Pop Culture: Enjoy... But Be Cautious

Stuck in Stereotypes

I once read that the majority of Americans don’t have a passport. As a European, I thought this was an incredibly shocking, if not dismaying, piece of trivia. On the other hand, presumably even those without passports know that Italians eat pizza and pasta and the typical French person cycles around with a baguette, wearing a black beret. An Irish citizen wears green and stumbles drunk down the street. Australians throw boomerangs at kangaroos. All the classic stereotypes.

These examples seem perhaps quite harmless at first glance, but what about the others---all Arabs are Muslim, all Blacks are poor, all Jews are greedy.

Stereotypes influence our decision making and are difficult to unlearn. Where do we form these ideas? How do we come to know---or think we know---so much about countries and cultures we have never experienced firsthand? The answer is through popular culture – the media of film, books, magazines, music and videos.

Mass Media: The Importance of Popular Culture

We cannot underestimate the power of mass media and pop culture in shaping our perceptions, ideals or prejudices of another culture. When it comes to ‘exporting culture’, there is both “High Culture" and "Low Culture" (a.k.a. Pop Culture). High Culture includes opera and ballet but reaches a smaller audience. Pop culture is much more ubiquitous and as a result arguably more influential. Let’s look at the most popular example---violence on our screens.

It is well documented that watching violence in film and on television could negatively influence the viewer. There is evidence to suggest this is true. Recently, a young man in the USA killed and dismembered his girlfriend after being inspired by a popular show about a serial killer, Dexter. On the other hand, Norway is regarded as a very peaceful country with low internal conflict. Is it a coincidence that the same country attempts to control, avoid and limit negative influences from its media? Crime is not sensationalized, television has little violence, boxing is banned from television. Even E.T. was rated too violent for viewers under 12.

Violence on television is a widely debated topic in the public eye. Why then, is less thought put into monitoring and researching the power of pop culture? Most people would look down at the importance of studying pop culture, believing it to be insignificant. Pop culture can be fun and educating but at the same time, it is a major factor in building prejudices and creating stereotypes. When original content is made by one culture and exported to another, we need to examine it carefully and make an educated decision on whether or not it is accurately portraying a culture’s image.

[caption id="" align="aligncenter" width="329"] How are Asians usually represented in film? The men traditionally played the role of the villain such as Ming in Flash Gordon. On the hand, women tend to be painted as soft, feminine and desirable.[/caption]

Film: Learning about Cultures without Personal Experience

While I have yet to visit most of the countries in the world, it seems that I already know so much about them. You probably feel the same. Those who have yet to visit Paris, New York or London all have wonderful images and notions of their streets and alleys. Bustling Asian markets, piranhas in the Amazon and tribes in Africa. We are all constantly learning about cultures without firsthand personal experience. This increases the risk of misshaping our attitudes.

Through mass media, I know that India, for example, is a colorful place with a rich history, delicious food and with wonderful landscapes and locals. I do however, also know that a series of high-profile rape cases have tarnished the country’s image over the past few years. This has lead to a decrease in tourism. I know this from reading the news or watching a documentary but often it is film that is the most widespread channel in delivering gateways into other cultures. Looking at India again, the film Slumdog Millionaire was criticized by Indians for showing the country in such a dim light. Yet friends who have visited there can’t speak highly enough of such a beautiful place. Who to trust more, media sources or those who have been there and done that?

[caption id="" align="aligncenter" width="556" class=" "] Slumdog Millionaire presented the slums of Mumbai in a brutal but honest light. Still, it would most likely turn viewers away from India.[/caption]

Taken, the Hollywood blockbuster about human trafficking in Paris, apparently led to a decline in annual tourism in France. Parents told the movie’s leading front man Liam Neeson, “I’ll never send my kids to Europe.” To Asia, after the movie The Beach was released showing Leonardo Di Caprio’s adventures in Thailand, tourism soared there. People saw what an interesting culture Thailand had to offer with friendly locals, crazy parties and pristine beaches. They also expected shots of snake blood, shark infested-waters and drugs growing out of thin air on their arrival.

Heading north, to eastern Asia and Korea, a French actress Brigitte Bardot highlighted that Koreans eat dog in the French media prior to the 2002 FIFA World Cup. This spread across the global media and painted Koreans in a barbaric way, despite their huge advances in modern technology and innovation. The eating of dog, although a separate topic, is a custom that has lasted centuries and is ingrained in local culture here. We shouldn't compare cultures as being right or wrong, simply different. On a better note, Korean dramas have recently become huge in Cuba, of all places.

[caption id="" align="aligncenter" width="488"] Phi Phi island in Thailand. Since the Beach, the area has received an incredible boost to tourism but local culture and the surrounding environment have taken a battering.[/caption]

Media: Objective or Subjective?

In general, we often believe that the media---whether a newspaper, a television show or a documentary---is objective and reflect their subjects much like a mirror would do. However, in fact the media is more like a window. It is mostly subjective and only offers us one viewpoint. Another window from the same building may cast a different light. This is to say that when we consume foreign pop culture we must do so with an open mind. What we are seeing, reading and hearing may not represent the true culture of a nation. The media is usually affected by local constraints that we are not aware of such as religious, political, historical or gender differences.

Korean director Kim Ki-Duk has had great success at international film festivals but his movies have never been widely appreciated in his homeland. If someone was to watch just one of his films, they would have a misrepresentation of Korea. Traditionally African-American women were portrayed as domestic stereotypes like in Tom and Jerry (which now carries a racial warning to viewers). Often media that is ‘factual’ or ‘based on a true story’ is only telling one side of a tale. Others rewrite history altogether; Disney’s Pocahontas, for example, all but overhauled the tragic history between natives and European adventurers.

[caption id="attachment_3259" align="aligncenter" width="250" class=" "] Media framing - what we see may not be a true reflection[/caption]

Keep an Open Mind

As technology improves, culture is spreading more and more. However, there is also a major global imbalance. Individuals from less populous cultural groups tend to import huge amounts of foreign content as it isn't plausible to consume only their own. Societies that watch too much foreign media may lose touch with their own. On the other hand, major nations like America, tend to view or consume little or no foreign content.

Finally, for many of us, some cultures and some nations exist only through popular culture. Mass media and pop culture are major powers in building our perceptions of other cultures and can often be only somewhat correct and educational. Those who do use media as their primary source of learning about other cultures thus need to consume as much as possible with an open mind in order to see a wider, probably more accurate picture of a nation, group or culture. Still, the best way to learn is still to get out there and mingle with real people.

Pursuing Happy Episode 4

[soundcloud url="https://api.soundcloud.com/tracks/146247822" params="auto_play=false&hide_related=false&visual=true" width="100%" height="450" iframe="true" /]

During my time at Lotte Department Store with Simon we got thirsty and decided to go down to the food court. Coincidentally there was a little juice stand called happy juice. One of the employees at "Happy Juice" was kind enough to give me an interview after his shift ended. His name is Joon, he is a young kid, a student with a dream of studying in New Zealand. I'm not sure how happy he actually is but he had some interesting ideas that he picked up along his travels in India. I guess sometimes we need a guru, right?  There is no photo of Joon, he is a shy kid and didn't want to provide a photo so here is one of my abstract works I made. I call it cave ghost. Folks, when the interviewee is not willing to provide a picture for the site I will substitute with one of my works. All are on sale. ^^

 

Conspiracy in Culture: Spring-heeled Jack and the Monkey-Man

As we look at different cultures around the world, we can’t help but notice a few of the strange occurrences and coincidences that pop up from time to time, and from place to place. This segment will explore a few of the more outlandish cultural curios that we have come across in our research – side-stories that are often overlooked by history books and travel guides. We will begin with the strange tale of England’s Spring-heeled Jack.

In 1837, Great Britain was plagued by a spate of strangeness in the form of a bizarre entity that would leap out of the shadows to terrorize the country, perplex its police, and molest its women. Aside from a very odd appearance, the man-creature was said to be able to leap tall buildings in a single bound. Obviously, only one name came to the minds of Victorian-era Londoners: Spring-heeled Jack! Descriptions of this nefarious fiend varied depending on the location of the report and the amount of absinthe that had been consumed that night. Largely, descriptions described Spring-heeled Jack as a monstrous man with primitive, ape-like features, and a very peculiar fashion sense. He was clad in a dark cape, a silver helmet, and a white body suit like an oilskin. There was also a flashing blue light affixed to his chest, which he allegedly used to disorient his victims. Some say he could breathe blue fire and emit a noxious gas – which could have been any Victorian Londoner after a binge of rotgut and pickled herrings… or whatever the hell kind of noxious foods they ate back then. Despite the occasional reports of fire and toxic odors, Jack was always armed with a metal claw on at least one of his massive hands that he used to scratch at his victims.

[caption id="attachment_1903" align="alignnone" width="284"] Artist's rendition[/caption]

Jack would then make good his escape by leaping incredible distances to avoid capture, hence his moniker. Although encounters with this ape-faced menace were reported as far away as Scotland, most of the sightings occurred in London, and most of the victims were female. One of the most popular accounts of such an encounter involved a servant girl by the name of Mary Stevens who was on her way to visit her parents one evening. As she walked through Clapham Common, Spring-heeled Jack pounced upon her. Not only did he rip her clothes and scratch her flesh with his claws, but the fiend also got fresh with the girl, giving her some dastardly smooches as he lightly mauled her. Terrified, the girl screamed, and Jack Spring-heeled away before the authorities could apprehend him. The next day, in the same neighborhood, he leaped in front of a carriage, spooking the horse and upsetting the coach. The coachman was severely injured, and Jack escaped by leaping over a 9-foot wall. England was in grips of terror as more sightings of varying degrees of ferocity and bizarre fashion sense were reported, and eventually, on the 9^th of January in 1838, the Lord Mayor of London held a press conference on the issue, where he probably would have entreated the help of Sherlock Holmes, had Holmes been a real person. Instead, his public acknowledgement of the issue only fed the flames of rumor. Soon Spring-heeled Jack was said to be anything from a drunken playboy with a thing for the ladies (Henry de La Poer Beresford, The Marquees of Waterford, was the main suspect) to a ghost, demon or the devil himself.

[caption id="attachment_1904" align="alignnone" width="250"] Victorian artist's rendition.[/caption]

Spring-heeled Jack became the subject of many pulp novels, or “penny dreadfuls”, of the day, and he was also the subject of some very bad theater. However, despite the terror he inflicted on the social conscious, there were never any deaths attributed to him. The sightings continued right up until the 1870s, around the time of the invention of the camera and the introduction of electric lights to London’s city streets. To this day, however, the true identity of Spring-heeled Jack – and whether any such beastie ever even existed at all – remains a mystery. Yet as strange as the tale of Spring-heeled Jack is, it gets even stranger.

Flash forward to the year 2001, in the city of New Delhi, India. The summer was very hot that year, and many residents of this overpopulated city took to sleeping on the roofs of their apartment buildings at night to escape the sweltering heat of their rooms. They found no respite on the rooftops, however, as they suddenly found themselves plagued by a monstrous apparition that leaped from rooftop to rooftop, attacking sleepers in the open night air. How did the victims and eyewitnesses describe this night terror? You guessed it: An ape-like guy in a silver helmet, long cloak, flashing light or lights on his chest, and a metal claw that he used to scratch people. Just as in England, the New Delhi media had given this fearsome character a name befitting a mysterious super-villain: Monkey-Man! The name was catchy, mainly because it was funnier than Spring-Heeled Jack, and so the story was soon carried in the global media, and it even became a running gag on the American late-night talk show circuit. Tragically, the Monkey-Man attacks were really no laughing matter. They turned out to be much more dangerous than Spring-heeled Jack attacks as at least two people died jumping off rooftops to escape their attacker. Fortunately, New Delhi only had to deal with this terror for six weeks in the summer of 2001, rather than the 40 some years of hysteria Victorian England endured.

[caption id="attachment_1911" align="alignnone" width="300"] The usual suspects[/caption]

Neither Spring-heeled Jack nor the Monkey Man ever answered for their crimes, and both affairs were eventually chalked up to mass hysteria. Still, the similarities between these two bizarre cases are striking, especially when you look at the history of the two countries in question: England and India. In the 1600s, England saw India as a gateway to trade with all of Asia. With the Dutch, they pushed Portugal out of the region and moved in with their English East India Trading Company.  At first, the British were only interested in the spice trade, and the British soldiers there were only concerned with protecting company holdings. However, the British were talked into assisting with the overthrow of the Nawab, the rulers of Bengal. Bengal was a very wealthy province, and the British could easily see the benefits of taking control of it. Despite the British forces being greatly outnumbered, the Nawab’s forces were defeated at the Battle of Plassey in 1757. Jafar, a puppet ruler who was friendly to England, was put on the throne. Realizing how easy it might be to take even more territory, the British began to move more military into the region. By the middle of the 19^th century – when Spring-heeled Jack was terrorizing London – England had colonized India.

Could the Monkey-Man be a recessive form of acculturation, left over from the British colonization?  Perhaps stories of Spring-heeled Jack were introduced to the Indian psyche, when the locals heard British soldiers telling wild tales from back in England about this terrifying phantom. Was the Monkey-Man of New Delhi just a bit of post-colonial anxiety manifesting in heat-induced hysteria? These seemingly supernatural tales, combined with the terror of occupation and with just a little bit of the Hindu traditions mixed in, could very well have produced a chimera like the Monkey-Man in the collective Indian imagination.

There is also the possibility that Britain didn’t introduce Spring-heeled Jack/Monkey-Man to India, but rather it was India that introduced Jack to the Brits as a type of psychic revenge during colonization. It’s no secret that the Indians resented British colonization, but felt powerless to do anything about it. Rather than try to fight the British, they embraced their own culture and traditions with a greater devotion. The Hindu god Hanuman was said to be an incarnation of Lord Shiva the Destroyer. Hanuman was described as having an ape-like face, and would have been the perfect avenging spirit to go after England as retribution for the colonization of India.

[caption id="attachment_1905" align="alignnone" width="204"] Hanuman, monkey god extraordinaire[/caption]

According to the legend, Hanuman fought for Rama against evil in the Ramayana War and therefore may have been seen as a kind of avenging angel to many of the oppressed. Hanuman was also great at leaping, and was said to once have jumped over a great ocean. It was said that Brahma even gave Hanuman the power to strike fear into his enemies and to change his shape at will, which would account for the varying descriptions of Spring-heeled Jack.

Although, Jack gave up his wave of terror in England 77 years before the British finally decided to leave India, and for a Hindu god, Jack really didn't do much in the way of vengeance, other than frightening the occasional citizen and ripping a few petticoats. Perhaps he was just a manifestation of Empirical guilt felt collectively by the British citizenry? Conversely, could the Monkey-Man in India have been a manifestation of lingering resentment, perhaps now directed at India itself for allowing the colonization? Was Monkey-Man the vengeance of Hanuman, revisiting his own people to punish them for being colonized for so long? Was he the result of some sinister conspiracy, as William "Captain Kirk" Shatner might have us believe? Or could he have simply been some pranksters dressing up in a monkey suit -- in the 48-degree (118F) heat of the New Delhi summer -- to parkour their way across the rooftops? Perhaps Occam’s razor is the best tool for cutting to the truth of this mystery.

Still, for two figments of the human imagination, from two different continents and two different time periods, the similarities are oddly striking. Two cultures clash nearly 200 years ago, and the effects still reverberate to the present day in the form of an ape-faced phantom with a metal helmet and sharp, metal claws, leaping over buildings and centuries alike, to remind us of what we get when we don’t get along: We get leaping, helmeted monkey-men scratching at our evening wear with metal claws.

[caption id="attachment_1906" align="alignnone" width="235"] Or some very freaky fodder for B-movie scripts.[/caption]