Taking Giant Steps: Ashley Orellana-Melendez

Showing posts with label Ashley Orellana-Melendez. Show all posts

Friday, June 28, 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.

Monday, June 3, 2019

Artificial Nature: Civilized Man’s Downfall; A Look into “The Gods Must Be Crazy” by Ashley Orellana-Melendez

It is also rarer to find happiness in a man surrounded by the miracles of technology, than among people living in the desert of the jungle and who by the standards of our society would be considered destitute and out of touch.

‑--Thor Heyerdahl, Norwegian adventurer

In the eighteenth century, Britain gave birth to the Industrial Revolution and swept the world off its primitive feet. A wave of technology and innovative ideas began to flow all throughout Europe and shortly thereafter in America. Communities that were once rural and agrarian became industrial and urban. Over time, the culmination of inventions gave rise to a by-product we call the ‘civilized’ world. In this tech-savvy society, man sees no need to concern himself with the consequences of his creations or the footprint that he leaves behind, proving that the manufactured world is the epitome of “ignorance is bliss.” As humankind continues to progress towards technological expansion, it becomes less human-centered, putting the welfare of man on the back burner. In recent years, the masses have willingly paid this price in order to reap the “benefits” of modern-day commodities. This vicious cycle continues to run so long as our ‘stuff’ fulfills its purpose: making life easy while keeping us content. But in a society that seems to have lost touch with the natural, how do we know for certain that our happiness is true as opposed to distorted? And if our emotions are false, how can we claim that the Western way of life is superior to the lifestyles we have deemed primitive and savage?

Jamie Uys’ The Gods Must Be Crazy confronts us with these inquiries from the get-go by presenting us with a lifestyle that is opposite to our own. The film opens with a compilation of shots, introducing viewers to Sub-Saharan African wildlife. The camera shifts from gazelles to lions and from giraffes to elephants, all coexisting, to demonstrate that a certain degree of harmony does exists somewhere: in nature. The tranquility that is evoked by the scenic views is backed by an even more serene soundtrack, leaving viewers in awe of Mother Nature’s majestic creations. This peaceful opener invites us as the audience to let down our guards and embark on a blissful safari ride. As we continue to make our way through the Kalahari, we come across a group of “pretty, dainty, small, and graceful” (Uys, 00:01:17) people: the Bushmen. While we observe the primitive beings, a third-party narrator cuts in to enlighten us. In his Nat Geo Wild voice, the narrator says, “They must be the most contented people in the world. They have no crime, no punishment, no violence, no laws, no police, judges, rulers, or buses. They believe that the Gods put only good and useful things on the Earth for them to use. In this world of theirs nothing is evil” (Uys, 00:02:42). Taking note of the peace and overwhelming sense of joy that exists within this community, viewers are left feeling slightly jealous of the Bushmen. This insight is followed by a rundown of the tribe’s daily activities, to further educate the audience on the “savage” way of life. The elders dig for roots and tubers while the children gather berries. Some hunt for meat, while others makeshift tools out of the resources surrounding them. At the end of the day, they all come together to tell stories and play unorthodox games in order to pass the time. The Bushmen live a simple lifestyle, meeting the conditions of their gentle world.

While this existence may seem lackluster and archaic to civilized man, it proves to be much more fulfilling and superior to the Western way of life. As Uys demonstrates in the first half of the opening scene, the Bushmen relish in their stress-free lives. They are not subservient to the constraints of societal pressures nor the construct of time. Instead of becoming a ‘snob-ciety,’ this group of people accepts what the natural world offers them. Thus, their only real worry is to gather enough food to feed their family. Since everyone, including the young and the elderly, pitches in, this hearty task becomes a leisurely family activity. In Western society, however, this task is overcomplicated and treated like a dire chore. Our ‘civilized’ world has proclaimed that man knows better than nature. So instead of doing like the Bushmen, we have created a culture in which one must possess stuff in order to survive. As a result, we put a tremendous amount of pressure on ourselves to get a well-paying job so that we can partake in acts such as purchasing genetically modified “food” or buying the latest iPhone. The self-manufactured dismay does not stop here though. Not only have we created a middleman to hinder us from fulfilling basic necessities such as alimenting ourselves, but along the way we have also constructed stressors and anxieties to warp our mental states. The Bushmen, on the other hand, have never been exposed to the manufactured world, so their physical and emotional health are better for it.

To further demonstrate the ways in which the norms of modern society affect our well-being, Uys juxtaposes the calm primitive lifestyle of indigenous peoples against the fast-paced world of technology. The audience is transported 600 miles south of the Kalahari, where the script is flipped and viewers are introduced to modern day civilization. The narration in this half of the opening scene satirically emphasizes the impracticality of our creations. In a condescending tone, the narrator says, “Civilized man refused to adapt himself to his environment, instead he adapted his environment to suit him. So, he built cities, roads, vehicles, machinery, and he put out power lines to run these labor-saving devices. But somehow he didn’t know when to stop. The more he improved his surroundings to make life easier, the more complicated he made it” (Uys, 00:06:00). This narration serves as a wake-up call for the audience. As Uys makes the point that we have created more problems for ourselves by trying to evade the natural, viewers are prompted to have an “aha” moment. It is here that we realize that there is a direct relationship between our commodities and our troubles: the more stuff we have, the more suffering we endure.

However, despite this fact, we cannot seem to stop making and obtaining manufactured goods. This inability to halt the innovation of unnecessary products is known as the Diderot Effect. It is brought about when one grows to need a particular kind of material possession: “Obtaining new stuff creates a spiral of consumption which leads one to acquire more new things. As a result, we end up buying and producing things that our previous selves never needed to feel happy or fulfilled” (Clear, par. 7). The Gods Must Be Crazy captures the essence of the Diderot Effect through a series of clips, showcasing a few of civilized man’s many inventions. Viewers become overwhelmed by the multitude of snippets---everything from speeding cars to skyscrapers and assembly lines to computers---in a manner that causes viewers to feel as though they are drowning in chaos. The splicing of these clips and the narrator’s tone are deliberately combined to show us that our current lifestyle is absurd.

In “#FirstWorldProblems: Looking at THE GODS MUST BE CRAZY,” Maggy Pollicino points out the faults of Western society. She declares our need for material ‘stuff’ as the foremost problem in our modern society. “When a thing appears, or is invented for convenience, after a couple of generations, people cannot fathom getting by without it… the excessive use of ‘stuff’ has become the true first world problem” (Pollicino, par. 3). However, in recent years this so-called “first world problem” is quickly turning into an epidemic. A study conducted by the United Nations Centre for Human Settlements estimates that by 2030 85% of the world’s population will be living in developed countries (“Urbanization: Facts and Figures,” par. 1). This means that in eleven years the vast majority of our population will live in manufactured societies. This statistic alone is cause for concern given our current state of affairs. Modern man is evidence that the more material goods one has at their disposal, the more out of touch one becomes. Our species is not yet emotionally intelligent enough to utilize technology without letting it pollute our soul. Emotional intelligence is described as the ability to be “more aware of our emotions and what they are signaling to us” (Handel, par. 9), meaning that emotions play a vital role in guiding our choices and decision-making.

Unfortunately for us, we tend to confuse the rush of dopamine that we experience when using modern day technology with real joy. Dopamine is the neurotransmitter that is associated with the brain’s pleasure and reward system. This chemical brings about positive feelings based on certain actions (Fader, par. 6). In our ‘civilized’ society, actions such as tapping away on an app and or shopping online, have induced the release of dopamine. On the flip side, not partaking in acts like these can lead to a significant drop in one’s overall mood. In an article published by The New York Times, columnist David Brooks wrote, “Tech companies understand what causes dopamine surges in the brain and they lace their products with ‘hijacking techniques’ that lure us in and create compulsion loops” (par. 7). Evidently, we are not in control of our emotions; our ‘stuff’ is. Lacking the sense of emotional intelligence needed to uncloak false joy, we have allowed our society to get hooked on tech.

Uys subtly parallels this hijacking of emotions in The Gods Must Be Crazy. After a pilot chucks an infamous Coca-Cola bottle out of his plane, it lands in the wilderness of the Kalahari. Xi, a member of the Bushmen tribe, comes across the glorious bottle as he makes his way back home. Believing that the Gods had sent the bottle, Xi decides to take it to the village with him. Being resourceful people, the Bushmen find many uses for the bottle. One bushman uses the bottle to cure snakeskin while another plays music on it. “Every day they’d discover a new use for the thing… it was the most useful thing the Gods have ever given them, a real labor-saving device” (Uys, 00:09:56). All was well until man everyone suddenly needed it. Individuals began to take the bottle from each other and fights broke out over this piece of glass. The once peaceful and content people of the Kalahari were now violent beings, overcome with anger and jealousy. Just like advanced technology promotes fake happiness in modern man, the Coca-Cola bottle stirred up destructive sentiments in the Bushmen. Acknowledging this fact, Xi takes it upon himself to get rid of the bottle. He journeys to the end of the earth and throws the glass container away before it has the chance to further damage his family’s well-being.

The relationship between humans and manufactured products is toxic. Not only has our society come to depend on the artificial, but it has become obsessed. As a result, our souls are becoming rotten. However, it is important to note that technology itself is not evil. The ways in which we interact our ‘stuff,’ on the other hand, is evil. We must seek to become as filled with agency and emotional intelligence as Xi. In order to save our society from destruction, the civilized must learn from the “savage.”