Response Paper: Life as We Know It

Kenneth Malate
Professor Wexler
English 313
Response Paper
Admittedly, this was one of the harder essays I’ve ever had to write in my life. Not because of the paper itself, but because I for one am a connoisseur of the romantic comedy genre. I felt that by analyzing a movie from this genre would somehow persuade my mind to look at these movies in a different light. That wasn’t exactly the case. In fact, it seemed like every single movie that I’ve seen seems to make a lot more sense now, not only aesthetically, but also in a deeper sense of the movie making experience.
I was initially only interested in one movie. The movie was recently released. It is a film by Greg Berlanti called “Life as We Know It.” In the film the main protagonists, Holly and Messer, were chosen to be the caring adoptive parents of a little baby girl named Sophie after a tragic accident took the lives of her parents, who also happened to be the best friends of Holly and Messer. Here’s the catch, Holly and Messer and completely different people, emotionally and philosophically. In fact, they almost hate each other, especially after botching a blind date they were set up on just a few years back. This particular movie tackles a few topics we’ve discussed in class.
One of them is from the Romantic Comedy book by Tamar McDonald. According to McDonald, every single “traditional” romantic comedy movie follows a certain pattern. There’s a certain flow to every movie, so he states. He says that romantic comedy’s frameworks are designed as follows, “boy meets girl, boy loses girl, then boy regains girl [happily ever after follows].”(McDonald) Every single movie that attempts to achieve that “feel good” emotion from their audiences attempts this very said style of filmography. This movie is no different than any other. The interesting part though is that this is a classical romantic comedy that tries to mask itself as a non-traditional one. For instance, one would say that in a “typical” movie, you would see the main family as being from the same blood lines and same family structure, but not this movie. The marriage structure is basically non-existent, the child they both take care of is not even theirs, which makes the whole family structure whacked.
In a sense this movie does follow the traditional way most romantic comedies are intended to be. “The radical romantic comedy acknowledges that its characters are in search of meaningful and satisfying relationships; and sometimes to the contrary, that they also seek romance” (McDonald) They have the same thematic style of boy meets, loses and regains girl. What’s interesting of course is the movie’s on radical way of drafting out that same exact scenario. By analyzing movies, especially with the luxury of having the knowledge of the classical pattern of movies, it makes movie watching somewhat of a bore since most movies tends to fall into the unintended predictability most romantic comedies suffer through. Again, like every other aspect of this movie, this falls in with that same problem. It seemed like the discourse and the way the movie was served just prolonged the inevitable. The “meeting” was brief and short as it was shown in the beginning and it was quickly done through the introduction and opening credits. The in between of course is always the best part as this is where the main plot and conflict are shown.
Another topic that was discussed in class that was tackled in this movie is this the idea of the “title one has.” For instance, what makes someone a “mother.” Does it have to be something that is biological? In the movie, Holly technically gets custody of Sophie when her parents passed away and she ultimately becomes her “mother.”
Life as We Know It tackles two main ideas discussed in our class meetings. One is the idea of what a romantic comedy is against what a radical romantic comedy is. The other is Derrida’s relational definition of objects as they are seen with conjunction to the materials they are being compared with. Life as We Know It makes for a great movie considering it’s elemental components and dynamic story plot that makes it sort of a classic staple for a not-so-radical radical romantic comedy.


Citations
Life As We Know It. Dir. Greg Berlanti. Perf. Katherine Heigl, Josh Duhamel. Warner Bros, 2010. Film
McDonald, Tamar Jeffers. Romantic Comedy: Boy Meets Girl Meets Genre. New York:
Wallflower Press, 2007. Print.

Virgins. Mary Did it, Why Can't Andy?

There seems to be this social understanding that men are suppose to lose their virginity once they reach a certain age. It seems to be a damning factor since for some reason we are expected to lose our virginity once puberty sets in, unlike women, who were suppose to stay "pure" until the right time, whenever that is. I've always wondered why that is the case to begin with? Is it the dominance factor? Are men suppose to make their mark early on in life in order to establish dominance amongst the other men in their area? Is this to establish dominance over women in general? It's quite confusing really. Kimura said "Evidence also suggests that men have lower 'arousal thresholds' than women, who are able to pay greater focused attention to events and more swiftly than men." So that's it?! Men are essentially easier aroused than women are? Thus explains why men are expected to lose it faster! right? It still doesn't make sense..

Newsflash! Sex- Women Like it Too

McDonald discusses three main components of a Romantic Comedy which were the Visual, the Narrative Pattern and the Ideology. In the ideology aspect, we observe that there is always the quintessential character who plays the "ideal" one but of course, as many rom com fans, we later find out that the ideal ones are usually not the right ones for the main characters. That was certainly the case for the movie "10". We see George who was the "Ideal" bachelor. Women, money, the single life. He had a significant other waiting on him, yet he chose to chase Jenny around, who was considered his "ideal" woman. He then finds out she wasn't what he wanted and chooses to go back to Samantha, his girlfriend.
Watching this movie, we see a critical relevance to Jenny's character and the Sexual Revolution of the 60's. It's an interesting concept because socially, it is more understandable that the men are the ones sleeping around and craving the sexual relations. But in this movie, the woman's side is analyzed as we learn that women are just like men. This is further solidified by Kinsey who said, "women were already doing it and also quite enjoying it"

Ethnography Project

Observation:

I did my research at a Starbucks. In walks in this beautiful girl with a bag in one hand, and her phone in the other. She seems to be looking for someone, she searches both the front and the back of the store. After a thorough search of the place, she realizes that the person she was looking for was nowhere to be found. She then sits at a nearby table, takes out her phone and proceeds to text excessively. A few minutes later she gets a phone call and she informs the person that she has arrived and was waiting at the back of the store. After about twenty minutes or so, a guy well attired for a fist-pumping session, walks in with his hair gelled up desperately trying to hit the ceiling. He is adorned from head to toe with every accoutrement Ed Hardy has to offer. He walks in, winks at the girl, and walks up to the counter and orders his drink. Her excitement was obvious, she gets up and gives him a kiss and a hug. She then tells him what she wants and he pays. She didn’t even bother to reach for her cash, not even a slight gesture. That’s man-ly chivalry for you.

A few tables behind them sits a couple, each on their laptop. From time to time the guy would get up from his seat and go to where he can see his girlfriend’s computer screen and would burst into laughter. He did this a few times, and after every single laughing session, he would kiss her on the lips and return to where he was previously sitting. After every kiss, after he has sat down, his girlfriend would take his hand, squeeze it, and would give him the cutest smile, a smile that was so adorable, so bright, that it would make turn the darkest of nights into days. I later found out after a quick trip to the restroom that the girl was having a Skype session (webcam to webcam) with an older woman. I assume that to be her, or his, mother.

Every now and then, in the midst of all this, there’s always that person on his/her phone that would walk in talking to another from across the airwaves. A steady stream of people on their electronic devices that would wander into this lowly neighborhood Starbucks. It was either the wife calling and asking the husband for his dinner preferences. The husband checking in on the wife and kids. The college/high school student calling his significant other wondering where he/she is and if she fancied herself a drink. The “Electronic Elves” as I called them on my notes.

Analysis:
During my observations, one thing was prevalent, and that was the use of electronics or technology. In our society today, the major means of communications is through technology. Whether it be by the girl texting her boyfriend, or the couple talking to their parent or the hordes of “Electronic Elves” communicating with their loved ones, human interactions are now taken to a whole other level because of the use of electronics.

In class we discussed the many ways gender roles are portrayed. During my observation I didn’t really see any of that being done. Except of course for the girl waiting for her boyfriend. Usually, or at least socially, it is more acceptable for the man to be chivalrous and not leave the lady waiting, but all that was brought to status quo when the man paid for the drinks, which, going back to the old days, was always “socially expected”.
According to Derrida, the relationship between A always changes with accordance to the “thing” accompanying it. He says that “there are only differences within a language.” (Derrida) I saw that with the wife caring for her husband’s dinner preference. She was not just a wife, in relationship to her children, by definition she is also a mother. Derrida state that there’s no real binary relationship, or as Saussure would call it, “signage”, when it comes to one thing. Definitions are always changing with relations to the things around it.

Couples are only called couples because according to Saussure, a sign is composed of a signifier, which is the “sound-image,” and a signified, which is the “concept”. (Saussure 79). In every sense of the word, the couple sitting on the table, holding hands, is what makes them, at least socially, a “couple”. This of course is what makes them a couple. Because of what we see and what society tells us the definition of what a “couple” is. The affection they share is what people see.

Works Cited.
Derrida, Jacques. “Chapter 8: ‘Difference.’” 385-407. PDF File.
Saussure, Ferdinand De. “Chapter Two: Course in General Linguistics.” 76-89. PDF File.

I Did Not Have Sexual Relations With That Woman

This past week, many issues were tackled during the class lectures. The biggest one being the semiotic relationships between objects/concepts according to Saussure. According to Saussure, there is a definite relationship when it comes to objects. For instance, when one thinks of the word DOG, one automatically assumes the next word would be CAT. Similar with MAN, one automatically assumes WOMAN. But of course, with every great idea comes with its own set of debates. One person that challenged Saussure was Derrida, and I for one is on his side. I believe that everything is relational. Meaning, there's really not one perfect signage. The meaning of things can vary from one to another. Just ask a lawyer or a politician.

The Person Inside Me

For centuries now, man has endured billions of questions and perhaps the most daunting question a man can ever ask himself is this, "who am I?". Answering the question about one's inner self can be extremely difficult indeed. The movie American Psycho touches upon the subject of identity and self.



Patrick Bateman says in the movies' intro, "There is an idea of a Patrick Bateman, some kind of abstraction, but there is no real me, only an entity." He then goes on to say that the "real" Patrick doesn't even exist. That he's just a facade.

American Psycho tackles an interesting universal debate. That is, does an inner self really exist? Or are we just simply a product of our environment? Personally, I believe in the latter. Human beings are adaptive people, we blend in with our surroundings, thus creating a self that is fueled and molded by the products thrown at us. By that I mean, we are all the products we consume. We are the food we eat, the clothes we buy, the music we listen to. We are "individuals" molded by the products we choose.

What Is Love?