Monday, October 28, 2019

9:13 PM

For editing: the structure is here, but I need to add in citations and MLA, along with strong evidence. As well as make my voice clearer and more like a blog than just discussion and analysis. Need to analyze more of evidence too, especially movie scene.

Accusations and alienation, two reigning themes that have held a footing in many societies and cultures. Throughout the decade and the 1950s, these themes were present in western and even european politics and culture as much as they are important and present today. Whether it be in the US political culture of McCarthyism, or the political represession featured in Russia, we can use Russia and the USA and the history of their relationship as lens to view these concepts through however.  USA’s culture of suspicion and alienation can be easily compared with elements of Russia’s history from the Stalin’s great purges to Putin’s KSB today (extra source). One example of this is how the movie invasion of the body snatchers portrays tha paranoia and distrust that was so has been so present not only in McCarthy era US, but also in the repression of dissenters within Russia’s internal governments, past and present (extra source).  In the beginning and ends of the movie, outside of the retelling of the story, the protaganist expresses fear of the spreading of the pod people beyond the city limits and increasing the aliens’ sphere of influence. This can be compared to the fears expressed by Russia’s political elite in where both Joseph Stalin and Vladimir Putin have created groups of some political or military structure meant to suppress dissent and prune the branches of the individuals affiliated with them. This can also be contrasted well with tMcCarthyism in the United States. Why these two unique countries each have held and/or hold some sort of political paranoia, they differ greatly. Russia’s paranoia comes from a top-down tool for dealing with opposition, while the US’ is more devolved that generates from individuals with not as specific of a political goal (halberstam citation). Another aspect of political culture that shows this in a way is Invisible Man. While the book discusses aspects of society through the lens of race, the concepts they discuss can still be utilized. Early in the book, the main character struggles between their traditional, Booker T. Washington views on race with the imposed, cynical ideas of Dr. Bledsoe (quote). The way the author dislikes this idea of deceiving and manipulating the white people can be seen as a way the era of McCarthyism has been regarded as well. These acts of deception and malcontent are the wrong means to an end, for the narrator, its praise from the white people, for McCarthy, it was fame and following.

Sources:

Invasion of the body snatchers, focus on scene when protaganist discovers trucks of pods heading for other cities

Halberstam – McCarthy

Invisible

Possible source relating to stalin’s great purges

Extra source: https://www.economist.com/special-report/2016/10/22/wheels-within-wheels

For editing: this has my voice appear more, but lacks the strong points that might be coming together more in the previous one. Like the previous one, it needs to be bolstered with strong evidence to support claims, but also as jumping off points to create the blog feel.

War, the ever present threat. Something that is so much second nature to humans it feels that it’s always in discussion and thought. Yet the ideas revolving around war have changed so much since the decades past and now. Exploring this connection in more vivid detail nets may help us define the socital factors that affect how we carry it out and view it overall.

It was the 1950s, WW2 had ended and many former soldiers had come home and made the start of the nuclear family. The mindset was that participating in the war was serving your country, you were proud of it and praised for it. It was the biggest of all the big deals. This mindset would however waver as time drew on. The Korean war, Vietnam, Iraq, even the cold war. These wars introduced a new, contemporary mindset. American society has become disallusioned by all these engagements. No longer is there honor and justice, war is war, and as such the discussion of it feels like one.  The earlier decades provided this set path to success, the education, the military, the family, the life. Now I’m not painting war as a good thing, but the admirable participation of war has waned as the reasons for fighting have become more bureacratic and indirect. It changes the entire landscape of both adult and young life, this is also painted well in Rebel without a cause. The lack of global issue that connotes a greater worldview can start to be percieved in the more reckless abandon some of the characters exhibit (source + analysis).  This makes more sense when note is taken that the movie premiered as the admirable war mindset begins to wane with the start of the Korean war, a little before hand. This idea of rebellious, devil-may-care life style has also shown its signs in the writing of On the Road. As the mindset of a fighting for your country loses its value, so have the people’s desires to live under the country’s ideals.  This can be argued as a key factor in the rise of the beat generation,  along with the greater need for the nuclear family outcome to be reaffirmed for tv viewers every day of the week. Many US demographics are affected by this change in mindset and these are just a few examples of how that has affected western media overall in the 1950s

Rebel without a cause

Halberstam timeline

Other strong sources

What is the ideal family structure? Do we still believe in the two kids, one spouse, with the father as the breadwinner for the ideal family model? Or have we swayed far from that structure? What could’ve happened to change it? What societal and cultural changes have affected this idea? In the 1940s, the global political and economic climate was disastrous. The American nation was still suffering from the repercussions of the great depression and the second world war threw the entire world order into disarray.  These factors contributed to the need for security or the goal of it in these trying times. Media throughout the 1950s reflected this with their distinct portrayal of the economically-stable family unit; the father provided for the family, the mother tended to the house and kids, and the kids were sociable and behaved well. Shows like Leave it to Beaver and The Adventures of Ozzie and Harriet helped epitomize this lifestyle and the all-American values it entails.  But how exactly did we move from this happy-go-lucky, ‘golly gee’ life to the diverse array of family and home life present in today’s American society? There’s a quite a variety of contributing factors that could be argued so I will just cite a few. Many factors that granted greater freedoms to women served to change the nuclear family model. The invention of 100% effective over the counter birth control for example, was monumental in the destruction in of the nuclear family model. While various types of contraceptives were experimented and being worked on, the innovation of the pill was huge and was able to truly divide the line between intercourse and procreation, granting much more independetive for womens’ reproductive rights. This served to both create more ideas on the process of child-rearing bring the viability of the nuclear family model to light. Another was the rapid progress made in the womens’ civil rights movement through the 1960s and 1970s. Action against domestive violence and the gender pay gap affected the role of women in the household and brought more women into the workplace, these two combined were yet another challenge to the nuclear family. The second wave of feminism as this era was termed overall continued to apply pressure to the role of women and how they are and should be percieved under a lense of free expression and sexuality. What everything listed has in common is they all in some way gave liberty to women allowing them to more decision in their life, this caused a lasting impact as well on the validity of the nuclear family as America’s main and goal of a lifestyle.

https://online.csp.edu/blog/family-science/the-evolution-of-american-family-structure nuclear family source

https://www.plannedparenthood.org/files/1514/3518/7100/Pill_History_FactSheet.pdf birth control source

https://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2010/03/12/the-1960s-a-decade-of-change-for-women womens  rights