Check out new podcasts made by your classmates! This course (Fall 2021), may have been the best yet!

Learn about Paul Bunyan, the Kitchenaid Mixer, Hershey, Smokey the Bear and more!

It was August 8th, 2013 when I first saw my favorite band in concert. The Killers were on a worldwide tour for their newest album “Battle Born.” I remember hearing the first note and tearing up. I remember screaming “You’re gonna miss me when I’m gone” as loud as I possibly could. The song was “Miss Atomic Bomb” and I will never forget that moment in time. But what does this have to do with American icons? I’m glad you asked because it has EVERYTHING to do with modern day representation of the atomic bomb.

Sure, I could go on and on about the references to the atomic bomb made in both the song and music video, but there are some particular mentions I want to explore. First of all, the song is called “Miss Atomic Bomb”, so who was she? Well, it’d be helpful to set the scene by saying that The Killers are from Las Vegas. That being said, the Yucca Flat just outside of Las Vegas hosted 739 nuclear tests from 1951 to 1992.[1] Because Vegas was a blossoming city, the chamber of commerce decided to provide a unique tourist experience by capitalizing on the bombings through advertisements and calendars.[2] Soon Vegas became the hot spot for all things atomic. Thus, Miss Atomic Bomb was created.

Miss Atomic Bomb was a representation of Vegas. She was a showgirl in a mushroom cloud bikini used to pull tourists to the city. Though her name was supposedly Lee Merlin, there is little information about the original Miss Atomic Bomb. This is a fascinating tale as the U.S. had just recently detonated two atomic bombs that decimated two cities. Despite which narrative the American public was exposed to, they still found a way to capitalize on it and build Las Vegas into the city it is today. The commercialization of the atomic bomb is wholly American in nature as we value capitalism and ingenuity. Miss Atomic Bomb is not only significant because of her association with the bomb itself, but with her representation in present day culture, she could be an icon as well.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qok9Ialei4c

1. https://www.buzzfeed.com/copyranter/lee-merlin-miss-atomic-bomb-1957?utm_term=.dmK8lvE6B#.iqn043x9z
2. https://www.popularmechanics.com/science/energy/a20536/who-are-you-miss-atomic-bomb/

During their time in the White House as the First Lady and President, Jackie and John F. Kennedy changed everything about how Americans see their First Family.  Of course, their visibility as they arrived in Washington had owed a great deal to the fact that it coincided with the growth in popularity of television, but a huge factor in their popularity and their cultural relevance was how Jackie wanted herself and her family to be represented.

[1]

Jackie’s famous style has become iconic in its own right.  The way she presented herself gave rise to the Kennedy’s image of royalty, or as close as they could get in the United States.  The focus on fashion in the White House was something that Americans had never seen before and naturally led to high levels of fascination.  Despite things lurking beneath the public’s point of view, such as John F. Kennedy’s poor health and myriad of extramarital affairs, Jackie Kennedy was great at exhibiting elegance and poise.  Even in the face of tragedy, she exuded these traits.

The day of JFK’s assassination, she was adorned in her now famous pink jacket and pillbox hat.  During Lyndon B Johnson’s swearing in session following the traumatic moment of his death, she kept her outfit on, still stained in her John’s blood.  It is a wonder that she kept her cool enough to choose to show the world what had happened to her husband.  Newly widowed and covered in her husband’s blood, she remained the Jackie Kennedy people had expected.  During the planning of the funeral procession, she still showed her strength and her awareness that the image of her husband’s time as president was paramount.  She fought to have a dramatic and marvelous funeral to honor JFK because she truly believed he deserved it.

[2]

Jackie Kennedy set the new standard for First Ladies both in the spotlight and behind the scenes by being extremely marketable and popular to the average citizen and by being strong willed and resolute with her family and peers.  She created a feeling of majesty for the First Family and engineered the viewpoint of JFK’s term as president as the United States of America’s Camelot.  Her achievements for the image of her family are something that future First Families will strive for, but in all likelihood will never attain.

 

[1] Harper’s Bazaar, https://www.harpersbazaar.com/fashion/trends/g1370/jackie-kennedy-onassis-style-0111/?slide=24

[2] http://yournewswire.com/jfk-jackie-bloodstained-suit/

When I learned about the Kennedy Assassination in high school, I read a report from a British journalist, who attended Kennedy’s funeral and claimed that “Jacqueline Kennedy has today given her country the one thing it has always lacked, and that is majesty.”[1] This statement left me with a deep first impression about this prominent first lady. Historian Michael Hogan points out that after President Kennedy was assassinated, not only did Jackie bury his body at Arlington National Cemetery, she also helped to establish the Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts in Washington D.C. and the Kennedy Library and Museum in Boston.[2] Jackie wanted the American public to remember President Kennedy as a war hero and a charming intellectual leader who demonstrated an appreciation of art. However, Jackie played a critical role to construct the public memory of President Kennedy even before he was assassinated.

During Kennedy’s presidency, Jackie had become an American icon through her fashionable appearance. Jackie’s iconic fashion reflected Americans’ obsession with the appropriate demonstration of gender. Her elegant appearance demonstrated how her gender role became an important element that made a positive influence on her husband’s collective memory. Oleg Cassini was Jackie’s costume designer and he claimed that Jackie’s clothes “could reinforce the message of her husband’s administration.” [3] In addition, her role as a wife and a mother of two children helped the public to link President Kennedy with the image of a loving husband and father.[4]  Along with the image of President Kennedy’s charming youth, Jackie’s iconic fashion style reinforced a positive public memory of President Kennedy. Jackie presented a new fashion look that combines American style with European elegance, which established an appealing American version of royalty and turned herself into a graceful American “queen”.[5] Because Jackie’s dignified fashionable appearance presented the vigorous image of the United States as a powerful modern nation, her elegant costumes emphasized the growth of American power and the prosperity during Kennedy’s presidency. Jackie played a significant role to help construct the image of President Kennedy and herself as a flawless couple and perfect family. This idealized version of American life appealed to the American public and strengthened people’s positive memory of President Kennedy.

Similar to the way that Jacqueline Kennedy became an icon of fashion, social emphasis on the wardrobe choices of former first lady Michelle Obama also shows how female icon can be associated with the expectations of gender appearance in American society. Even though they came from different backgrounds, Michelle Obama is considered the second Jacqueline Kennedy due to the comparison of their fashion choices.[6] The dressing style of both first ladies have made different impacts on the American society in their times. For instance, Jackie’s strapless gown became the popular “Jackie Look” across the country in the 1960s.[7] The “modified A-line gown of pink-and-white silk” that she wore in a White House dinner became the most eye-catching news of the event.[8] Likewise, Michelle Obama wore a “custom-made pink and gold silk dress” during her speech at the Democratic National Convention in 2012 and it became the best-selling dress of the designer.[9] Another dress, the “black dress with big red poppies” that she wore during the 50th anniversary of the 1963 march on Washington D.C., is displayed at the National Museum of African-American History and Culture.[10] These examples show how the American public obsession with the dressing choices of first ladies can turn them into fashion icons. The connections between notable female icons and the way they present themselves reflect the social expectations placed on the appropriate appearance of females.

Jacqueline Kennedy and Michelle Obama are both beloved first ladies throughout American history. Moreover, they are popular female icons that represent the American fashion style. Jacqueline Kennedy demonstrates how gender role became an element in shaping the public memory of President Kennedy. Jacqueline Kennedy and Michelle Obama rose to the status of fashion icon based on similar characteristics. The historic representations of both first ladies demonstrate a potential social expectation of gender appearance in American society.

 

[1] Peggy Noonan, The Time of Our Lives: Collected Writings (New York: Grand Central

Publishing, 2015), 210.

[2] Michael J. Hogan, The Afterlife of John Fitzgerald Kennedy: A Biography (Cambridge:

Cambridge University Press, 2017), 5.

[3] Ibid., 33.

[4] Ibid., 41.

[5] custom matching couples

[6] Scott Whitlock, “ABC Hosts Swoon Over ‘American Icon’ Michelle Obama, Compare Her to

Jackie Kennedy,” Media Research Center. November 10, 2010, http://archive2.mrc.org/bias-alerts/abc-hosts-swoon-over-american-icon-michelle-obama-compare-her-jackie-kennedy  (accessed April 4, 2018).

[7]  Hogan, The Afterlife of John Fitzgerald Kennedy, 33.

[8]  Ibid., 34.

[9] Vanessa Friedman, “What Michelle Obama Wore and Why It Mattered,” New York Times,

January 14, 2017, https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/14/fashion/michelle-obama-first-lady-fashion.html (accessed April 4, 2018).

[10] Ibid.

BY OWEN MCCUE

Sitting in class earlier this week and listening to the conversation on Barbie, I was hoping to find a topic for my blog. Then someone threw out the phrase, ‘Barbie World’ and something clicked. “I’m a Barbie girl, in a Barbie world”[1] … I’d heard that line before.

The line comes from the Danish dance-pop group Aqua’s 1997 song ‘Barbie Girl.’ Though the song was voted the worst song of the 1990s by Rolling Stone magazine’s Readers Poll in 2011, the catchy tune is one I’m sure almost everyone knows.[2] I remember hearing it and singing along quite a few times growing up.

“Playfully naughty Euro-dance ditty,” is how Billboard’s Chuck Taylor described the song in August 1997.[3] Take a look at the music video, and I think that would be a good description. The song and the video are both cartoonish in a way, yet very, very sexualized.

The music video is full of pink. The female, who is supposed to be Barbie, has lots of makeup and several different outfits throughout. The band obviously does not see Barbie as some type of symbol for feminism or an innocent children’s toy. In fact, it’s quite the opposite. This was all lost on me as I grew up listening to it, but examining the lyrics now… Yikes.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZyhrYis509A

You can brush my hair, undress me everywhere.

I’m a blond bimbo girl, in a fantasy world. / Dress me up, make it tight, I’m your dolly.

Make me walk, make me talk, do whatever you please. / I can act like a star, I can beg on my knees.[4]

Those are all lines sung by a female member of the band, playing the role of Barbie in the song and video. The male voice, or Ken, is even less subtle with his sexual innuendos, starting the song with the line, “Do you want to go for a ride?” which is supplemented with a wink in the video.[5] I don’t think he is asking Barbie if she wants to hop in his car. That’s made pretty obvious with the later line, “You’re my doll, rock’n’roll, feel the glamor in pink. / Kiss me here, touch me there, hanky panky.”[6]

The way Barbie is portrayed in this song reminds me of Barbie’s origins. She was a knock off from the “Bild Lilli” doll, a German doll for adult males that was essentially a “three dimensional pin-up.”[7] This song to me feels like a sarcastic take on the American Icon, highlighting all the damaging stereotypes Barbie portrays.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hwu6NrxVVFk

One of the most interesting parts of this song is that Mattel originally sued the band for copyright infringement.[8] The makers of the children’s toy were not so happy that their product name was being associated in this sexual manner. The case went all the way to the Supreme Court. It was ruled that the song was parody and therefore did not violate any copyright laws.

The reason I may remember having heard it so much growing up is that Mattell actually used the song in one of its marketing campaigns in 2009.[9] Though the lyrics were certainly altered a bit, the hook remained the same: “I’m a Barbie girl, in the Barbie world / Life in plastic, it’s fantastic.” I can understand the idea of having a catchy song associated with your product, but that just screams all kinds of weird. I think the saga of the ‘Barbie Girl’ song fits right into some of the other interesting chapters of Barbie’s “playfully naughty” history.

[1] Aqua. “Barbie Girl.” Released May 1997. In Universal, MCA.

[2] “Readers Poll: The Worst Songs of the Nineties.” Rolling Stone. August 31, 2011. Accessed March 29, 2018. https://www.rollingstone.com/music/pictures/readers-poll-the-worst-songs-of-the-nineties-20110831/1-aqua-barbie-girl-0315695.

[3] Taylor, Chuck. “Danish breakout group Aqua toys with U.S. pop success with its ‘Barbie Girl.'(Air Waves)(Column).” Billboard, 30 Aug. 1997, p. 92+. Academic OneFile, http://link.galegroup.com/apps/doc/A19845280/AONE?u=temple_main&sid=AONE&xid=595116d9. Accessed 29 Mar. 2018.

[4] Aqua. “Barbie Girl.”

[5] Ibid.

[6] Ibid.

[7] Lord, M. G. Forever Barbie: The Unauthorized Biography of a Real Doll. Fredericton, N.B.: Goose Lane Editions, 2004.

[8] Elliott, Stuart. “Years Later, Mattel Embraces ‘Barbie Girl’.” The New York Times. August 26, 2009. Accessed March 29, 2018. https://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/08/26/years-later-mattel-embraces-barbie-girl/.

[9] Elliott, Stuart.

 

According to Mirror Mirror: Eating Disorder Help, if Barbie was a real woman, she would be 5’9” and weigh 120 pounds[1]. Her body fat percentage would be so low that she would not be able to menstruate.[2] So, if we allow children to play with such dolls, are we supplying them with unnecessary ideals of the female body?

Many Barbie dolls take on the average character of the happy cheerleader or shopping Barbie as seen above. In M.G. Lorde’s Forever Barbie, “For every fluffy blond cheerleader who leaps breast forwards into an exaggerated gender rule, there is a recovering bulimic who refers to wear dresses and blames Barbie for her ordeal.” [3]In a way, Barbie has set up these gender roles and standards for women of all ages. Women feel the need to be skinny based on the standards that society and the media lays out for them. I also feel that, Barbie has enforced this idea that pink is only a girls color, as seen in her many outfits and in your local Barbie toy aisle. So, it is extremely frowned for any boy to like the color pink, because it would automatically make him ‘girly.’

In one study, girls who played with Barbie reported lower body image and a greater desire to be thinner than girls who played with other toys. It all come down to the question if Barbie is teaching children that to be liked, you have to be thin, white and blonde.[4] Personally, I never felt the need to look this way, but I did feel inferior to people who were white and have blonde hair. The reason for this was because I didn’t look like the popular toy that other girls played with, so I had no representation out there that showed the color of my  skin had beauty in it too. I am glad now that Mattel is introducing dolls that have different body types and skin tones, but is this representation of diversity better late than never?

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QMP2T5dwOtg

There are perhaps hundreds and thousands of girls and even women that dream of looking like Barbie. Of those those thousands, there are probably hundreds of females that have tried. In the video above, this is just one of the many cases where women have undergone many surgeries in order to look like the famous doll. She event states that people have called her plastic and fake, but she doesn’t care what they think as they are all just “jealous.” She has also set up a savings account of $20,000 for her daughter in case she wants plastic surgery as well. I am not for or against plastic surgery, as I feel that if you are not satisfied with the way you look, you have every right to change it. However, when it comes to looking like a plastic doll, I am not sure where the line

 

 

[1] “Barbie and Body Image,” Mirror Mirror Eating Disorder Help, last modified 2016, accessed March 29, 2018 https://www.mirror-mirror.org/barbie-and-body-image.htm

[2] Ibid.

[3]  Lord, M. G. Forever Barbie: The Unauthorized Biography of a Real Doll. Fredericton, N.B.: Goose Lane Editions, 2004. 14.

[4] “Barbie and Body Image,” Mirror Mirror Eating Disorder Help, last modified 2016, accessed March 29, 2018 https://www.mirror-mirror.org/barbie-and-body-image.htm

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l1vnsqbnAkk

I first saw this advertisement in my Mosaics II class as we were reading Mary Wollstonecraft’s Vindication of the Rights of Woman. My first thought was about how these little girls were inspired by Barbie to become what they want to be. However, after a lengthy discussion with my classmates and several more times viewing the ad, I found it to be beyond problematic.

First of all, the reactions of the adults in the video are extremely troubling. Everyone is laughing at these little girls. Sure it is cute and a little bit silly, but they are completely discrediting the possibility that these girls are extremely intelligent and can lecture about the brain or can lead a tour about dinosaurs.

Assuming that the dialogue of the girls was scripted and the reactions of the adults were genuine, I find another flaw in the ad. These little girls say some of the most ridiculous, off the wall, and unintelligent lines. In the scene where the girl is a veterinarian she says something about her cat being able to fly. That is completely damaging to everything Barbie claims to stand for. How can this girl be taken seriously if she is portrayed as being unintelligent and incapable of performing her job?

As far as my critique of what is shown in the ad, I have one last problem to address. At the end of the ad, the girl is still playing with her Barbie dolls. This strikes me as problematic because it is as if she was just playing pretend the whole time she was pursuing her dreams. It’s as if she will always be pretending. It would have been way more effective to show women in the careers depicted as well instead of just making the thought of being a soccer coach or a professor seem like a pipe dream.

Today we are living in a world where gender identities are fluid. This advertisement completely ignores that notion. Sure, we are living in a time where Barbie is seen as a sign of empowerment for females, but in a society with non-binary genders it is important to recognize that anyone can feel empowered by Barbie. There is even DNA evidence to prove that more than two genders exist. [1] And of course I cannot forget to mention that Barbie in the ad and historically speaking has features that are humanly unattainable. [2] The girls in the ad are only playing with thin, traditionally shaped Barbies (though there is an African American one in the mix). The current advertising style and feminist ideals of Barbie are quite antiquated and unrepresentative of the population she currently inspires.

[1] Lord, M. G. Forever Barbie: The Unauthorized Biography of a Real Doll. Fredericton, N.B.: Goose Lane Editions, 2004. 14.

[2] Ibid.

 

When I first found out that we were going to discuss American Gothic in class, I had no idea that we were going to talk about this painting. I didn’t think that the name of the painting would be American Gothic, because the only thing that seemed to make it “gothic” was the window. I was curious about what my friends would think about the painting because I knew that their analysis would be different from those in the class. I say this because I feel that as a class, we are more concerned with deeper meaning associated with the painting, such as the meaning of every little detail in the painting like the design of the house. However, I knew that my friends would be more honest and genuine about what their first thoughts on the painting. My first friend said that the painting made him think of, “angry white racist people.” He said he thought this because it looked the painting was based on a southern couple on a farm.

It is a common stereotype that people living in the south are “racist rednecks,” or that some families may even marry within their family. This can be seen when my friend took this stereotype even farther, and asked me if the couple in the painting were either. “related, married, or both,” and that they look like Trump supporters. I found it very interesting that such a plain looking painting could spark so much thought and connections to these stereotypical values of Americans in the South.

Another friend told me that the painting made her feel bored as it is very neutral and looks like just a simple life. A different friend told me she had no opinion of it at all because it is just such a boring painting. I found it very interesting that one friend though this painting screamed racism and anger, while the two other friends thought of it as nothing at all. Their views may show that they think the average southern American couple is a redneck, or a boring farmer. Everyone interprets art in different ways, but if an interpretation is so far off from the original artist’s intention, does that make the interpretation wrong? Grant Wood did not intend for people to believe that he used this painting to “satirize the narrow-mindedness and repression that has been said to characterize Midwestern culture.”[1] He denied any accusations of this. Yet, people still make the connection that this painting of a small town life of a boring couple on their farm. I think that because this painting can have so many different interpretations and is so ambiguous  it makes it an icon. The painting can portray a couple that is “rich or poor, urban or rural, young or old, radical or redneck,”[2] but in the end, what the painting truly portrays, is that it is American.

 

[1]The Art institute of Chicago. “American Gothic.” Art Access: Modern and Contemporary Art. Accessed March 15, 2018. http://www.artic.edu/aic/collections/exhibitions/Modern/American-Gothic.

[2]  Wanda Corn, The Birth of a National Icon: Grant Wood’s American Gothic (Chicago: The Art Institute of Chicago, 1983) 272.