On page 18, author Paul Rutherford describes how the American consumer chooses to watch violent films. Although democracies may value pacifism, Rutherford describes a culture that “where the scenes of conflict are enjoyed as entertainment.” He uses several movies such as the Star Wars saga, the Terminators and Indina Jones as popular violent flicks. Because we predispose ourselves to violent action flicks, the idea of a “just” or “clean” war is not as difficult for the government to sell.
Although an adult viewer may not be as impressionable as a child, the continual stream of violent films may change that viewer’s attitude towards violence. What a person decides to listen to will shape who he will become. Choosing to be around a certain type of person will change a person’s habit. For instance, I had a friend who constantly said “like” or “totally.” As a result of hearing that a million times in one day, I picked it up. Now I can add talking like a valley girl to my long list of quirks.
In the same way, continually watching violence for numerous hours in a week will change a viewer’s attitude towards war. Although watching only one violent movie won’t change a person’s point of view immediately, watching many war movies might. Maybe the person who watched hours of violence would have less qualms with using violence in war. For in stance in a war situation rather than thinking about the civilians who lost their lives, loved-ones or homes, that person may automatically think about defeating the enemy. Meanwhile the person who hates violence on television would hate the idea of killing Iraqi people.
The violent media that seems so common on television makes the government’s job of selling a war a lot easier. Although the government should take some responsibility in persuading the public, the public should take responsibility for their own attitutes.
1 comment:
Hey Skittles!
I don’t think that Rutherford is concerned with the amount of violence in the entertainment industry as much as the type of violence that is depicted. He gave many examples, but let me give my own. G.I. Joes was a cartoon based on war, yet no one ever died. When a jet was blown up, the pilot would always eject and parachute out of the plane. In Rutherford’s example with James Bond, the viewer sees many explosions, but they don’t actually see those killed in the explosions. When we see the night vision cameras streaming to us from Iraq with the occasional burst of green light, we don’t realize that there are people dying with every explosion. Right there on CNN we are witnessing the execution of civilians, but it does not occur or register with the viewer. Why? Because we are more concerned about the capture of the super villains and never think about the real cost of a real war.
Post a Comment