1. Concept
The media artefact we are using to inform our topic today depicts Religion challenging scientific knowledge and research, we are going to apply power and spectacle to this.
Religion is presented as the dominant discourse and it therefore creates a concept of a clash between both ideologies. This results in a power struggle for what is perhaps the most critical decisions in the history of mankind. We are going to apply power and spectacle to this artefact.
2. Exemplification
The example we are showing you today is a clip from the film Contact (1997). It clearly displays a power economy between religion and scientific research, it shows how a critical decision is being made in a board room based on a candidates religious beliefs, instead of taking into consideration a logical approach, that instead, might have been made based upon the candidates abilities, knowledge and experience.
3. Context
During the movie there is a power struggle between two opposing discourses. The counter discourse is represented as the scientist, whereas the religious believer is represented as the dominant discourse, “95% of the population”. The 5% that aren’t are represented by the 5 scientists. The male scientist changes discourse to be approved by the masses and get to where he wants to be. We as the viewer know she is the best person for the job, but she is denied at the last moment, and steps aside to let the dominant discourse take control. The scientists used knowledge and fact as a form of power but this opposes the dominant discourses belief in faith. The believers in god do not put reason and rationality first and instead make decisions based on what the mass population want to hear instead of what they should hear.
These ideologies relate to Antonio Gramsci’s theory of hegemony, he believed that a dominant discourse is no more a truth than the counter discourse. He suggested that the discourse that gains the most attention in our lives, for example our ideology, wasn’t programmed within us at birth, it is all down to the surroundings we inhibit as we grow up.
This is also theroised by Faucalt as he explains that we live “with the reality with which we are presented”
For example, in the movie Dr. Arroway is brought up on science over faith. A dominant discourse such as religion in this film, is no more justifiable than a minority discourse which is represented by science, but because the dominant discourse within a culture can be so overwhelming in terms of its following, it causes those who oppose its ideology to feel left out, which causes them to conform to the totalising discourse of their society or remain unheard as an outcast figure. Those who openly conform gain more acceptance which leads to power.
Analysis
In the analysis part I’d like to include the fact that spectacle gives power through out the movie.
When the protagonist first discovers the signal and it is revealed to the masses a huge group of people/ the media turn up demanding answers. At this point in time the ball is in her court as it is. Her knowledge is power. However as her motives and intentions aren’t the same as the dominant discourse she is somewhat challenged by them and eventually overthrown by someone who matches the dominant discourse’s ways of thinking.
Throughout the movie spectacle helps reinforce power.
Domination” is not “that solid and global kind of domination that one person exercises over others, or one group over another, but the manifold forms of domination that can be exercised within society”
Foucalut (ibid, p.96)
Wikiversity
The film does not consider other discourses outside of religion and science, it is presented as a one against one encounter. The film doesn’t interpret a perspective from the public and therefore denotes a sense of distance between the important characters in the film and the population across the globe that they represent.
The science in this film can be interpreted as being religious metaphorically. For example the Scientist makes contact with the multi billionaire who funded her project, but first must meet with his associates, as he lives on an aero plane, the man from the sky, represented by his disciples.
4.Critique(IAN)
The film ends with a distinct lack of opinion, the unity between characters with opposing discourses is something which ties this film up, this happens in many other popular Hollywood texts. Therefore it is a safe text and lacks controversy and fails to challenge the beliefs of its audience.
In Mist everyone is logical and does not believe that what is happening is Gods punishment, it is a science experiment gone wrong.
There is only one religious woman in the group that is trapped, who is preaching and everyone else is mocking. The mocking stops and everyone starts to believe her when they loose their sense of logic and reason. Therefore her discourse becomes the dominant one and those who don’t follow are sacrificed.
5.appropriation
We believe that this is an appropriate medium for the Western culture because film is one of the most popular forms of communication and because if you take in visual and audio information together the audience takes in more of the message than if only one of the mediums were used. It is not a ideal medium for the masses because it is too ‘westernized’ and film is not always taken as a serious medium, there is too much room for fanstasy.
Watching the film we are assuming that the film has been marketed for western audiences we came to this conclusion due to the fact that most of the actors within the film have won Oscars and are well known within the western film audiences. The ideologies presented in this film are appropriate to western culture because the issues discussed in this film are issues discussed within western cultures.
Its is appropriate as a film as it is one of the most popular and successful mediums, visual and sound are the most popular way to take in information, kinetic learning.
The film is now world wide, which makes it less appropriate due to countries without beliefs viewing, which lowers the appropriation of the film
Her losing power to a spectacle, is this an appropriate way to show the loss of power.
Science within this text is portrayed as a minority discourse, in reality this may not be true, but within that minority a few highly skilled people are able to trigger a huge pandemic. The religious ideology on the other hand, focuses on the spectacular, they represent the majority, and require scale to be successful, there are far more of them than scientists. Therefore they are at the forefront of government consideration, a Hegemony. The scientist whilst in the possession of power and knowledge at the start of the film is soon over thrown by the dominant discourse as she doesn’t share the same motives and beliefs of the mass population. Spectacle reinforces power.
The films treatment of religion and science may also relate to real life political debates, the fact that 11 candidates are running for the American government this year may surprise some of you. That is because only two are widely televised, this demonstrates a framing, a careful consideration by the media in what to represent to its people. In terms of their beliefs, we will see candidates stretching the truth, they do this in order to increase their following and win more votes.
This was demonstrated in the board room scene you saw earlier.
This film pushed religion to the extreme by displaying bomb suicide and radical interpretations of God. It interprets Religion as an obstacle, a restriction on science in the way of social development. It challenges “our” moral and cherished beliefs. Is this scene appropriate to be shown world wide as this does not happen and is not understood worldwide?
6. Daniel talk on Feng shui
I believe every single discourse or spectacle in the film we argued above can relate to our real world. As we all know, Feng shui, Taoism, and Buddhism were flourishing in ancient China. Nowadays, these mainstream religion are discarded as superstition because of none scientific basis. In rural area of mainland China, people giving up the opportunity being educated; Burn down their houses because of ‘wrong’ facing direction; Refuse to see doctor even they are dying. Obviously, these religious ideas ruining people’s life which makes the big red signal sparkled in China.
However, there is another voice among socialists in China. They attributed milk scandal to inadequacy of religion. Due to the discouragement of religion believe, there is no restriction among Milk suppliers in morality. I believe the saying makes a little sense. Science and religion is a double-edged sword. Which side are you going to use. Balance before you move.
7. Reflection
To summaries, Science seeks the truth by constantly disproving itself until it works. Whilst religion keeps us away from the fear of the unknown. It binds us by our beliefs and imbues fear in us.
The film concludes by interpreting science and religion as a contradiction yet both opposing discourses end in unity with each other, favoring neither discourse.
The government are shown concealing key information which may cause a shift in ideological beliefs. This demonstrates the governments’ ability to hide information if it has the potential to disrupt a dominant discourse.
8.Re making
With such ideologies as the religion versus science debate, perhaps the form of a documentary would be more appropriate to convey this message. This way professional opinions and true facts could be stated to let the audience make a more informed decision for themselves (as opposed to the passive ending to the film where an answer is simply brushed off). A documentary could also look a wider range of themes as opposed to JUST religion and science. It could also explore the ideas and thoughts of someone with less power and knowledge as opposed to just those shown as possessing power in the film. This would mean that all audience members could be more equally represented.
Conclusion
In conclusion we believe that a documentary would be a more suitable medium to discuss such ideologies because it would reach a wider audience, not just the western, Hollywood film watchers. However, there are always going to be issues caused by this topic such as opposing discourses that aren’t represented within the film. This could cause some audiences to reject it altogether. There are also always going to be distribution problems. Neither a film nor a documentary will be able to be watched by some of the more remote members of the world’s population, and this also applies to any media form.
Contact
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-FbSPXC4btU&feature=related
The Mist
