Some people mentioned in class today that the movie transcript to Citizen Kane may be of use to them so I thought I'd post it here for anyone who wants to use it!
The full Citizen Kane transcript can be found here.
Happy writing!
Tuesday, May 29, 2012
Tuesday, May 22, 2012
Hush Hush
If there is one thing that fascinates me, it is how sex and sexuality is treated in the United States today. So how 'bout it? Let us talk about sex.
What really sparked this post was Hush Hush, a short played performed by a class of senior New Trier theatre students during the Spring Plays Festival on Saturday, May 19th. Hush Hush is an original devised work, a "documentary-style" type of theatre, and is a compilation of stories and interviews all concerning sex and sexuality; the underlying question being: What does sex mean to you?
Although this production contained powerful stories about first love, homosexuality, virginity, and even sexual assault, I found the title of the play the most interesting. "Hush Hush" connotes an unspoken quality about sex, and suggests that the action is too vulgar to openly address. In reality, sex is one of the most natural and instinctual things humans do, but for some reason, our society has seemingly pegged it as something inappropriate and indecent. The image presented on the poster and the playbill (right) depicts a woman with a finger over her mouth and, again, suggests the shushed attitude toward sex.
So why is sex almost always hushed? Why do we, as Americans, feel compelled to keep it secretive?
Some might argue sex is quieted because it is a private, personal, and intimate action done between two people, and although I agree with all of those things, talking about sex is still avoided even in necessary situations because it is so often thought of as "naughty".
In one of the stories incorporated in Hush Hush, a girl shared her story about sexual assault, but confessed that she did not tell anyone about the incident because she did not want to be labeled a "slut". She kept it a secret because she feared others would find her indecent, and silenced her pain because sex is something a young girl does not talk about, nonetheless do, openly.
So when does it become okay to talk about sex? Why is it censored in the first place?
 | ||
| Hush Hush Playbill |
What really sparked this post was Hush Hush, a short played performed by a class of senior New Trier theatre students during the Spring Plays Festival on Saturday, May 19th. Hush Hush is an original devised work, a "documentary-style" type of theatre, and is a compilation of stories and interviews all concerning sex and sexuality; the underlying question being: What does sex mean to you?
Although this production contained powerful stories about first love, homosexuality, virginity, and even sexual assault, I found the title of the play the most interesting. "Hush Hush" connotes an unspoken quality about sex, and suggests that the action is too vulgar to openly address. In reality, sex is one of the most natural and instinctual things humans do, but for some reason, our society has seemingly pegged it as something inappropriate and indecent. The image presented on the poster and the playbill (right) depicts a woman with a finger over her mouth and, again, suggests the shushed attitude toward sex.
So why is sex almost always hushed? Why do we, as Americans, feel compelled to keep it secretive?
Some might argue sex is quieted because it is a private, personal, and intimate action done between two people, and although I agree with all of those things, talking about sex is still avoided even in necessary situations because it is so often thought of as "naughty".
In one of the stories incorporated in Hush Hush, a girl shared her story about sexual assault, but confessed that she did not tell anyone about the incident because she did not want to be labeled a "slut". She kept it a secret because she feared others would find her indecent, and silenced her pain because sex is something a young girl does not talk about, nonetheless do, openly.
So when does it become okay to talk about sex? Why is it censored in the first place?
Monday, May 14, 2012
Butch or Beautiful
 |
| Picture taken from The Great Gatsby, the film |
Believe it or not, the idea for this post came to me after reading blog post by fellow American Studies student, Nate Goss. Goss wrote an interesting post about women athletes competing on men's sports teams and questioned whether or not that practice should be allowed. Although I could delve into that argument, I am more interested in the gender roles female athletes face today.
As a female athlete myself, I receive a lot of comments about how I look or act because I am athletic. To give you some more context, I play softball, and any softball player knows (and probably most of you), we often get associated with words like "butch" or "buff" because surprise, surprise-- softball players have muscles (gasp!).Despite the fact that it is extremely common for girls to compete in sports in today's society, we still get ridiculed for being strong or muscular-- as if those things make us less womanly. Are gender roles more embedded into our society than we previously thought? Or is possible to be a beautiful flower and a buff softball player?
Thursday, May 10, 2012
$ Old Money...New Money? $
"I disapproved of him from beginning to end" (154), says Nick Carraway about Jay Gatsby in F. Scott Fitzergald's The Great Gatsby. In class, we discussed the possible reasons why Nick "disapproved" of Gatsby for the duration of their relationship and we found that one reason was because Gatsby was considered "new money".
Gatsby did not come from a wealthy family, unlike Nick. According to Nick, the Carraway family has been "prominent, well-to-do people... for three generations" (3), and the fact that Gatsby did not come from a "well-to-do" family, like his own, suggests that Nick disapproves of Gatsby for his non-traditional, showy, and luxurious lifestyle.
Though this story takes place in the "roaring twenties", a time where social classes were rigidly separated, the idea of new money vs. old money is still apparent in today's society. For example, the Village of Winnetka's roots trace back to the mid 1800s and has since become one of those most affluent towns in the United States. I am very thankful to live in such a comfortable community, but I am even more thankful for the connections that an "old money"(esque) community offers. Not only have I gone to fantastic schools, but my family and friends know people who can help me get into certain colleges, land certain internships, and eventually, get certain jobs. Conversations about how "so-and-so" is an alum of that prestigious school out east, and how "what's-her-face" is the vice president of that big company you'd love to work for, are frequent in my household.
As evidenced by my own family, many members of this community have lasting ties to the community and the New Trier district school system. My father, like many New Trier parents, grew up in this district, got an outstanding education in college and graduate school, became successful, and then decided to raise his children in the same environment.
This cycle is not uncommon in this community by any means. It makes sense, right? Any man would want to raise a family in the same place he found success. But does this cycle make it harder for people of lower class to rise up? Moving up in society is often about who you know and what connections you have, so if you have no connections in the upper class, how does that effect the odds of moving up?
Though this story takes place in the "roaring twenties", a time where social classes were rigidly separated, the idea of new money vs. old money is still apparent in today's society. For example, the Village of Winnetka's roots trace back to the mid 1800s and has since become one of those most affluent towns in the United States. I am very thankful to live in such a comfortable community, but I am even more thankful for the connections that an "old money"(esque) community offers. Not only have I gone to fantastic schools, but my family and friends know people who can help me get into certain colleges, land certain internships, and eventually, get certain jobs. Conversations about how "so-and-so" is an alum of that prestigious school out east, and how "what's-her-face" is the vice president of that big company you'd love to work for, are frequent in my household.
As evidenced by my own family, many members of this community have lasting ties to the community and the New Trier district school system. My father, like many New Trier parents, grew up in this district, got an outstanding education in college and graduate school, became successful, and then decided to raise his children in the same environment.
This cycle is not uncommon in this community by any means. It makes sense, right? Any man would want to raise a family in the same place he found success. But does this cycle make it harder for people of lower class to rise up? Moving up in society is often about who you know and what connections you have, so if you have no connections in the upper class, how does that effect the odds of moving up?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)