Head Swap

Here is one of the funniest sketches I've seen in a long time. I would have said a while but couldn't remember if it was awhile or a while ago.



Who would have thought...

Finally an Elegantly Produced Defamiliarization: A Trick

Films are living literature and instructional tools, and the action moved forward by words then signals to the viewer what to anticipate, and eventually dictates what they will enjoy in the future. Orthographically similar, but polar in intention, the title characters of the animated film Beauty and the Beast are best suited for a primarily structuralist interpretation. Author and teacher Martin Ryder makes a valid proposition when he asserts, “Whether used as a tool for representing phenomena or for interpreting it, the value of semiotic analysis becomes most pronounced in highly mediated, postmodern environments where encounters with manufactured reality shift our grounding senses of normalcy.” (Ryder). There are a copious amount of reflections to be made concerning one of the most successful cartoon films about love of all time, but the structure stands on its own as one of driving factors in that accomplishment.

The simple and predictable plot of Beauty and Beast, although exceptional in some ways, relies on tried and true formulas. This story is a classic fairytale, but context and history aren’t as important as the pattern it follows. Literary Theory: An Anthology editor Julie Rivkin explains, “Structuralism begins with the work of Ferdinand de Saussure, an early twentieth-century Swiss linguist who argued that language should be studied as if it were frozen in time and cut transversely like a leaf” (Rivkin 53). The main characters in Belle and the Beast are unique, and although their attributes change, as Propp would say, “neither their actions nor functions change” (Propp 72). Vladmir Propp wrote “Morphology of the Folk-tale”, an eerily scientific breakdown of most, if not all, fantasy stories. Whether there is a main hero or heroine, there is a recipe for these kind of stories. The Beauty and the Beast tale as a picture, as well as many Disney fairytales, counts on some of these Proppisms to create a hit.

The tale begins as most do, an exceptionally out of place heroine at the mercy of the town she was born in to. A single parent household headed by a ‘Papa’, an eccentric but dim-witted man she has unbreakable allegiance for. She immediately sings, “I want adventure in the great wide somewhere” (Beauty). Meanwhile, once upon a time on the other side of town the prince was approached by a witch like figure, usually a sign of evil, but she warns him to not be deceived by appearances and turns out to be a powerful sorceress. The now transformed Beast receives the magic mirror and enchanted rose, a mirror he later offers to Belle as a gift of sight and remembrance. Belle is a reader and thinker and an attractive lead, but her role is classic and very conventional, and could be switched to be a hero. She sacrifices her freedom for her father and is at the mercy of a beastman who wants something from her, but it is constructed oh so romantically.

Worldwide, audiences agree that moving pictures are the way to connect to one another, and the phenomenon is that once translated into another language these movies are still significant in almost any culture. Anthropologist and theorist Claude Lévi-Strauss provides more answers on why these formulaic plots are so ready devoured universally by audiences. At one time literature connected the globe, but we now see that the film industry is more accessible and easily digested by the masses. The most amazing fact is that these American films work so well in practically any country. Why can Argentinean citizens identify so well with the Disney cartoon about a princess in the making and a foppishly dressed animal man? It has also been shown to viewers in South Korea, Portugal, Germany, Japan, Peru, and Iceland and so on, and was nominated for Best Picture in 1992 (IMDb). This brings many issues to account for, such as the amount of labor that is involved in a film and if the profit is distributed equitably- but that is a whole other topic. One fact that is true, which is why the structuralists were right on, and that is that most audiences gain similar cathartic effects and recognize the plot as universal.

Structuralism gives reasons why these actions and story lines resonate with audiences. Observers are always able to describe objectively what actions take place, but as linguist Jonathan Culler would say, “he would be unable to grasp their meaning and so would not treating them as social or cultural phenomena” (Culler 56). I claim that the toxic relationship, which will be discussed later, between a man and a woman which is then torn apart and then rebulit is a universal model and that when manipulated strategically can use any platform for presentation, even an animated one. Lévi-Strauss would suggest, “that all cultures and not only scholars understand the universe around them through such models, and that humankind comprehends his world on the basis of these mental structures” (Glazer). These cognitive models are not merely stories, but typically predictable archetypal fairytales. The characters may switch roles, but the roles themselves are consistent. Lévi-Strauss was hot for patterns the that the words form and spent more than half of his life studying North and South American Indian tribes, and it is said that, “His belief that the characteristics of man are everywhere identical was found after countless travels to Brazil and visits to North and South American Indian tribes." (Schmitt). He also believed that, “Man passes from a natural to a cultural state as he uses language, learns to cook, etc... Structuralism considers that in the passage from natural to cultural, man obeys laws he does not invent, it's a mechanism of the human brain” (Schmitt). These connections are what allow us to function and flourish, and most of these linguistic phenomenons come together in binary patterns that organize the biological and rational jobs of the human brain.

The title alone sets up a theme of hierarchical binary opposites, but this unique tale has the female above the character representing man. Traditionally there are binary pairs like, good/bad, happy/sad, man/woman and so on. Derivational morphology even allows for hierarchical binaries, like selfish/unselfish or tolerable/intolerable. The pairing of beauty and beast places the emphasis and positive connotation on the women over the man. Specifically in the Disney version the Beast is rude and controlling, but his features are softened and humanized. Earlier illustrations of the pair feature a boar-like or warthog type of bust, still with the princely attire. Besides bestiality this pair presents the ultimate odd couple, a match only possible in fairy land.

One could also argue that it makes a case that only brutish men are below women who happen to be smart, beautiful and kind. Unless she possesses a myriad of qualities our heroine has little chance at besting her complement, who is often higher in socio-economic status and education. Although the lead character in Pride and Prejudice is a bright and delightful female, her happiness is guaranteed at the match to an equally affluent and intelligent man. Mr. Darcy is also allowed rude behavior, thought not to other beast’s extents, this attitude as acceptable breeds tradition. An entire lineage of men and women who are slaves to love, and do what it takes to keep it or get it. The end of this is not in sight as modern romantic comedies still rely on happy endings, or justified ends. Thinker and Marxist-Lacanist Slavoj Zizek comments on the structures that an ingrained to our core, he comments, “We ‘feel free’ because we lack the very language to articulate our unfreedom.” (Zizek!)


Earlier I mentioned the toxic relationship of the pair and sometimes in this and other stories the beast is romanticized, and all his bad behavior is excused. By the end of Beauty and the Beast the audience has fully forgiven the man, because after all he has now proved himself a man by his words accompanied by actions, and not any longer the beast, who locked up and imprisoned Belle. In the play A Streetcar Named Desire by Tennessee Williams the characters were all very hot and heavy. When sex does happen at first between the married couple Stella and Stanley we accept the vulgarity as almost sweet. Stella excuses he husband’s rough foreplay by reasoning, “But there are things that happen between a man and a woman in the dark- that sort of make everything else seem unimportant” (31). We learn by the end however, to open that door and let in indecency opens up a whole new level of impropriety. The next to final scene in the play is a rape of Blanche by her brother-in-law Stanley that is not justified by her actions. Yes she is flighty, flirty and asking for it- but you never give it to her- in a decent society. The words and phrases used in a fairytale are far less gruesome, but add an R rating and there are plenty of possibilities for the story to go south.

Although in this postmodern world we see more and more unique voices as our narrators, their goals are similar in popular culture. In Jonathan Safran Foer’s Everything is Illuminated there are several sexual scenes during the fragmented Trachimbrod narrative between the smarter and lovestruck Brod and the handicapped Kolker. Before the two meet Brod is a passionate twelve year old with a brain too big for her own good, she defamilrizes love in the most touching way making the author come alive for me from the text. Referring about Brod he says, “She had to satisfy herself with the idea of love – loving the loving of things whose existence she didn’t care at all about. Love itself became the object of her love. She loved herself in love, she loved loving love, as love loves loving, and was able to reconcile herself with a world that fell so short of what she would have hoped for.” (80). After the pair meet the audience is pried for action and the first time they made love, “Her belly lit up like a firefly’s bulb – brighter than a hundred thousand virgins making love for the first time” (98). Although she loved him madly, this was no excuse for his later on violent physical abuse of her. As a reader I even found myself being swept up by the powerful discourse of love forgiving all acts. Author Anita Moss wisely claims, “To make meaning from literary texts, structuralists argue, a reader must bring them within the modes of discourse which one's culture makes possible. Cultural conventions become after a time so thoroughly internalized that they appear to be natural. A central structuralist notion (deriving from the Russian formalist critics) concerns the force of genre conventions in establishing a reader's expectations, which may or may not be fulfilled by a given text.”(Moss). Her line is worth repeating, “Cultural conventions become after a time so thoroughly internalized that they appear to be natural.” As a reader you want the main characters to fall in love and be happy, you get a momentarily feeling of bliss when it does happen, and it is very satisfying. Do we crave love stories because human relationships are the deepest need of humankind, or because of centuries of cultural reinforcement? Writer Franz Fanon postulates that, “we have to fall back on the idea of collective catharsis. In every society, in every collectivity, exists- must exist – a channel, an outlet through which the forces accumulated in the form of aggression can be released.” (464). Is love real? This is a philosophical question that plenty have tried to answer, and plenty have made money from.

Hollywood is no stranger to making a profit off of female lead characters, but their reliance on love is usually essential. In the The Philadelphia Story Katharine Hepburn’s, Tracey Lord is pushed down in the face to the point of falling by Cary Grant’s, C.K. Dexter Haven, her rich ex-husband. On the one hand this is a landmark for a female lead doing slapstick comedy; on the other hand it is a confusing picture of violence to someone less educated in the antics of the elite. Grant is a chauvinist and confident male, but he is oh so witty so it is excusable. Hepburn is clever but hysteric without her true love, and although she shares the lead with the other two men, she relies on them for action. If one Netflixes “Movies with a strong female lead” they will be presented with a list a varied as can be. Audrey Hepburn films dominate a list that also includes, Funny Face, Chocolat, Knocked Up, Reality Bites, Harold & Maude, Bring it On, and Sliding Doors (Netflix). One of main reasons perhaps that Beauty and the Beast is so popular could be that is provides the happy ending. Some other movies to consider that feature glorified antagonistic love fencing are V is for Vendetta and The Phantom of the Opera. Both feature brutal male leads that by strategic lines and patriarchal traditions the audience is forced to root for mindlessly. All these movies defamiliarize us with the brute or the beast, making us complacent with his crimes because he is placed in conventionally romantic positions. However these movies differ significantly in that there is no happy ending relying on romance, and the couple is torn apart for the betterment of the heroine’s life. Still we don’t know what we want and some viewers may have hoped for an ending they wouldn’t have been happy with any way.

Various members of the intelligentsia will try to answer these questions about love. Zizek has strong opinions on the subject, he provides the premise that, “Love...is an extremely violent act. Love is not ‘I love you all’, love means I pick out something... a fragile individual, and I say ‘I love you more than anything else.’ In this quite formal sense, love is evil.” (Zizek!). In their book Relationships, Drs. Les and Leslie Parrott see the need as well, but their answer differs in that they state, “There is in all of us, at the very center of our lives, an aching, a burning in the heart that is deep and insatiable. Most often we try to quench that yearning with a human relationship.” (Parrott). They maintain that a spiritual connection to God is the only way to truly fill that void, and we see a completely different view of the love obsession humankind seems to share. There is of course an endearing thought that the unconditional love of a girl can change any man into a prince, but this is not wise as an instructional tool for impressionable younglings. Love is such an extremely personal yet simultaneously universal concept; the word is an endless signifier with endless ways of being signified. The future of many theories will still revolve around fixations that can be fetishcized, capitalized, or signified. It will be remarkable to see where things go as we realize how powerful society and culture are at shaping reality, and just meaningless that constructed reality can truly unbe.

Sidebar: I could have wrote a lot more about EVERYTHING, I didn't have time or patience to go into the implications of the human servants turned practically cyborg according to their utilitarian counterpart, like Mrs. Potts and so on. I didn't expose how much Belle is an amazing heroine and better than Sleeping Beauty any day. I also didn't talk about the phallic death scene between Gaston and the Beast. I also didn't mention that this fairytale of poor girl is swept up into royalty has its roots in the first historical princess story of Ester from the Bible. I didn't address Belle's class influencing her decision to stay and be patient with the Beast for her potential 'great wide somewhere'. Now that I think about it- I could have wrote more- but it is late now.


Works Cited

Beauty and the Beast. Dir. Gary Trousdale and Kirk Wise. Perf. Paige O’Hara. 1991, Walt Disney Pictures. VHS, 1992.

Culler, Jonathan. “The Linguistic Foundation.” Literary Theory: An Anthology Second Edition. Ed. Julie Rivkin and Michael Ryan. Malden: Blackwell, 2004. 56-58.

Fanon, Frantz. “The Negro and Psychopathology.” Literary Theory: An Anthology Second Edition. Ed. Julie Rivkin and Michael Ryan. Malden: Blackwell, 2004. 462-9.

Foer, Jonathan Safran. Everything is Illuminated. New York: HarperCollins, 2002.

Glazer, Mark. Structuralism. 1994 McAllen , Texas. 6 August 2009.

IMDb. Beauty and the Beast. Addition Details: Certification, Awards. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0101414/ 7 August 2009

Moss, Anita. “Makers of Meaning: A Structuralist Study of Twain's Tom Sawyer and
Nesbit's The Enchanted Castle” http://muse.jhu.edu/login?uri=/journals/childrens_literature_association_quarterly/v007/7.3.moss01.html 12 August 2009

“Netflix: Movies with a Strong Female Lead.” http://www.netflix.com/AltGenre?agid=23288&lnkce=mtag 14 August 2009.

Parrott, Drs. Les and Leslie. Relationships. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2002

“Propp's Structure of the Magic Tale”
http://www.uky.edu/~jrouhie/rae370_proppmagic.html 10 August 2009

Ryder, Martin. 2004. “Semiotics: Language and Culture” http://carbon.cudenver.edu/~mryder/semiotics_este.html 6 August 2009

Rivkin, Julie and Michael Ryan. “Introduction: The Implied Order: Structuralism.” Literary Theory: An Anthology Second Edition. Ed. Julie Rivkin and Michael Ryan. Malden: Blackwell, 2004. 53-5.

Schmitt, Sarah. 1999 Edited by: David Gardner, 2007 http://www.mnsu.edu/emuseum/information/biography/klmno/levi-strauss_claude.html 6 August 2009

The Philadelphia Story. Dir. George Cukor. Perf. Cary Grant, Katharine Hepburn, James Stewart. 1940, Film.

Williams, Tennessee. A Streetcar Named Desire. New York: New Directions Publishing Corp., 2004

ZIZEK! Dir. Astra Taylor. Perf. Slavoj Zizek. 2005. DVD. Zeitgeist Films, 2006.

Sweded: the Premier Postmodern Art Form

The feature film Be Kind Rewind written and directed by Michael Gondry stars Jack Black and Mos Def. The premise of this lower budget film is manifold as the main characters accidentally erase all of the rental VHS movies and reenact some of America’s most loved classic movies to still have a product to offer. This dark comdey has social commentary and oodles of intertexuality. Jack Black, who was also in the 2005 remake of King Kong, sweded the monkey movie in Be Kind Rewind, a remake of a remake (Trivia). Now you should be asking yourself what is sweding? Besides becoming a new verb, to swede a film is to redo pivotal and/or memorable moments from a movie, usually a blockbuster, using primitive filming techniques and few characters. The provided YouTube clip gives an excellent overview of the process, which is a simple yet stirring moment where the actors recreate the hit Ghostbusters (Be Kind). Just as Lyotard said, “I have decided to use the word postmodern to describe that condition... it designates the state of our culture following the transformations which... have altered the game rules for science, literature, and the arts.” (355).


What advantages are there to sweding a film? By taking memorable cliff hangers and other trailer-like clips in isolation society is able to remember our theatrical history, and feel like we are all part of one big inside joke. Deeper implications may be that by revisiting cinema history and exposing special effects we are exposing the plasticity of the movie industry. The main notion of Be Kind Rewind is that by making films with their friends the characters participate in ownership and get to display their own creativity and talent for making films that make other millions of dollars. Research on YouTube will show a community of swede followers who now do similar feats. The subsequent sweded Jurassic Park is a wonderful adaptation by moderately common people using the idea proposed by this film. There are rules to sweding, such as no computers, these special effects rely on old techniques and exaggerate their deficiencies. I came across a 300 remake where comments lambasted the makers for using a green screen in the reproduction, entirely missing the point one user said. This is perhaps a commentary on whether or not you are seeing a cardboard dinosaur or an elaborate CG T-Rex, the fact remains that it is never real. Just as Jean Baudrillard describes Disneyland as, “(an imaginary effect concealing that reality no more exists outside than inside the bounds of the artificial perimeter)” (370). There are hundreds of thousands of dollars spent on these films hoping to make more than they spent is in service of an illusory art that tricks the mind.

The film ends with lawyers coming to the video store and seizing all of the sweded movies for copyright infringement. This is more commentary on an industry that seeks revenue for every idea and thought inspired by its licensed creation. Hopefully these new sweders will have less trouble with the authorities and more creative license of their own.

To hear Michael Gondry talk about sweding check out http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i5Rd8x4OJoY

Works Cited

Baudrillard, Jean. “Simulacra and Simulations.” Literary Theory: An Anthology Second Edition. Ed. Julie Rivkin and Michael Ryan. Malden: Blackwell, 2004. 364-77.

“Be Kind Rewind- Ghostbusters” http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xMdwkpVV0QA

"Sweded- Jurassic Park" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OFZBz3ZiQbk

Lyotard, Jean-Francois. “The Postmodern Condition.” Literary Theory: An Anthology Second Edition. Ed. Julie Rivkin and Michael Ryan. Malden: Blackwell, 2004.355-64.

Trivia for Be Kind Rewind. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0799934/

Any Sign of Life?

The isolated 'brass balls' pep talk by Alec Baldwin's character in the film Glengarry Glen Ross relies on rhetoric and capitalistic motivation. This young rich man speaks harsh words to the three older salesmen at a dwindling real estate sales office. He first threatens their masculinity, asking "Are you men?" Then he challenges their income by promising to only keep the top two closers, and fire the rest. Baldwin also demeans their value by praising and parading his own wealth.

The word 'leads' and the actual physical stack of leads are given new authority and significance. In the article "Marxism and the Philosophy of Language" author V.N. Volosinov talks about the forms of communication and their hierarchical structures. Although the seemingly tough character of Alec Baldwin is above the other men in socioeconomic status, he is speaking the technical language of men who are in sales. These men understand that their entire occupation is sales and phrases like "Coffee is for closers only", are easily understood. When he is challenged that the leads are the weak element in the men's failure, he retorts, "You're weak." These leads, however, become the most spiritual aspect of the conversation as they represent the unattainable yet most desirous of things. Volosinov states that "When these forms change, so does [the] sign...Only items within that circle will achieve sign formation and become objects in semiotic communication. What determines this circle of items endowed with value accents?" (279). The value of the leads is immeasurable as they represent hope to men on the brink of hopelessness.

The harshness of Baldwin's words are chosen specifically to inspire action, towards a mutually beneficial goal. These curses are motivating, and Volosinov would argue that "Any current curse word can become a word of praise, any current truth must inevitably sound to many people as the greatest lie" (280-1). The audience may watch this movie hoping good will triumph, but the reality of the character's livelihood is the ABC's of selling, 'Always Be Closing'.



Glengarry Glen Ross. Dir. James Foley. Perf. Alec Baldwin. GGR. New Line Cinema, 1992

Image: www.ebaumsworld.com/pictures/view/151377/

Volosinov, V.N. "Marxism and the Philosophy of Language." Literary Theory: An Anthology. Ed. Julie Rivkin and Michael Ryan. Malden: Blackwell, 1998. 278-81.

Semiotic Desecration

Defamiliarized - try to read this first

Three roundish orbs dominate the picture plane. Two of the circular objects are jet black, empty vacuous spaces ready to pounce on an empty head. The largest shape is also circular and envelops facial like features. There are three black points cradling the features, each point is needle point sharp, ready to penetrate a flat face. The eyes are also vacantly black, over a nose-like oval with implied depth. Everything is plastic and fake looking finishing up with a red and black mouth. This geometrically contrasted face is surrounded by rays of golden light with a label in the upper corner. Never forget that this is not just any mouse, this is a corporate mouse with legions of followers.



















































This iconic picture is almost considered a photograph of a real entity. Worldwide viewers can immediately recognize the face and poster animal of cartoons. Without Mickey in the beginning we couldn't have grown from the Flintstone's into the Simpson's and so on. Mickey Mouse actually signifies something like this old cartoon clip (see below) in my mind, a tradition in physical comedy with adult themes. It can be easy to criticize America's favorite rodent because in some minds he can be seen as a pimp with a brothel of princesses, but this is not his true purpose. Currently the label of Disney uses a silhouette of the Mouse head, but this picture is specifically an older version reminiscent of his cartoon character as opposed to modern label. This is why the yellow, red, black and white can actually have a very positive connotation of nostalgia and a pre-princess porn empire. This picture is Mickey as a source of laughter and pure pleasure.




(All extremes aside I do love me some good cartoons. I was actually looking for the Jack and the Beanstalk giant clip, but this clip sparked a lot of ideas. Notice how the King is depicted, and how Minnie is treated as coin. I remember the giant smoking that hay and eating those pumpkins all too well- we won't ever find Elmo doing that- and I'm forced to think/believe that is a good thing)

Plato's Warlike Contradiction

X Factoring the Exception

There seems to be certain groups of people that are exempt from censorship, and this stirring battle clip montage from the movie 300 set against violent music from Dethklok of the show Metalopcalypse would be something to hide from the common people, and perhaps only show the generals. Plato believed that the common people would be told lies as, “[but falsehood is] useful to human beings as a kind of medicine,...So it’s appropriate for the rulers of the state, if anyone, to tell lies involving enemies or fellow citizens for the benefit of the state” (28). One of many problems with this thinking is that it applies to citizens of the Republic and outsiders are seen as enemies. This exception punches a big hole in the peaceful front Plato gives. Although the Republic would rely on honorable servicemen to serve it, they still would be fed doctrine by the philosopher kings. Setting aside the point that Plato would dislike any imitation or replication of a war, especially by a director who is not in real life a successful general, we can assume that if forced there are certain aspects of the video he would appreciate.

Plato believed in the necessity of courage and honor of a citizen, especially one that is also a soldier. He would perhaps applaud the chivalry and victories of the group of Spartans. Men were to be men and bravery went along with respect. In Republic 3 he explains his reasoning for removing any emotional displays of males reported by the poets, “So we would be right to remove the lamentations of famous men and give them to women- but no the serious ones- and to the inferior men, so that those we claim to be educating as guardians of the country will be ashamed to act like this.”(26). Again this is further proof that this emotional display of strength in the video would only be shown to men being bred for positions of power.

Plato was big on levels in society and would believe in the didactic merit of the clip. All personal relations with Sparta set aside, the philosopher would enjoy the way the Persian forces are depicted as soulless evildoers. The enemy would be associated with witchcraft and such atrocities as making a tree from the dead corpses of innocent villagers. The small band of soldiers overcoming a massive enemy would inspire hope, but must end before the hero dies. Plato would perhaps end the clip in the last few seconds, a sin of omission. Plato would know that the main hero dies, but would hide this from even perhaps men right underneath him in rank.

All men are to be trained in efficient ways when it comes to dealing with enemies of the state. The beginning of the clip shows a young Spartan boy killing a wolf in a daring show of strength. There is little struggle, which would supply courage for other aspiring Spartans. In modern times the boy’s success gives the optimism that anyone with proper training can succeed in military situations. Plato would claim he was descended from the gods, or downplay the achievements of the boy as very human, and not ever let on, “that heroes are no better than ordinary human beings” (31). Soldiers were perhaps the only men allowed to sin in this way, but as long as it was controlled by the powers that be, it was justified. It seems that if the thirst for blood was noble in intent and appropriately directed, war is an appropriate activity for rulers of a state to create.

Works Cited
300. “Madness? This is Dethklok”. You Tube, 8 March 2008. Web. 13 July 2009

Plato. “Republic 3.” Classical Literary Criticism. Trans. Penelope Murray and T.S. Dorsch. New York: Penguin Books, 2004. 24-40.