Blood, Gore, Intestines, Oh My!

This post will be the second in my series of guest blogs. This "Walking Dead"-inspired post is brought to you by Elizabeth, another great blogger, who writes primarily on her blog Wrapped Up In Words. Enjoy! 

_________________________________________________________________________________

Hi everyone! My name is Elizabeth Woo, coming all the way from a blog called Wrapped in Words, to guest blog for Nicole. Take 1.

One thing you should know about me before I begin, is that I am a huge fan of this small, award winning show called “Walking Dead,” maybe you’ve heard of it. While I watch it for its killer (literally) plot, I also watch it for the gore. Despite knowing it’s make-up at its finest, the show uses the gore to realistically create scenarios with all the raw emotions and actions that follow. For example, if an arm needed to be amputated, how would it look? How would it be done? What would be the emotions? Covering up such a scene by cutting directly from one scene where he has two arms to another with one arm, seems a bit like avoiding our own shadow.

However, it turns out that the place we need the truth and reality the most, aka the media, doesn’t provide them. In response to the Boston Marathon bombings, the Daily News published the front page with a large picture of a woman lying in a pool of blood. This was the picture they posted:

Pretty powerful, right? Until Andy Neumann, a sports designer at Gannett’s Louisville Design Studio, thought something was a little off. He was right; Daily News had doctored the picture. Take a look:

As many criticisms for the apparent violation of journalistic principle poured in, I was both upset and yet curious. Why did they erase the gore? Daily News was far from the only newspaper to censor images, the Atlantic and Gawker both opted to censor their pictures. Why? As Charles Apple puts it, “If you can’t stomach the gore, don’t run the photo. Period”.

According to the Observer, the decision to publish the gore was mainly dependent on two questions: Does the gore advance the story? Does the gore infringe on the subjects’ privacy? In the case of gore advancing a story, author Jim Lewis pointed out the dangers of photographs becoming “horror-porn.” In other words, pictures that simply captivated audiences through its gore, without providing important information. On the other hand, after photos of the 2010 Haiti earthquake were published Valerie Payean-Jean Baptiste, a Haitian school teacher, referred to the pictures as a “cruelty,” making money on their pain and suffering.

We live in a society where the culture is deeply embedded in visual censorship. In fact, the New York Times in 2008 noted that, “after five years and more than 4,000 American combat deaths, an exhaustive search led to only a half-dozen photos of dead American soldiers.” While it is important to pay due respect to the ones being photographed, Washington Post Picture Editor Bonnie Jo Mount argues that it might be detrimental for us to not see visuals that we need to see. If we continue to avoid seeing the reality of a situation, there is the risk that we might be misled, misinformed, and in the dark.

In an age when taking photos and sending them halfway around the world can be accomplished in simply 2 button clicks, we must ask ourselves which pictures we decide to share and which pictures we decide not to share.

One Photo Truly Worth a Thousand Words

Today's post features a guest writer, Stephanie, who will examine a truly incredible photo used on the cover the most recent Special Report of TIME Magazine. Feel free to check out her blog for more interesting posts. Also, I will be guest-blogging on another great blog called "The Numbers Don't Lie", so feel free to check that out as well!

_________________________________________________________________________________

Photos and paintings have the power to move us in different ways. They may stir anger, sadness, joy, and even a combination of different emotions. Oftentimes a photographer takes a photo to make a statement or capture an intriguing moment. It is no wonder that people frequently say "A picture is worth a thousand words."

In light of the Boston Marathon explosion, Time Magazine released a special tablet issue. The cover photo shows a close image of a frightened toddler, with blood smeared into his disheveled red hair, being carried by a police officer. It is headlined "Tragedy in Boston." Unlike several other images I have seen after the explosion, this one does not show any open wounds and is not explicitly graphic. Nevertheless, the photo is still emotional. The response to this cover, however, has been mixed. Many have responded that the photo is heartbreaking and moving, while others believe the media has gone too far. 

But it is precisely these types of photos and the reactions they generate that draw public attention. Instead of using a photo of a man/woman on a stretcher or of the explosion itself, Time specifically chose to place a little boy on their cover. His expression clearly depicts terror—a sign that perhaps he will be forever scarred with the moment he just lived through. Some Twitter users stated that the image gives “the bad guys” exactly what they wanted—proof that the explosions could affect not only the people at the marathon, as well as the youngest and most innocent; but also cause the entire nation to stir. 

The appearance and details of a photo tell a story. As I look at the photo, I associate the boy’s messy hair with chaos; the blood on his head with an act of terror or violence; and the police officer with help. I do not need to read a page of text to understand that this event will be historic. The image, in many ways, is a shortcut. 

We live in an increasingly fast-paced society. Personally, I do not have time to stop and read every single current event. However, I do have time to skim through news photos and their captions. A photo will often tell me the gist of the story or and important aspect. By seeing it, I also know whether I want to take more time reading about the situation. Perhaps the simplicity of viewing an image as well as the power that an image can possess is why many social networking pages, apps, etc. have become media oriented (for example, Instagram, Pintrest, and SnapChat). In any case, Time Magazine succeeded in finding a photo that represents the Boston explosions, as well as drawing attention to their digital cover. 

It's All in the Packaging

Going grocery shopping has always been something that I enjoyed to do. However, only recently have I started to pay attention to the actual products and how they are being sold. I mean, you can't blame me. It is so easy to just stroll into a store, particularly Whole Foods, and instantly become captivated by the plethora of fruits, vegetables, artisan soaps and snacks that they are selling. It was enough to distract me from actually considering why products are sold in the fashion that they are and how that indicates something about American culture.

The first question I had to answer was "What makes Whole Foods products so enticing?". I truly do not believe that I am the only one who finds Whole Foods somewhat more exciting than the conventional supermarket. But why? What I realized was that it has to do with how everything appears...how everything is packaged. First, I walk in and see an array of vibrant fruits and vegetables, perfectly stacked with signs reading "Oranges from Spain" or "Organic Strawberries". Then, moving further into the store, the consumer is bombarded by beautifully packaged breads and cartons of eggs, each with a heartfelt story that often takes the reader on a beautiful journey about how that item was produced. Are you beginning to see where I'm going here? It's not the actual food that is mesmerizing, it's the experience, the packaging and the aesthetics. 

The first time I had heard about this concept was while reading an excerpt from a book called The Omnivore's Dilemma by Michael Pollan. Pollan spoke a lot about how grocery shopping has become more of a literary experience, where individuals choose items based more upon their connection to a product's "story" and its appearance, rather than just the type of food itself. While I was initially skeptical, the more I thought about this concept, the more I began to believe it. 

Whole Foods does really go out of its way to give customer's a great experience, from the overall appearance of the store to the little messages they put on their baked goods. It seems like customers, including myself, are beginning to pay more attention to the aesthetics rather than the actual products. While this is, in some ways, a somewhat cool shift, it also poses some serious concerns. For example, if we are becoming so mesmerized by the stories companies write about their food and getting caught up in this sort of fantasy, aren't we ignoring the realities of food production? What I mean is that even though there may be a beautifully written story on a milk carton about how happy the cow that produced the milk was or how nice the farm was, do we believe that? Companies are still often big businesses and will do whatever they want to make a sale. So those beautiful stories are often exaggerations of what is really going on. And how about meat? Meat-producing companies are becoming increasingly conscious of how they package and advertise their food...often to distract from the actual production of the meat that they are selling. It seems like sometimes, people will get so caught up in the advertising, that they forget about the realities of mass food production, which often include cruelty, huge factories, and messy slaughter. So, while it's often a refreshing experience to enjoy all the distractions Whole Foods has to offer (trust me, I love it!), it's also important for consumers to remember that the aesthetics and appearances are usually airbrushed.

A New Lens for the Microscope

Compelling characters are often the backbone of good novel. While many observations about the individuals within a novel can be made just by reading the novel casually, critical lenses are always helpful to bring in fresh perspectives. Having recently read Hamlet by William Shakespeare, I was able to thoroughly explore the feminist lens. With this lens essentially exploring how certain authors, especially male authors, represent women in novels, I was essentially able to look at the female characters in a completely new light. How are these women really portrayed?

The feminist lens certainly reveals something interesting: women often appear differently in books than men do. This doesn't even hold true exclusively in literature; almost all forms of media display this. Women are constructed differently. For example, it has been a common dispute in past years regarding women being displayed as the "damsel in distress, always needing the male figure to come save her. While this may not seem like a big deal, I've started to realize how prevalent this is. Countless children's books and fairy tales embodying the same preset: the idea, as feminist critics say, that the women are represented as the "other" or the "lacking" individual. They are often the oppressed ones, the ones stuck at home performing chores, or creating some sort of inconvenience that must be resolved by their male counterpart. By growing up around these stories, it sets a certain standard in which society views women, which subconsciously stays in an individual's brain as they grow up. The feminist lens, when this individual grows up, can then help them answer the questions: Why are women always looking a certain way? Why are women appearing in the same fashion...doing the same things?

Instead of taking the portrait painted of women in novels and films so literally, the feminist lens allows the reader or viewer to delve deeper into the reasoning of why the woman was painted that way. Particularly, the upbringing of the author, the circumstances or societal norms may have dictated how the author portrayed the woman in the novel, exposing questions about the stature of women in society at that time as well. The feminist lens's ability to explore women's roles in a given work as well as tie that to the role of women in society either currently or during the author's time period certainly provides a well-rounded and in-depth look at a certain topic. Additionally, it helps paint a more detailed picture of women and their role in novels and works of art and media, making it a valuable lens for a reader or viewer.

What Universities do to Stay "Beautiful"

6.3%...7.2%....9.7%....it's acceptance rates like these that, perhaps embarrassingly, make prospective students and interested researchers alike gasp and blush. Universities know that these prestigious, exclusive numbers are marveled over time and time again, making the necessity to uphold them quite strong. Reading these microscopic values previously led me to the conclusion "Well, schools like Harvard and Stanford...they're just selective. They know who they want and they pick wisely!" A couple students cherry-picked to attend and a herd of hopeful students denied. 

However, as I got my first college decision, I opened it to read what essentially led to "wait-listed". I had heard about some of my other friends receiving the same sort of decision and feeling happy about it, as in, they were happy it wasn't a rejection and maybe there was hope. I, on the other hand, wasn't as thrilled. I couldn't feel happy nor could I feel sad. It was a massive question mark. Upon hearing more about students getting "wait-listed" than rejected or accepted, I decided it was time to find out why the wait-list has become so attractive. Is it a real sign of hope or something else?

Well, as I had expected, the infamous wait list isn't as hopeful as it seems. An article from the Wall Street Journal described it as schools wanting to "pad their wait list". Sure, a prospective student may be put on there because they definitely piqued an admissions officer's interest in some way or because they were truly very close to getting a spot, however when a school is wait-listing hundreds, even thousands of applicants, you start to wonder what their intentions are. For example, one can look at Johns Hopkins waiting list of approximately 2700 kids and true freshman class size of about 1200 kids question if they're really that indecisive or if they are just trying to stay beautiful. And for them, beautiful means exclusive.

Personally, I would rather receive a definite yes or a no from colleges. However, I understand that sometimes space clears up and a wait list is helpful to have. That being said though, it's frustrating to think that a handful of the most prestigious universities are simply trying to "beat the system" in order to keep their acceptance rates low. Would colleges lose their prestige if their acceptance rates began to creep up? As much as I want to think they wouldn't, I honestly would probably assert that our system does value the rates....perhaps a bit too much. 

Life Illustrated

Art is one of the most popular ways to express the appearance of and feelings associated with a certain idea, setting or object. However, art's appearance throughout time also indicates aspects of the culture surrounding it. The intricacy, the strokes, the themes seen in art offer viewers an understanding of what individuals during certain time periods valued.

Compare Renaissance Art, which was very detailed, scenic, and intricate, with the more recent Modern Art, which is more thought-provoking, raw and risky. While these characteristics are seen in the actual painting itself, this appearance also reveals something about what society was life during the Renaissance Era or during the early 20th century. For example, the shift to more thought-provoking and risky art during the early 20th century expresses the struggle of artists during this time to revive the popularity of art. By inserting more subliminal messages and controversial ideas, artists were clearly trying to have viewers foster more of a connection with art and gain more meaning from the paintings.

With the "look" of art always shifting alongside societal changes, I decided to explore an art trend that has become a huge trend in our modern culture - pop art. Though it isn't a particularly new concept, pop art has been showing up more and more in exhibits and as inspiration for prominent design companies, such as Vogue. When comparing classic pop art to a painting like "School of Athens" by Raphael Sanzio, it's pretty obvious that there has been a shift in what artists are looking to convey.

While analyzing these examples of modern pop art on the left, some conclusions can be drawn. Pop art is often colorful, loud and formatted like a mirage of many prints, patterns and textures. Many examples of pop art, like the example on the top left, also include references to the media or pop culture. Popular lingo, well-known brands, celebrities... more than any other type of art, pop art truly plays with pop culture and societal norms.

So what does the popularization of pop art illustrate about our culture? Personally, I would say that it shows our interest and inextricable connection to current pop culture. Not only is that seen in how artists are inspired to create pop art but also the amount of interest in viewing this type of art and recreating it. Our culture is so influenced by the media that is reflecting in our artists' illustration of our life and interests. Though pop art is certainly unique compared to many of the other artistic trends that have developed throughout time, however it shows an interesting sense of change. It shows our ousting of the old and interest in starting with something fresh...something new. Even more than that, it shows that we are conscious of the influence of media and pop culture, and that we can use art to express and critique it.

The Pageant Craze

Beauty pageants have been a popular pastime for decades, however in this day and age, pageants have grown to be so much more than what they used to be. Nearly everyone I know has watched the TLC show Toddlers & Tiaras or heard about the newly popular toddler beauty pageants. Essentially, the new trend is not to enroll toddlers in summer camps or sign them up for ballet or baseball, but to sign them up for beauty contests.

With hundreds of competitions around the country, children can be enrolled into pageants practically at birth, as the youngest division is 0-11 months old. While there are natural pageants (usually forbid makeup, hair extensions, etc), glitz pageants, which include choreographed routines and look favorably upon big hair, fake teeth, sparkly gowns and nail extensions, are the most popular. Children can compete for a variety of prizes, ranging from money to massive trophies or electronics. Toddlers & Tiaras, which is one of the more commonly recognized shows about toddler beauty pageants, exposes the realities of what the children and families committed to these pageants actually go through.

As innocent and adorable as Toddlers & Tiaras may sound, the controversies connected to these pageants have gained nearly as much attention as the show itself. From giving a child an energy drink mix before going onstage to forcing a child to get her eyebrows waxed to gain points, it seems that some individuals don't have limits when it comes to beauty. When is it too much? Why are there so many parents who seem perfectly content with altering their own child until they seem "flawless"...just for a trophy or some cash?

One of the most disturbing stories I've heard regarding toddler beauty pageants involved a mother who gave botox injections and leg waxing on her 8-year-old daughter. As the article asked, how young is too young? If an individual wants to do these things to themselves when they are old enough to make their own decisions, then so be it. However, it's frightening to think that a mother would allow her daughter, whether she wanted it or not, to get these things done just so that she would be better prepared for a pageant. Clearly this is a recurring thing, which leads me to believe that the beauty pageant system is flawed. Beauty pageants have the potential of being fun and appropriate, however if to win, a child is advised to have fake extensions, fake teeth, a spray tan, an expensive costume, and a lot of makeup...what is that saying about what our society values?

Appearance is important to people; that will likely be true for a long time. However a line must be drawn somewhere. When someone is old enough to make their own decisions and decides that they would like to participate in a beauty pageant, then they can pursue that. Forcing children to do these pageants while altering their natural beauty in the process is a different story. With beauty and makeup already playing such a strong role in our culture today, is it necessary to start exposing children to this specific lifestyle so early? If a child wants to enroll in a beauty pageant, is it necessary to play to win instead of playing for the experience or for fun?

At some point, when a parent has been applying makeup onto their child for 20 minutes straight or starts spray tanning, injecting or waxing their kid, the child begins to lose the appreciation for their natural beauty and for who they are themselves. If a child grows up thinking that they must be beautified to be rewarded, that sentiment is likely there to stay.