat while keeping Gennarino and the crew below. Because he is getting paid by this “rich bitch,” Gennarino cannot express his disdain towards her. Instead, his anger fills up within him for as long as they remain on the boat. We soon see how their inability to express themselves in a respectful way leads them into devastating territory.

The idea that ineffective communication largely contributes to our social troubles is further reinforced by the physical abuse that is shown once they are marooned. One afternoon, Rafaella gets the bright idea that she wants to take a swim. She not so nicely asks the captain to have one of the crew members set up a dingy so as to take her out into the ocean for her plunge. Out of pure misfortune, Gennarino was ordered to carry out the task. As he is setting up, he notices a change in the tide and tries to persuade Rafaella to reconsider her swim. A thick-headed person, she refuses to pay mind to his concerns and decides to go anyway. Rafaella’s failure to listen results in the two getting shipwrecked. 

Upon landing on a remote and deserted isle with no civilization binding them, emotions begin to run higher than before. After having had enough of Rafaella’s “bitchy” remarks, Gennarino snaps and begins to clobber her. As he strikes her, he says things like, “Now you’re going to pay for every single one of them, you ugly social democrat whore!” (Wertmuller, 01:08:15). With every beating that he administers, he associates a different hardship that he has gone through. He says, “That’s for causing inflation and not paying taxes” as he smacks her, and “That’s for raising the prices of meat and cheese, and the fares on buses and trains and the cost of gas” as he kicks her around. Here Gennarino has lost the levelheaded civility of resolving matters through discourse. He engages in violent deeds because he has exceeded his breaking point. This act of using brute force represents the fallout of violence that resulted in the Years of Lead. But in this case, instead of fighting back, Rafaella attempts to stop Gennarino from striking again by using reason. She says, “But why take it out on me? All of that isn’t my fault” (01:09: 45). Gennarino, though, continues to assault her and demand obedience. We should consider his actions as a vain means of communication that transcends its basic textbook definition. To communicate entails so much more than just speech; body language and physical signs can often say just as much, if not more, than words. 

Healthy and stimulating conversation with others is one of the principles that our society was built on. Without it, we probably would not have made it out alive of the Stone Age; it is key to our overall survival. The open forum to discuss our thoughts and ideas is the fundamental cornerstone of civilization. Swept Away shows that when we cease to communicate effectively, we open ourselves to a world of emotional and or physical hurt. It is when we flip the switch and decide to listen with the intent of understanding a fellow soul and speak with the desire to elevate that we reap the vast joys that come from the delicate art of communication.

Works Cited

Ancos. “Life in Italy 1970s to 1980s.” Life in Italy, 16 Jan. 2017.

www.lifeinitaly.com/history/life-italy-1970s-1980s.

Vu, Max. “What is effective communication?” Web.

www.maxcommunicationmotivation.weebly.com/communication-effective-vs-ineffective.html

Weston, Fred. “Italy on the Brink of Revolution- Lessons from the 70’s.” Web. 22 Sept. 2017.

www.marxist.com/italy-on-the-brink-of-revolution-lessons-from-the-70-s.htm

Wertmuller, Lina. Director, Swept Away. Performances by Mariangela Melato and Giancarlo

Giannini, Medusa Film, 1974.

Build Roads, Don't Just Drive on Them by Victoria Wetmore

Life is a crazy thing. I am not here to preach that living is some magical journey that changes the foundation of society as we know it, but people should take advantage of the life that they have been given. To have the ability to run through valleys, feel the wind in our hair, and breathe the air around us is amazing. The sad part of these hidden blessings is that we are all merely a blip in the existence of the world, yet we are expected to make the most of life. However, if life is so small, then what is the point? What are we here for if, in the relativity of time and space, we are only here for a few seconds? Why are humans expected to make a difference, to be somebody, and to carve our own paths for others to be inspired by? It is because we matter. Our few seconds on Earth make a difference to those who follow simply because we are all connected to one another.

           

In Peter Handke’s poem, “Song of Childhood,” written specifically for Wim Wenders’ 1987 drama/fantasy Wings of Desire, he writes, “...everything is soulful, / and all souls are one” (8-9). Our choices have meaning to those who succeed us; we continue on our journeys laced with the ideas of the ancestors rooted in our heritage, lineage and nation. Even so, the insights and discoveries of our predecessors do not determine how we should act, but they influence the choices that we make today. People are constantly out to be their best, to cope effectively with their existence and to advance human civilization. Hence, there is a constant inner battle with ourselves to be adaptable and to find the ability to make choices that are not stereotypical, biased or pre-determined. 

Personally, I am guilty of competing with others. I grew up believing that if I were not on top, then I was not the best; then again, I often did not show how smart I was to others because that would be showing too much of my hand. I also strived to not deviate from the path that our stereotyped society has created for me. I continued to do the same thing every single day—not because it was habitual but because I was scared to have my homeostasis rocked. In this sense, the character known as The Girl in Nicolas Roeg’s Walkabout is a parallel to a younger me. She did not want to go along with the Aborigine and break the cultural barriers of western civilization in the Australian Outback. The white, British, teenaged foreigner could not accept the advances of the indigenous teenager on his walkabout, nor learn his ways of life simply because they differed from her pre-chosen course. To cope with her decision to remain stagnant in a culture that constrained her, especially when her husband disappointed her, she daydreamed of the freedom that she experienced (Roeg, 1:38:03). 

Her swimming naked in the lake waters in the Outback (Roeg, 0:58:09) symbolizes her inner need to undress from a life that forced her to escape her mad and suicidal father, watch over her younger brother and become a boring housewife. The subconscious voice of the British girl yearned for the independence that her conscious mind could not even begin to understand nor allow. What she was seeking was a mind and life of her own, but she was too brainwashed by thoughts drilled into her of how she should run her life. She, as well as I, should learn to “join with the consciousness of others, not compete with it” (Gordon). 

Afraid to adapt to change, I often fall prey to these inner battles over the smallest of decisions. I do not skip class, but usually contemplate it to the point of having a headache. I do not have the ability to say no to even the simplest of requests because it is in my conditioning to be nice, even if I am swamped with work. I cannot join my friends in these basic teenage activities because I refuse to change my ways. For example, I never argue with my parents’ decisions when receiving a firm no after asking to stay out late with my friends. Usually, I am frightened by the consequences that would come from the potential fight, but in my mind what they say goes.  When I wish for a better way to grasp what is thrown at me, I go to my oasis, my waterhole, where I can swim freely. This metaphorical lake is the television. My favorite programs calm me down and allow me briefly to live a different life. If I picture myself in the shows, then I am not in reality. Despite this, as we all know, The Girl and I have not found a way out; we have simply developed coping mechanisms to blind us from the harsh reality that we refuse to change. 

           

However, there are ways to push past these “fixed” boundaries. Our “writing coach and midwife,” Paul Kirpal Gordon, suggests we create and develop three interconnected and interdependent experiences that check and balance each other. The first is a healthy love relationship with a significant other. If we are all supposed to be one collective soul, then we require healthy, quality human exchanges that help us sustain a love life and vital connection with the person we care most deeply about. To have someone to come back to at the end of the day who cares about you just as much as you care about them is one of the most beneficial things that the human mind, body and soul can have. Studies show, “From childhood until old age, being connected to others in secure and loving relationships helps our patients better deal with stress” (Vallas, par. 7). The second part of this model is to develop a dependable and inspiring core of friends, family and associates who one can trust with one’s deepest issues, fears and ambitions. Having peers to talk to or a supporting family life helps to keep a clear and focused mind and heart. Thirdly, one must discover on one’s own walkabout what one wants to do with one’s life in terms of a meaningful career, vocation and service to others. The Girl thought that she had to follow the predetermined path of compliant schoolgirl, responsible older sister, snobbish foreigner and obedient wife in the overbearing land of stereotypes and comfort, but she really wanted to break free of the chains of civilized man. The longing look of regret in her eyes at the end of the film (Roeg, 1:38:18) portrays her lack of independence and her yearning to return to the freedom that the Outback allowed. 

I want to establish my own path in advertising and become somebody who I can love and respect, not some plastic doll that my parents can dress into whatever career they think will earn me the most money. 

           

When I and The Girl escape to our imaginative states, we miss out on what reality presents to us, especially the people, things and events that can enlarge our perspectives on life. Coming into college, I had to learn to re-train my senses in order to experience Hofstra University because it is anything but a typical college. Here, there is the inclusion of all races, genders and backgrounds, as well as clubs and support groups that welcome us with open arms. In my town of Brick, New Jersey, such an impartial and non-judgmental community does not exist. Hofstra’s diverse and international community of individuals feels like several indigenous societies brought together into one spot, which has allowed me to immerse myself in an environment of change. It is not a place where I can pretend to be someone else for a little while; it is an environment that is molding me into who I really want to be: a decisive, determined, contributing part of a collective society. 

In order to make my engagement into a true community happen, I have to drop my old ideas about status and labels and categories that do not allow me to explore all the possibilities thrown my way. Lina Wertmuller’s controversial Swept Away helped with this part of my journey. Her two main Italian protagonists, Raffaella and Gennarino, become stranded on a deserted island together. In such a circumstance, one would think that differences would be set aside as survival becomes the imperative mindset of both castaways. Instead, Raffaella could not drop her upper-class ego to allow the lower-class ruffian Gennarino to help her. Her mistreatment of his help on the yacht fueled the fire that metaphorically burned the bridge for a true connection. Both protagonists allowed their social status and political views to constrict their lives on the island. They had the potential to break the norm and join together to construct a love relationship or mutual friendship, sans any previous connections of wealth and class. Nonetheless, trouble emerges when Gennarino starts bullying Raffaella who soon succumbs to Stockholm Syndrome. As described in Ariana Farajollah’s blog post, “An Abused Woman’s Colonization and Declaration of Independence in Swept Away,” “Mental disorder therapist Julia Layton describes the cause of the syndrome: ‘In a traumatic and extraordinarily stressful event, a person finds herself held captive by a man who is threatening to kill her if she disobeys him in any way. She may be abused — physically, sexually and/or verbally — and have trouble thinking straight’” (Farajollah, par. 2). Simply put, the two protagonists tricked themselves into believing that they had a true connection while on the island. However, when they return to the mainland, the stigma of class and status reappear, and they revert back to their own ways. Raffaella ditches Gennarino for her upper-class husband and his wealth. 

   

The idea that status controls us and inhibit who we can be with is preposterous but tragic. It cuts off the idea that we are all one and of the same place. This persisting issue of ranking falls in line with my own personal problem: I did not want to set aside my intentions of being on top. Nevertheless, if I were to stick to this framework, I would constantly be on this high horse that made me believe that I was better than the people around me. Consequently, entertaining this delusional state of mind would only be limiting my own growth and interpretation of the world. Since entering college, my antennae has allowed me to reach those in need of not only academic help but social assistance, too. I no longer attempt to be the best; instead, I use my tools to benefit others around me. Hence, I am more open to share my thoughts and ideas that used to be secretive. I use my school work to benefit others and to try new things that a younger, hesitant me could not think of doing. I dropped my own stereotypes and have since benefitted morally from the change.

I realized that to enhance my intellectual and moral growth I need to stop ignoring topics I do not fully comprehend. In fact, an obtuse, head-in-the-sand lifestyle can create these differences that further the disconnect gap that I am struggling to close. In order to become a better and more well-rounded individual, I am learning things that help me to better comprehend a larger world, not just things that relate to my public relations major. For example, I am all for mathematics, but I draw the line just at extreme problems that require four sheets of paper to complete. Similarly, I enjoy debating on politics, but I have no control over what the country or the world does, nor do I feel like my ideas fit directly into one political party.     

What I have learned is that every single person has the right to enjoy things that I do not. After all, my ability to accept those differences and participate in life with those who have contrasting ideas from me is what makes us all one. The concept that we can all be connected, no matter our personal beliefs, is something stronger than we are able to perceive. Jamie Uys portrayed this mindset in The Gods Must Be Crazy, in which an indigenous bushman of the Kalahari Desert, Xi, came across a Coke bottle. The piece of glass that was once seen as useful to the tribe was actually the catalyst that created the dispute in the community and eventually drew them apart. Although I agree with removing toxic things from our lives, I do not agree with Xi’s decision to travel to the end of the earth to rid his band of people from this new item. He did not like the disagreement that the bottle caused within the tribe, even though it was a tool that helped to roll out animal skins, make music, and other various tasks. Instead of attempting to regulate the use of the bottle or understand more about it, he threw it away. I tend to handle my problems with information that I do not care about nor comprehend the same way. The bushmen and I should learn how to open ourselves to appreciating the differences between those with thoughts that differ from our original ideologies. Just because we are from different places does not mean that we should be blind to the way others function; “spiritually we are one,” (Enea) but “we are different people who form part of a bigger group called mankind, which makes us one” (Orellana). I have begun to grow as a person by listening to ideas different than my own, and I associate myself with people I originally would have put off after the first meeting. I have gained a new set of eyes. After watching Uys’ film, I connected more profoundly with the idea that we are all one. Rather than seeing ourselves as animals in competition with one another, we are cooperative beings who share the same prerogative to experience the best lives that we can.

In a world where there is so much miscommunication and discrepancy, an imaginary force holds us back. We are closed off because we are blocking out the peripheral vision sensors that we are born with, which prohibits us from seeing the small things and appreciating what is right in front of us. It also lessens our desire to be content with what we have because we always have to be on top with the next best gadget. Although we have the freedom of choice to do what we want, when we want, and with whomever we choose, Walkabout, Swept Away and The Gods Must Be Crazy all portray what happens when we do not break the stereotypes that limit us, when we pretend to be something we are not and when we fail to adapt to change. In Wim Wenders’ Wings of Desire, angel Damiel drops these notions when he falls in love with a mortal. In what world would an angel be able to follow their heart to take human form in order to be with their mortal lover? Most people watching the film would say, “Never,” but that is because we are so blocked by pre-determined characteristics and the illusion that things are magically set in stone. Well, stones break and crumble. Damiel chooses to give up angelic immortality to know what it is like to love and experience the world first hand. As fellow “fallen” angel Peter Falk advises him, Damiel comes to appreciate the small things, like drinking coffee, bleeding, seeing color and tasting food. He celebrates hope. Fellow writer and Hofstra student blogger Monica Boretsky noted in “Wim Wenders’ Wings of Desire: A Reason to Believe,” “Damiel has a visible reaction of joy and contentment. His face eases up and clearly experiences the full sensation that many people have overlooked” (par. 2). Damiel broke out of the mold in order to join life instead of standing outside of it. We do not always understand that we have the ability to control our own fates. 

 

I have recently been immersed in an environment that has caused me to follow my career ambition and become the best person that I can possibly be, inside and out. I can make choices that benefit me, no matter the original preconceptions that I once had. For example, just because I am straight does not mean that I cannot have LGBTQ+ friends or learn from their experiences; I am female, but that does not mean I have to stay in the kitchen and cook for a man or stay out of the billiards room at Hofstra because the other pool players are male (see “The Art of the Real Hustle,” February 12, 2018, Taking Giant Steps Press Blog). Who says I have to remain quiet and timid when I was born with my own mouth to speak freely about feminism and equal rights? My own mind allows me to conjure up my own opinions and formulate my own lifestyle that transcends any and all stereotypes. Attending Hofstra University has done wonders for my growth and for expanding my mindset to a whole new level. I want to be myself! “Why lie and cheat when you have the confidence to be yourself?” (Gordon). I am tired of trying to be someone that I am not just to please the people around me. I am sick of the assumptions that make people believe they must be different or better than everyone else. Breaking those boundaries has expanded my comfort zone. In an attempt to network properly and get ahead for the years to come, I have found myself growing closer to students in my major. I am the person in charge of determining what happens with my life. 

I struggled to make friends when I first entered the university. I wandered around campus and introduced myself to the folks at the ultimate frisbee table. They made me feel accepted. When I attended their scrimmage, I was immersed in kindness and felt a communion with all of their wild spirits. I did not feel the need to be different or change who I was in order to be accepted. In this moment, I also realized that this is a group of people who do not judge anybody. They also played together as seven cogs in one cohesive machine, as opposed to seven individuals on a field. This type of comradery is what proved to me that this was the form of society that I needed to be a part of in order to thrive. 

In an attempt to get to my goal of being in advertising faster, I joined the Public Relations Student Society of America (PRSSA). I wanted to get a head start. I learned that I have to make my own path in order to get to where I want, not expect things to just fall in my lap. If I want to make it in this field, I must learn to work together with people, for being part of a team and acting as one is an important skill to have in this work setting. Damiel’s tenacity is exactly what I need to develop in order to stay strong in the business field. Handke’s message that we are all one is what reels me back if I lose the teamwork model. My seventh-grade teacher, a man who taught me more about myself at the age of twelve than I have learned in my other eighteen years of existence, presented me with this quote: “Learning is not attained by chance; it must be sought for with ardor and attended to with diligence” (Founding Families). Abigail Adams wrote this to her son, John Quincy Adams, telling him that wandering is not the way to traverse through life. He has to be focused and know what he wants (which relates back to the three ideas for love-friends-career). Wenders takes this idea and flips it on its head, for it shows the journey of an angel, of a spirit, searching for something that transforms him. Damiel is on the hunt for love, for feeling, for something real; he is done with the business of watching and witnessing. Peter Handke’s idea that “all souls are one” influences Damiel’s decisions, for he does not let the fact that he is an angel stop him from loving a mortal and incarnating that dream. 

I am still learning to not let the preconceived notions of society weigh me down and make me feel trapped and unable to make my own choices. I have been on this journey for a long time and do not expect to stop when times get tough. Even though we are “of the same root but different flowers” (Gordon), we are soulfully one and have to remember that, under the umbrella of gender, sex, color, race, creed or religion, the sun shines equally on us all. Before college, I was in a town that was set in its old ways. After entering Hofstra University, I have been welcomed by individuals who see the world as a place to interpret thoughts and ideas for ourselves, rather than following a map that has already been written out. Perhaps it is better to deviate from those pre-written directions once in a while. I mean, what is a true adventure without getting lost a bit? While a good majority of rules should be followed, it is not up to our old stereotypes and predisposed information to determine our destinies. Instead, I am learning to figure things out for myself. I have even found joy in activities like writing and arts and crafts that I never found excitement in before college. These new experiences allow us to be unique and individualistic, but it is the same idea that we all want to be ourselves that make us all one. I am happy to report that I am going in the right direction and have Hofstra University and all of the people that I have met thus far to thank for it. 

Works Cited

Boretsky, Monica. “Wim Wenders' Wings of Desire: A Reason to Believe,” 

1Jan. 1970,giantstepspress.blogspot.com/2017/06/wim-wenders-wings-of-desire-reason-to.html

Enea, Kristen. Class Discussion. 18 Apr. 2018.

Farajollah, Ariana. Taking Giant Steps. "An Abused Woman's Colonization and Declaration of 

            Independence in Swept Away," 1 Jan. 1970, 

            giantstepspress.blogspot.com/2017/06/an-abused-womans-colonization-and.html.

Founding Families: Digital Editions of the Papers of the Winthrops and the Adamses, ed.C. 

James Taylor. Boston: Massachusetts Historical Society, 2018.

            http://www.masshist.org/apde2/

.

Gordon, Paul Kirpal. Class Discussion. 18 Apr. 2018.

Orellana, Roger. Class Discussion. 18 Apr. 2018.

“The Positive Effects of Love on Mental Health.” Psychiatry Advisor, 11 Mar. 2016, 

            www.psychiatryadvisor.com/mood-disorders/the-positive-effects-of-love-on-mental-healt

            h/article/401655/.

Roeg, Nicolas. Walkabout. Perf. Jenny Agutter, David Gulpilil, and Luc Roeg. Twentieth 

Century Fox, 1971. Film.

Comfortably Numb with an Infected Humanity by Michael O’Malley

In a world where helpless civilians are constantly mutilated by poisonous gas, people are bullied to the point of resorting to suicide, and children are being ripped apart by bullets flying through their classrooms, it is easy for faith in humanity to be cloaked in clouds of hopelessness and sorrow. However, even in the darkest of times, light can be found. For instance, after tragedies meant to disband people and destroy hope—like the plane hijackings of September 11^th, 2001, the Parkland High School shooting, and the Boston Marathon bombings—people did not give in to fear and let their hope be destroyed. They decided instead to continue living their lives as normal and band together to comfort each other, showing humanity’s natural inclination to aid one another. What about the people who commit these acts of terror? While it may be easy to conclude that they are naturally evil, bad people, this is not the case. These “bad guys” are simply sick, broken people. Broken by what exactly? The answer is simple, yet it is hidden in plain sight: civilization. The minds and souls of people are constantly being contaminated by flawed civilizations which function around unnecessary competition and determine your worth according to how much physical stuff you have. The film Swept Away, directed by Lina Wertmuller, focuses on the ways that civilization can destroy a person and shows what happens when someone’s humanity becomes ill. Wings of Desire, directed by Wim Wenders, focuses on the contrary, however, and shows not how civilization can destroy people but how little efforts to restore humanity to its natural state can make a big difference. Swept Away and Wings of Desire convey that humanity is not broken in nature, but instead is diseased by the unwritten behavioral constraints of society which idolizes a “power to prevent” lifestyle and demands that material wealth and socio-economic competition the supreme aim of life. This illness can be cured.

The idea that humanity is naturally good is proven to us every day in our own lives. For example, as I was sitting in Hofstra University’s Student Center, I was reading an article about a school being shot up during a gun-protest walkout and began to doubt my faith in humanity. How could humanity possibly be naturally good if whenever people try to make a difference it is immediately shot down? After convincing myself there is no hope for a cure, I packed up my things and began to leave. As I was walking away, a random lady stopped me and handed me a meal voucher, saying “Go get yourself a lunch; it’s free.” It was at this moment that I realized I had been wrong for concluding humanity is evil because everywhere there are people who naturally feel inclined to help each other, even if they are strangers. Not only from this did I learn that humanity must be naturally good, and it is just plagued by civilization, but I also discovered that my mind had been transformed by society. My initial reaction to this stranger doing the right thing was that I did not need a voucher because I already had a dining plan of my own. However, before I could decline her offer, I stopped myself, realizing that my mind had been taught to think in a materialistic way; my immediate behavior was to ask myself, “Can this benefit me?” By thinking in a selfish and materialistic way we as people not only prevent ourselves from curing humanity but prohibit others as well by putting them down for trying to help others.

The concept that the flaws of civilization disease humanity is also often featured in today’s music and cinematography. In modern music, such as Jon Bellion’s song New York Soul (Part ii), we are warned not to adhere to civilization’s unfair and destructive “power to prevent” rules. Bellion delivers a message for all of the kids who are being raised in psychologically and spiritually damaging societies: “Let me give the kids just a little help/tell 'em money is not the key to wealth/cause if it can stop the pain how the fuck did you explain the bunch of millionaires that killed themselves” (Bellion). The flaws of civilization being expressed through modern music culture is not a new thing and can even be traced as far back as the band Pink Floyd, an English rock group which became active in 1965. Throughout their album, The Wall, a discussion of civilization’s brainwashing and ruining the minds and souls of people can be found in many of their songs, including “Another Brick in the Wall Part 2” and “Comfortably Numb.”  “Another Brick in the Wall Part 2” is the story of how civilization infects their pure and innocent minds; it even features a chorus of schoolchildren shouting the lyrics: “We don’t need no education/we don’t need no thought control/no dark sarcasm in the classroom/teacher leave those kids alone” (Pink Floyd). “Comfortably Numb” has a similar message; it is the story of a man who has already been destroyed by the behavioral constraints of his society and explains that in his world “there is no pain,” stating how he has become “comfortably numb” (Pink Floyd). This resonates with the modern world because we have become desensitized. When Columbine High School fell victim to a shooting, people felt tremendous pain whether they were involved or not; however, with schools being shot up so often now, the victims are viewed as “statistics” instead of living, breathing souls. With terrorist attacks becoming a more prevalent reality, it is not uncommon for a person to respond to the statement, “There was a shooting today,” with shallow questions like: “Where?” or “How many people died?” Society itself has become comfortably numb.

Lina Wertmuller’s Swept Away focuses on a communist, working-class man, Gennarino, who is constantly belittled by a bourgeoise woman named Raffaella. Swept Away was pretty comical in the beginning, but it quickly transformed into a film so disturbing that it was nearly impossible to watch, and yet I could not peel my eyes away from the screen for even a minute. When the two opposing characters shipwreck on a deserted island, we are shown how sick and twisted Gennarino has become due to his oppression in a “power to prevent” civilization. A “power to prevent” society is the more traditionally taught idea in which competition between individuals must be present, and individuals must repress themselves and others in exchange for a healthy society; however, it has quite the opposite effect. Typically, for a “power to prevent” civilization to function, both the oppressed and the oppressors must be present. A “power to prevent” lifestyle is based on the thesis that in order to succeed in society, one must “step on the backs of others” to “climb the socio-economic ladder” and rise in status. The theory embeds into the minds of the people a proposition that, in order for one party to gain, another party must suffer. For instance, throughout most of American history, America has based its civilization on an oppressive “power to prevent” system of capitalism; specifically, in relation to African Americans. Throughout all of American history, African Americans have been systematically oppressed and “put down” by the white upper and middle classes; slavery, sharecropping, poll taxes, literacy tests, black codes, convict leasing, Jim Crow laws, and more have all been in effect with the sole intention of keeping one class of people down in order for another to prevail. The conservative “power to prevent” capitalism which America has run on for much of its history would eventually lead to the Great Depression due to the formation of monopolies and an insufficient flow of currency as a result of an oppressor-oppressed based society.

In the context of the film, most people would be distressed on an uninhabited island; however, Gennarino sees the shipwreck as a blessing and uses it as an opportunity to “get ahead” because in his new habitat the normal unwritten constraints of society are turned upside-down. For once, Gennarino is at the top of the social ladder. While from an outside perspective it is clear that Gennarino and Raffaella’s chances of survival would increase greatly if they joined together as equals, Gennarino has been worn down by civilization so much that he is unable to rid his mind of the damaging oppression which he has dealt with his entire life; instead of joining together, Gennarino would rather inflict oppression on another person even after knowing how damaging it is. The effects of civilization on Gennarino are first shown in the scene when Raffaella says there must be some law against letting others go hungry and Gennarino responds: “If there was such a law they could put all of the wealthy people in the world in jail, but, since there isn’t, all you see in jail is the poor” (Wertmuller 49:20). While less evident, Raffaella’s mind has also been contaminated by the effects of societal competition. Rather than treating Gennarino like her equal when they shipwreck, Raffaella still ignorantly hangs on to her “power to prevent” ideology and treats him as a servant where the unwritten rules of society do not pertain.

Not long after showing how corrupted the two characters’ minds have become as a result of their flawed civilization, Swept Away features a sickening rape scene in which Gennarino first violently abuses her and then makes Raffaella beg for him to have sex with her. When viewing this scene for the first time, it was unbelievable. I even thought to myself, “This is ridiculously unrealistic. No one would ever act this way to another human being over as a result of their social status,” but if that were true, then school shootings and rape would not be a real worldly issue. Lina Wertmuller, a progressive feminist, was attacked for including these types of scenes and titled a traitor to the cause; however, she was simply misunderstood. These scenes were not included to belittle the value of women, but to show how deeply our humanity can be deranged from living in these “power to prevent” civilizations which do not only demand us to “act in a savage way to another version of ourselves,” but require us to create status (Gordon). In the rape scene, we are truly shown how deeply scarred Gennarino’s mind and soul are. After every punch, he exclaims: “That’s for causing inflation and raising taxes and hoarding your money in Swiss banks instead… and this is for the hospitals where the poor people can’t get in… and that’s for raising the price of milk and cheese” (Wertmuller 1:08:30). No human being would ever naturally beat and rape another person, but after being constantly belittled and dehumanized in a “power to prevent” civilization, Gennarino does so to establish dominance and put his own ill mind at ease.

Whereas Swept Away focuses on the many ways that civilization causes humanity to fall ill, Wim Wenders’ Wings of Desire focuses on how humanity can be cured. Wings of Desire is the story of two angels, Damiel and Cassiel, who watch over civilization and eternally attempt to ease a diseased humanity. The film spends a considerable amount of time presenting scenes in which the two angels aid distraught people laced in the pain of enduring their broken souls. For instance, in the very beginning of the film, there is a scene which takes place on a train full of working-class people who struggle to earn enough money to survive. Wim Wenders allows the audience to hear what is going through the minds of the train’s passengers who are overcome by the problems created from their own artificial habitats. The scene highlights this by showing one woman worrying: “How will I pay? With my small pension?” (Wenders, 23: 30). Damiel finally settles on trying to console a man who has lost everything in his life including his family, friends, and his faith. The man thinks to himself: “You’re lost. It can go on for a long time. Abandoned by parents. Betrayed by wife. Friend in another town. Your children only recall your stutter. You could hit yourself as you look in the mirror” (Wenders, 23:35). This man has become so hopeless that he is willing to inflict physical pain on himself, a common action in modern civilization. When Damiel sits next to the man and puts his arm around him, the man feels the hope he had lost and thinks: “I’m still there. If I want it. If I only want it. I can drag myself out again” (Wenders, 23:40). This scene symbolizes how everyone in society goes through the same type of pain, and if people would just care for one another, then suffering could be relieved, or at the very least be greatly minimized. It does not take an angel to treat another with kindness. In “power to prevent” civilizations people are told to mind their own business and care for no one but themselves, and if someone does try and reach out to another person, they are shamed. If this idea does not seem realistic enough, try giving a smile to a stranger passing by in your own life; many will look at you like you are insane.

Wim Wenders makes sure to exaggerate how much “power to prevent” societies have desensitized people in the scene where a man has been in a motorcycle accident and is dying on the street. Even though a crowd of people is surrounding him, no one even tries to help him. Although it is likely that none of the bystanders could actually save the man, they could have at least tried to comfort him so he did not die alone. Instead, they simply stared at the man like he was a freak and watched the life fade from his eyes. It is only until an angel comforts the man in his time of dying that someone else steps in to help. Wenders makes a point to show that this is how sick humanity has become. Even nowadays, while it is a much less intense scenario, if someone at a grocery store very obviously could not reach something from the top shelf, almost everyone would feel inclined to help them, but very few people would actually do something. Meanwhile, most people would just brush it off with a quick “not my problem.”

Perhaps the most important scene in the film is when a man so broken by society decides to commit suicide. This scene is absolutely pivotal because for the first time even an angel cannot save an already-broken man. Every person in the film up to this point could feel the divine presence of Damiel and Cassiel; however, this man’s mind and soul were so deeply ruined that he could not even feel “hope’s” head resting on his shoulder. When it is shown what the man is thinking before he takes his own life, the audience can see how ill his mind is because he is only able to ramble about nonsense: “It’s cold. My hands were always warm. A good sign. It crackles underfoot. What time is it? The sun’s setting. Logical. The west. Now I know where the west is” (Wenders 1:08:17).  Wenders purposely waited a full hour to put this scene in the film to show a reality of civilized existence. Although the audience would think that the man would be saved because of one angel, they are proven wrong. This is to show how often times people will see someone in distress, whether it be in their own lives or on the internet and wait for some other “angel” to come along and help solve the problem, rather than just stepping up and doing it themselves. Perhaps if this man was cared about by others or simply asked how he was doing prior to this event he could have been saved. It is from this scene that the message of the entire film is clear, and more importantly, Wim Wenders gives humanity the key to cure itself.

To cure humanity, it will take more than two angels. Every single person must make an effort to be an “angel,” which does not mean that people must sprout wings and be touched by the hand of God, but instead they must simply give little efforts to make life better for one another. To save a broken humanity, civilization must abandon its “power to prevent” lifestyle in exchange for a “power to join” lifestyle based on love and feeling: for one another, life, and for humanity in its entirety. An example of a “power to join” lifestyle is exhibited through the first time Damiel and Marion meet as human beings. Not once does either of them mention the fact that Damiel is an angel and Marion is a mere human being. Instead, they accept each for who they are and are able to look past their major differences through the power of love. The first step to curing an ill humanity is to recognize that it is not okay to ignore the fact that our current “power to prevent” lifestyle is destroying the minds and souls of human beings, and change will not happen by itself. It is up to everybody to give a little bit of effort in their everyday lives to make a big change.

Works Cited

Jon Bellion. “New York Soul (Part ii).” The Human Condition, 2014.

Pink Floyd. “Comfortably Numb.” The Wall, Apr. 1979.

Pink Floyd. “Another Brick in the Wall, Pt. 2.” The Wall, Apr. 1979.

Wenders, Wim, director. Wings of Desire. 1987.

Wertmuller, Lena, director. Swept Away (1974). English Dubbed. YouTube, YouTube, 19 Feb. 2017, www.youtube.com/watch?v=OzAEF5g35uw.