Has CyberSpace taken over Real Life????

Nathan Jurgenson, The IRL Fetish

This article talks about how the new technology of smartphones, social media has taken over the real life. He talks about how everywhere we go, either ourselves or the person we are with is bound to go on their phones and start tapping away. He even shifts the subject to see that even when we are “online” in our social media, that just means we are “not offline”. The technology that we have has changed the way we use social media where social media is starting to merge within real life itself. I personally see where Jurgenson’s point stems from. But it is also hard to see because my whole life I have been face to face with new technology. The generation that I’m in is the first to be so stuck with our technology that I am curious to see how future generations will be like. Even when I am not directly on my phone looking at apps like Facebook, Instagram, or Twitter, the people I follow and the app still goes on without me. And when I am on, I can still see what I missed with the small time I was off, so it feels like I have not ever left the app when I signed on last. Not even signed on, we just leave our profiles logged on and with just a click, we are back on. We never officially “log out”. Even people who decide to quit, unless they thoroughly delete their profile, their content is still present. It is actually rare to find someone without any social media at all because it is so hard to be “in the loop” with people when everything is online now.

A Modern Day Catalyst: The iPod

Niki Saval: Wall of Sound: The iPod Has Changed the Way We Listen To Music

This article talks about how the invention of the iPod changed the way people today listen to music. It also goes back to how people were exposed to music before the iPod. The author talked about how the iPod is basically represents the “digitization of musical life”. As of right now, the iPod is becoming something nobody has anymore. Technology has evolved so much that even something as transformative as the iPod has slowly went down and nearly forgotten. I would say that the iPod was a catalyst device that led to the invention of all the smartphones and handheld devices out there. First came the iPod, which revolutionized how people get access to music. No more CDs, DVDs, or Vinyl disks, but on a compressed file. And you could download it as much as you want, delete what you want, and buy any more for a small price. It was easier and simpler. Saval emphasizes on the changes that the iPod brought to music. I felt like the iPod also brought a way to the changes and upgrade to technology in our century. As generations of the iPods came, Apple was able to add in Internet capabilities, gaming apps, and other useful functions. After that came the iPhone. With that, people could start calling, texting, etc. So now, people can do virtually anything with their smartphones. It kinda became an iPod with extensions. And this article just brings it all the way back to the device that started it all with music: the iPod.

ASIAN INVASION: The Movies

In the chapter 6 paired readings, one reading focused on Asian Americans in movies. Basically, the author just labeled some of the different types of characters that Asian actors tend to play.
Really, there was no bias or showing of discrimination/ cultural appropriation. It was mostly just labeling the type of characters and how Asians are never really the main actor or the only one actor; there is always another actor or color with them or whatnot. One example I remember is Rush Hour 3 because Jackie Chan and the other black guy was there. They included their picture in the reading as well. Although I see that Asian actors are usually type-casted as the fighter/nerdy character or just supporting actors, times have definitely changed. There is even a TV show all about an Asian American family living in America, called Fresh Off the Boat. It features the type of cultural differences they experience moving to a white-suburban area. I do not really like the show because even though it features an Asian cast, the material on that show is so whitewashed or Americanized to even be considered cultural. To me, it shows how Americans perceive Asians. That show is all stereotypes, and no cultural appropriation.
I feel like the reason for not casting as many Asian actors compared to white actors is that white people are the majority in the American acting industry. I mean, in Korean dramas for example, they feature literally an all Asian cast with little to no white actors because the film is from Asia. It goes the same for America because the majority of Americans are white. Still, America is slowly becoming diverse and more Asian actors and actresses are on the rise right now.

Movies and more movies!

David Denby, Has Hollywood Murdered the Movies?
This article from Reading Pop Culture showed how Hollywood is endorsing these low budget films and make it into these highly gross weighing films. They used the Avengers as an example. When I saw the movie, I personally did not see it as a great movie that everyone praised. I felt like it only caught a good amount of attention because of the familiar names of all the superheroes that the audience grew up with. There were big names like the hulk, captain America, iron man, and all the Marvel favorites. The film probably did not cost that much to produce but it did gain a lot of profit because of just the fact that it had all the heroes in one movie. That is one of the examples that showed how Hollywood is able to endorse these low budget films and make them bigger than they really are. Some other movies series that follow this are the story line ones where the last book always ends with "part 1 and part 2". Reason for that is, they know people who followed the story line will watch the movie no matter what and by separating and elongating the movie into two, they make more profit knowing full well the fans are gonna watch it. I think of movies like The Hunger Games series, Twilight, Harry Potter because all of the last movies ended in part one and part two. This RPC essay also talks about movies and the kind of "false praise" that movies have. Those also tie in with story line series based movies and the movies with familiar characters.

Pessimistic Views on Poptism

Austerlitz, The pernicious rise of poptimism
This reading, of RPC chapter 4 paired readings, focuses on the overpraising of pop icons, which the authors define as "poptism". The author talks about how the critique of music has drastically changed nowadays; where when a critic reviews music, they go on and say "if you don't like this artist, then you have no taste in music because it is great and amazing" other than actually analyzing the lyrics, melody, and all the other aspects of music. I personally take it as people trying to shove popular culture in someone's face when the popular culture that we live in now is so diverse that each person's sense of good music nowadays can be interconnected. When I read about this, I immediately thought about Beyoncé and how people on Tumblr praise her like a God. They call her queen bee, unfriend people who do not like her, and basically put her on a pedestal. And in a sociological aspect, no music will be the best ever. At one point, all of the big names we know now are going to be oldies and no names that have been replaced by newer artists. So, shoving music in people's faces by saying it's the best ever is kind of hypocritical and useless because that view will change one day due to culture constantly changing, and humans do not live forever. I also think it is an overhype of music nowadays. And it's not that music is bad, it is just that the radio stations constantly play the same songs all the time, and it gets tiring. But there are always some songs that brings back memories but are just forgotten because the hype died. The over saturation of all this music makes it so that the song is good in the beginning, is forgotten, and then brought back up time to time. It is also because everyone can become an artist now, it is not just with talent. I have seen famous people who were known for their acting or comedy go towards the music industry which they do not excel much in but with their fan base already set, it is easier for them to succeed even without talent.

Tunes & Jams

In Hollander's Elevate my mind: Identities for women in hip hop love songs, he talked about influenced feelings of R&B. The songs in that particular genre is very imitate, and talks about love in a very meaningful aspect. He mentions some idols that sounded familiar, but who I thought most of was Nicki Minaj. Her songs were very explicit on the idea of love, the display of love, sexuality and she had no shame in it. That led people to call her inappropriate names and such. But now, the media sees her music as empowering women instead. That is another thing Hollander talked about. R&B has also become a sort of feminist movement for music. I think of idols like Beyonce, MIA, and some of the other idols he mentions because every time their song shows up in my car, I JAM IT OUT. I feel like the most powerful and energetic person out there because the songs make me feel so good. That is some of the effect that their songs have to the audience, especially women.

In Anderson's Seduced by 'perfect' pitch: How autotune conquered pop music, Anderson discusses how music artists are using autotune on their voices more and more. He uses Kesha as an example using her song Animal. Although I am not entirely sure which side he was rooting on (either hating or supporting autotune), my opinion is that artists prefer it more maybe because it is more their style or it actually does make them sound better. Regardless or not it is considered "cheating" in the music industry, it is still a preference for many people. Also, it might just be music slowly evolving. Trending songs nowadays are purely techno and beats, barely lyrics alone. EDM, which stands for Electric Dance Music, is a trending genre that is mainly dependent on instrumental aspect than voice. The social shift in the music industry where people learn to use new technology produces new beats, ideas, vibes, etc. Would the music sound better? I personally would say yes because the beat helps tie the voice and background together to create a new style. Maybe that's just a new genre now? Auto tune

Another "Virtual" Reality

Story or Spectacle? Why Television Is Better Than the Movies, David Charpentier

Charpentier opens up about the drastically decreasing trends in movies and the increasing trend for television shows. He argues that television shows open a deeper insight to characters than movies since television shows have a longer span. Personally, I agree and favor that fact. I have been watching a lot of tv shows lately, and I rather watch them again and again than a movie. For some reason, a 2-hour movie sounds like more commitment and focus than watching four thirty-minute episodes. Plus, seeing all the funky scenarios that the writers put characters in, seeing their life events, seeing a story unfold, you see a character evolve throughout each episode a little bit more as the series goes. In a movie, it might be too quick for an audience member to even process. I watch shows like the Office, How I Met Your Mother, That 70's Show. They're light hearted shows, for the most part, and the writers create a backstory and more in depth perspectives for all of the characters, including supporting ones. Movies, on the other hand, only create in depth perspectives of the main character, and sometimes the antagonist. There's not enough time to introduce everything about every character and the plot in 2 hours, but it is possible to do so in 30 minute intervals for years at a time. In doing so, television shows create a closer replica of a virtual world where we believe the characters are real and we get sucked in to their world.