Keeping the Memory Alive by Connor Pagkalinawan

The painting American Gothic by Grant Wood is one of the most recognizable images in American history, despite not many people even knowing its name. Though, what exactly granted the image its iconic status? This question is still being asked today, as not many people understand why it is so memorable. It is not the most intricate piece of art in the world, nor does it feature the most beautiful subjects. I believe it is able to continue to remain a notable piece of art because of its ability to have its meaning interpreted in numerous ways, thus be continually discussed throughout time. Wood originally painted the portrait “to be a positive statement about rural American values, an image of reassurance at a time of great dislocation and disillusionment,” yet it is still “often understood as a satirical comment on the Midwestern character”.[1] Regardless, its satirical background is what stuck, along with a variety of other explanations, and it became a staple of American art. Another notable American piece of artwork with an ambiguous message is Edward Hooper’s Nighthawk (pictured below). Like American Gothic, it can currently be found in the Art Institute of Chicago, as well as being absent of any spectacular components, for it is a simple diner with four inhabitants on a street corner, yet millions of people still gravitate towards it. Some do note “Hopper’s understanding of the expressive possibilities of light playing on simplified shapes gives the painting its beauty.”[2] I believe that what makes it stand out from any other painting, similarly to Wood’s piece, is the lack of any explicit message being conveyed. Even if there was something on the mind of the artist while creating it, people can still translate the image in their own way. I am not even too sure about why I like Nighthawks so much, but it still manages to resonate with me and be one of my favorite scenes. Another huge contributor to the two artworks’ fame are the parodies created inspired by these two paintings. Their iconic statuses are so prevalent that they are often recreating using cartoon characters, celebrities, or even political figures to signify topics ranging from pop culture to the political climate. Boulevard of Broken Dreams by Gottfried Helnwein, which reimagines Nighthawks with Elvis Presley, Marilyn Monroe, Humphrey Bogart, and James Dean, is iconic in its own right. People today seeing their favorite figures inserted into these classics keeps their memory alive. While it can be argued that parodies degrade the value or significance of the paintings, it should be seen as an act of flattery. The originals are still acknowledged for their importance to this day, so people see them as worthy of being spoofed.

[1] “American Gothic.” Art Institute of Chicago. http://www.artic.edu/aic/collections/artwork/6565

[2] “Nighthawks.” Art Institute of Chicago. http://www.artic.edu/aic/collections/artwork/111628

The “Stereotypical Southern Couple” in American Gothic by Alyssa Deguzman

 

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.

The Wizard of Oz and Animal Farm

When I first heard that we were going to cover the Wizard of Oz in this class as an American Icon, I was very excited.  Like many, I grew up an avid fan of the movie and the story and to this day it is still a once a year tradition in my household to watch the movie as a family.

I remember learning in high school about how the Wizard of Oz is symbolic of the populist movement, and we touched upon this again in class on Monday.  Things like the silver shoes representing the move to a silver-based dollar, the yellow brick road representing the current gold standard, the tinman representing the industrialized worker of the east, the representing scarecrow the farmer of the Midwest, the Cowardly Lion representing politician William Jennings Bryan, and the two Wicked Witches representing corrupt business interests.[i]  This added a whole new level to the story that I thought for so long was so simple–a story about a girl wanting to go back home–and frankly I was very intrigued by it.  As a student of history and someone who enjoys politics, it was interesting to see how Baum’s version of the Cowardly Lion compared with William Jennings Bryan.  A lion is obviously a very powerful animal and often considered to be the king of the jungle, and Bryan himself was a very physically imposing man with very powerful oratory skills. [ii] However, in the Wizard of Oz, the lion is cowardly because he is very fearful of everything which is why he joined Dorthey, Toto, the Tinman, and the Scarecrow on their journey to see the great and powerful Oz in the Emerald City to make him more confident and powerful (the ironic thing is that he also possessed these traits, but never realized it).  Bryan could be considered cowardly by some of his critics because of his anti-imperialist views on the Spanish-American War.

Image result for william jennings bryan the cowardly lion

As someone who really enjoys politics and history, the idea of having an American classic like the Wizard of Oz representing a political movement was very exciting and made me wonder if there were any other instances of well known books, movies, or television shows having so much political symbolism.  The one thing that kept coming to my head was the novel Animal Farm.  While Author George Orwell may have been of English descent, I would think many people consider it to be almost an American Institution now as it is taught in almost every high school throughout the country.  Just reading Animal Farm without looking at any of the symbolism, it looks to be a simple story regarding corruption, conflict, and morals.  However, just like with the Wizard of Oz, once you add in the symbolism the story takes on an entire new meaning as it represents the Communist Revolution in Russia.  Characters like Old Major come to represent the father of Communism Karl Marx through the wisdom he imparts on the younger animals, Napoleon represents long time Soviet Union leader Joseph Stalin and his selfish, shrewd, and calculating rise to power, Snowball represents Trotsky, who both were ousted and killed by their more powerful counterpart, and how Boxer, the trusty horse who never questioned his superiors or their motives, represents the hardworking peasant class that never questioned Stalin and untimely kept him in power.[iii]

Image result for animal farm

This made me wonder why authors decide to engage their audiences using a simple topic to talk about such a complex issue through symbolism.  I understand from previous English classes that using symbolism is effective because it creates a new meaning for the reader and a much more powerful and clear image, so does that factor into their decision here?  Do the authors use symbolism instead of just stating the obvious to increase popularity of their book–after all, how many people really want to read only about politics?  Whatever the reason may be, I am very glad that both Baum and Orwell were innovative and creative enough to think of some of these motifs, symbols, and analogies because it really enhanced my reading experience by adding an entirely new dimension.

[i] Harmon, Julie . “Symbolism of the ‘Wizard of Oz’.” Wicked Tour. September 7, 2009. Accessed March 01, 2018. http://wickedtour.net/symbolism-of-the-wizard-of-oz.

 

[ii] 2016, Claire Jerry November 3. “Did the Cowardly Lion give the greatest campaign speech of all time? Quite possibly.” National Museum of American History. March 28, 2017. Accessed March 01, 2018. http://americanhistory.si.edu/blog/cowardly-lion-campaign-speech.

 

[iii] LitCharts. “Animal Farm Characters.” LitCharts. Accessed March 01, 2018. https://www.litcharts.com/lit/animal-farm/characters.

 

Not in Kansas Anymore

Last semester, I had to design covers for a series of books that had been banned in America. They didn’t have to be new releases, or recently banned, and they could have been banned for any reason. After several hours of preliminary research, I discovered that The Wonderful Wizard of Oz had been banned in America because it contained references to magic. I researched The Wonderful Wizard of Oz, eager to learn more. The pull-quote that I wanted to use on the back of the dust jacket- “I’ve a feeling we’re not in Kansas anymore,” was nowhere to be found. I soon realized that the book itself was quite different from the movie. The most famous quote, and, I would argue, the longest lasting cultural reference from The Wizard of Oz, was not written by L. Frank Baum at all. It was written by an MGM screenwriter.[1] The other cultural relic, “There’s no place like home,” is a direct reference to this quote:

 

“No matter how dreary and gray our homes are, we people of flesh and blood would rather live there any in any other country, be it every so beautiful. There is no place like home.”[2]

However, this quote has a very different feel to it than the incantation which takes Movie Dorothy home. Instead of a simple, wistful wish, the book version of Dorothy disparages “home” as boring, dreary, gray, and sad.

 

“We’re not in Kansas anymore,” is a rather flippant quote when compared to the book’s many quotes about perseverance, grit, teamwork, regret, fear, etc. It has become an American icon unto itself. There are books which rely on this quote for their titles, TV shows which utilize it in dialogue or episode names, and movies which reference it in conversations between characters. Other reference-types include newspaper articles, songs and albums, video games, anime and comic books.[3]

 

Movie The Matrix

Cypher

Avatar

Colonel Quaritch

Little Shop of Horrors:

Audrey / Audrey II

Honey, I Shrunk the Kids

Amy / Nick

TV Show Dukes of Hazzard Power Rangers MythBusters 90210
Song Big Country- We’re Not In Kansas Mystery Train- Bon Jovi The Farm- Aerosmith 305 to My City- Drake, Detail

 

The allegory of the Populist movement as described and discussed by Henry M. Littlefield is compelling and interesting interpretation.[4] I think most Americans have not read the book, and most of those who have are not historians. This meaning might have been very important and visible in 1900 when the book was released, but I think it is lost on most people now. The movie is the biggest cultural reference, and has changed many of the key elements of the book which Littlefield’s interpretation relies upon.

 

Roger Ebert’s movie review of The Wizard of Oz references the movie’s emphasis on bumbling adults who are either not paying attention to children, or are too inept to help them. Ebert’s interpretation is that the basis for the movie’s appeal is the pluckiness of children, the anxiety of not being taken care of and the personal growth of realizing you can take care of yourself. Children can relate to this story arc, and grownups can look fondly back on their own life and revisit their childhood.[5] Littlefield’s interpretation is different; that the Wizard of Oz does not represent grownups, he represents the government. It is a far less comforting message to consider that the government is inept, careless, and distracted.[6] I believe that this interpretation is especially important now. During the 2016 election cycle, both Bernie Sanders and Donald Trump ran on the platform that “business as usual,” was not working. Hilary Clinton, a woman who has been deeply involved in politics for decades, was distrusted because of her political involvement.[7] Learning about Littlefield’s interpretation from Rainie’s presentation and class discussion, I couldn’t help but to notice the similarities between the turn of the nineteenth century sentiment and now. The distrust of immigration, the anger at the government, as well as the swaths of America which felt left behind, all seem to be contemporary issues. There are no easy answers now, as there were none then. I believe it is important to reevaluate Henry M. Littlefield’s interpretation of the book. As an icon, it can do more good than the movie.

 

As an aside: I found this strange wedding planning blog that says most brides’ favorite movie is the Wizard of Oz, so a bride planning her wedding should consider poppies for her floral arrangements. Pretty weird since all the characters almost die in the poppy field.

http://www.weddingwindow.com/blog/oh-poppies/

 

Works Cited

 

Shmoop Editorial Team. “The Wonderful Wizard of Oz Home Quotes Page 1.” Shmoop. November 11, 2008. Accessed March 01, 2018. https://www.shmoop.com/wonderful-wizard-of-oz-book/home-quotes.html.

 

Ebert, Roger. “The Wizard of Oz Movie Review (1939) | Roger Ebert.” RogerEbert.com. December 22, 1996. Accessed March 01, 2018. https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/great-movie-the-wizard-of-oz-1939.

 

Houlberg, Lauren. “Writing Resources.” The Wizard of Oz: More Than Just a Children’s Story by Lauren Houlberg. Accessed March 01, 2018. https://wr.english.fsu.edu/College-Composition/Our-Own-Words-The-James-M.-McCrimmon-Award/Our-Own-Words-2005-2006-Edition/The-Wizard-of-Oz-More-Than-Just-a-Children-s-Story-by-Lauren-Houlberg.

 

Leonhardt, David. “Why 2016 Is Different From All Other Recent Elections.” The New York Times. January 19, 2016. Accessed March 01, 2018. https://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/19/upshot/why-2016-is-different-from-all-other-recent-elections.html.

 

Nix, Elizabeth. “8 Things You May Not Know About “The Wizard of Oz”.” History.com. May 26, 2015. Accessed March 01, 2018. http://www.history.com/news/history-lists/8-things-you-may-not-know-about-the-wizard-of-oz.

 

“Not in Kansas Anymore.” TV Tropes. Accessed March 01, 2018. http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/NotInKansasAnymore.

 

 

[1] Elizabeth Nix, “8 Things You May Not Know About “The Wizard of Oz”.” History.com.

[2] Shmoop Editorial Team. “The Wonderful Wizard of Oz Home Quotes Page 1.” Shmoop.

[3] “Not in Kansas Anymore.” TV Tropes.

[4] Lauren Houlberg. “Writing Resources.” The Wizard of Oz: More Than Just a Children’s Story

[5] Ebert, Roger. “The Wizard of Oz Movie Review (1939). Roger Ebert.

[6] Lauren Houlberg. “Writing Resources.” The Wizard of Oz: More Than Just a Children’s Story

[7] David Leonhardt. “Why 2016 Is Different From All Other Recent Elections.” The New York Times.

The Wonderful Wizard of Oz and the Test of Time by Daniel Criscuolo

When L. Frank Baum created The Wonderful Wizard of Oz in 1900, he  probably did not envision it becoming one of the most legendary pieces of literature in American history.  The chances that he saw the direction it would take itself are even slimmer.  The children’s story that also (likely) served as an allegory for 19th century populism is, at this point, more well known for its 1939 film adaptation, this time titled The Wizard of Oz.  The movie adaptation focused itself on the fantastical world created by Baum and featured songs written specifically for the movie that have become iconic in their own right.  For example, it is hard to think of the story separately from “We’re Off to See the Wizard,” and “Over the Rainbow” was named the best song of the 20th century by the Recording Industry Association of America.[1]  The film turned the story into one of the most well known ever, which is certainly an accomplishment, but in doing so, the story of The Wonderful Wizard of Oz lost its original allegorical significance.  Instead, The Wizard of Oz is thought of as one of the greatest family movies and Oz came to be a wondrous and fantastical paradigm of utopias in cinema.  [2]

Following the 1939 film adaptation, the story was adapted into another musical and subsequent film, The Wiz, this time featuring an all-black cast, all new songs, and a re-imagination of the land of Oz in a New York City setting.

In his essay “The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction,” Walter Benjamin argues that “the technique of reproduction detaches the reproduced object from the domain of tradition.”[3]  In the case of The Wonderful Wizard of Oz, this could certainly be true.  In the adaptations of Baum’s original story, the original allegory was lost as the overall themes changed to match the times of their respective releases.  The way the recreations altered the way people think of The Wonderful Wizard of Oz is naturally due to the changes made in each story, but that does not mean the original is tainted or disrespected: the tale likely owes its iconicity to these recreations.  Martin Kemp, who disagreed with Benjamin over the effects of reproduction, said: “any widespread broadcasting of fame ensures that the embodying of a special presence in the original is enormously enhanced.” [4]  In the case of The Wonderful Wizard of Oz, both are certainly true.  Much of the original story changed, but the wonderment and the whimsy remained.

[5]

 

 

 

 

[1] “Best Songs Of The Century?” CBS News, March 08, 2001, accessed March 01, 2018, https://www.cbsnews.com/news/best-songs-of-the-century/.

[2] The Wizard of Oz (1939).

[3] Walter Benjamin, “The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction.”

[4] Martin Kemp, Christ to Coke: How Image Becomes Icon (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2011).

[5] The Wiz (1978).

Multiple Aspects: The Wizard of Oz as an American icon by Suet Yuk (Rainie) Au Yeung

https://tinyurl.com/yaqns7oy

The Wonderful Wizard of Oz written by author L. Frank Baum in 1900 is one of most classic Children’s novel in the United States. Dorothy, a young farm girl from Kansas with her dog Toto, begin the adventures in the magical Land of Oz after they are swept away from home by a cyclone. Similar to other beloved female characters such as Alice who wore puffed sleeve dress with white pleated sweetheart neckline and Little Red Riding Hood who wore the red cape have become classic fashion, Dorothy’s blue and white gingham check dress is also a notable icon. Not to mention that her magic silver slippers (ruby red in the movie in 1939) is as powerful as the magic wand of Cinderella’s Fairy Godmother! The story of The Wonderful Wizard of Oz is an American icon which illustrates the characters’ convinced beliefs of the American dream, represents the populist movement in the late 1800s, and implicates political messages of the current American political landscape.

In the story, Dorothy was told by Witch of the North that she needs to go to the Emerald City in the Land of Oz to seek for help from the Wizard of Oz, who might be able to help her get back home.[1] On her way to the Emerald City, Dorothy became friends with a Scarecrow, a Tin Man and a Cowardly Lion who joined her journey. All of them are pursuing something that would make themselves a better being or for something that they want. Dorothy wants to go home, the Scarecrow is looking for a brain, the Tin Man wants a heart, the Lion wants to obtain courage. Throughout the journey, the Scarecrow he consistently comes up with smart ideas whenever the team faces a challenge, the Tin Man processes emotions through his caring for his friends. He even cries over the death of a beetle, and the Cowardly Lion demonstrates courage when he carries his friends and jumps over deep ditch. During the journey, they fail to realize that they already possess the things they unconsciously want.  Rather, they all believe that they are missing something only the great Oz can provide and that they can only achieve their goals in the Emerald City.[2] Even though Oz told them that he cannot grant them their wishes, the Scarecrow, the Tin man and the Lion refused to listen.[3]

https://tinyurl.com/ybkecsq8

The way that they finally arrived at their dream place, the Emerald City in the Land of Oz, after they overcome many challenges is similar to the promise of American dream. If one works hard, anyone can reach the dream of the middle class. They felt satisfied only when Oz provides them with symbolic objects that represent a brain, a heart and courage. Their satisfaction exposes the impact of American dream in their beliefs. They believe that achieving their goals from Oz is the only way to approve their hard work to arrive at Emerald City has pay off. This demonstrates the powerful impact of the American dream, which contribute the novel as an iconic American story.

Another aspect that makes The Wonderful Wizard of Oz an American icon is the Populist elements that implies in the story. In 1964, historian Henry Littlefield points out the novel is an allegory of the Populist movement in the 1890s.[4] The rise of Populist Party was organized by common people such as farmers and factory workers who united to form a third-party to challenge power from bankers and business leaders.[5] Littlefield argues that the Scarecrow in the story represents “self-doubt” American farmers who demonstrate “a terrible sense of inferiority” during this period. [6] The Tin Man symbolizes factory workers who have been dehumanized by the big business. [7] Because there were many Populists advocated the federal government to adopt the monetary policy for free minting silver money during the economic depression in 1893, Littlefield interprets the Oz’s yellow brick road as the existing gold standard and indicates Dorothy’s silver shoes represents the free silver movement.[8]The Wonderful Wizard of Oz is a Populist allegory, which contains elements that reflects the social and political movement in the late 1800s.

http://americannewsx.com/politics/donald-the-great-and-powerful/

The iconic association between the novel and politics is remained today as it has been used to convey messages in current American political climate. Even though everyone believes that Oz is a powerful leader, Dorothy and her friends uncover that the great Wizard of Oz is simply an ordinary man towards the end of the story. He used a variety of tricks that allowed him to be regarded as a powerful Wizard. CNN Journalist Jeanne Moos disapproves the way that the President Donald Trump intended to avoid answering any questions about the Republican tax deduction plan by taping himself talking on two TV screens rather than physically being present during White House press briefing to is similar to Wizard of Oz, who tries to maintain his authority by cunning and avoid presenting his actual appearances in front of the public. [9]In the article “Trump is like ‘Wizard of Oz,’” author Ed Sokalski satirically criticizes the administration of Trump by indicating that his inefficient leadership just as the incapability of Wizard of Oz, an ordinary man with no special power.[10] The story demonstrates the notion of questioning the untruthful leadership has continually being used by political critics today.

The Wonderful Wizard of Oz is an American icon in multiple aspects. The story demonstrates the American belief that hard work pays off. It also highlights the elements of Populist movement, and exposes unreliable leadership, which has remain being used to challenge current political leader.

[1] L. Frank Baum, The Wonderful Wizard of Oz (New York: George M. Hill Company, 1900).

[2] Ibid., 55.

[3] Ibid., 131.

[4] Peter Liebhold, “Populism and the World of Oz,” National Museum of American History.

Smithsonian, November 2, 2016, http://americanhistory.si.edu/blog/populism-oz (accessed February 28, 2018).

[5] Ibid.

[6] Ibid.

[7] Ibid.

[8] custom matching couples.

[9] “CNN playfully mocks Trump’s ‘Wizard of Oz’ act at the White House press briefing,” The Week, January 5, 2018, http://theweek.com/speedreads/746838/cnn-playfully-mocks-trumps-wizard-oz-act-white-house-press-briefing (accessed February 28, 2018).

[10] Ed Sokalski, “Trump is like ‘Wizard of Oz,’” The Morning Call, February 23, 2018, http://www.mcall.com/opinion/letters/mc-sokalski-trump-wizard-oz-curtain-20180223-story.html (accessed February 28, 2018).

Christ the Redeemer and the Statue of Liberty: Great Guardians of Nations by Morgan O’Donnell

When thinking about national statues and monuments, my mind flashed back to a picture I saw when I was twelve and nearing the height of my Jonas Brothers obsession. It was a photo of the three brothers at the Christ the Redeemer statue in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. I knew nothing about the statue at the time but I was struck by how massive and looming it was compared to the size of an average human. I was even more captivated when I came across photos that showed the statue looking out over the city’s vast landscape of skyscrapers, mountains, neighboring islands, and water. Christ the Redeemer may seem to have little in common with the U.S.’s Statue of Liberty (for starters, it’s a him/Him…) but the two iconic structures have one striking similarity: they are what their people want them to be.

The idea for Cristo Redentor, as it is known in Portuguese, came from the people of Brazil themselves. Although the country had gone through a separation of church and state at the end of the 19th century, a group of Brazilians who feared “an advancing tide of Godlessness” throughout the country and the world after World War I decided that there was a need for a national symbol that would reclaim Brazil — and Rio, its capital city at the time — as a land of Christianity. [1] The group, the Catholic Circle of Rio, organized an event to collect donations and signatures to support the building of the statue and considered many designs before choosing engineer Heitor da Silva Costa’s image of Christ with arms outstretched as a symbol of peace. French sculptor Paul Landowski led the creation of the 98-foot tall statue, which is made out of soapstone and concrete, and after nine years of construction, Christ the Redeemer officially opened on Mount Corcovado in 1931. [2]

Now, a statue with a founding based entirely on one specific religion may seem to run counter to the secular American values of freedom and democracy that the famous Statue of Liberty has come to represent, but I feel that both are examples of how the values that are associated with icons can change over time while still retaining a sense of national pride. Historian Bernard Dard writes that while Lady Liberty has been used by everyone from business firms to cartoonists for a variety of purposes — from commercial product promotion to advocacy of liberal immigration laws and criticism of the government — her core symbolism as the bearer of American ideals such as liberty, opportunity, and democracy (and as America itself) has remained intact and transcended all else. [3]

In a similar way, although Christ the Reedemer began as a symbol of Christianity, it is not exclusively so and it has also acquired a greater significance. According to a BBC article, Count Celso, one of the first to be involved with project in its early stages during the 1920s, described the finished statue as “a monument to science, art and religion.” [4] The rector of the chapel that sits inside the base of the statue (the pedestal that elevates its full height to 125 feet) calls it a religious, cultural, and national symbol for Brazil and a means of welcoming all those who pass through Rio, almost like a host. And for a local sorbet vendor, who is also quoted in the article, the statue is a beautiful place with special significance to the community around it. [5] Christ the Reedemer stands as a representation of the Brazilian people’s accepting and warmhearted attitude towards all visitors to Rio and citizens of the world, just like the welcoming and protective qualities that have been attributed to the Statue of Liberty over time as she has greeted new arrivals to America — “From her beacon-hand/Glows world-wide welcome,” as Emma Lazarus’s famous poem states. [6]

Native songwriter Gilberto Gil perfectly captured this essence surrounding Christ the Redeemer and Rio’s culture in his 1968 song “Aquele Abraco” (translated as “That Hug”):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oCB6wQ1R0WA

The simple song is a love letter to Brazil, as Gil recounts walking through the streets, admiring the city’s beauty and embracing the people he encounters:
“My path through the world 
I even trace 
Bahia has already given me 
Ruler and compass 
Who knows of me I am 
That hug! 
For you that forgot me 
That hug! 
Alô Rio de Janeiro 
That hug! 
All the Brazilian people 
That hug” [7]
 These icons, one American, one Brazilian, represent important attitudes and values of their home countries on such a strong level that they have basically been elevated throughout history and now come to represent the countries themselves.. Whether you see the outstretched arms of Christ the Redeemer in Rio de Janeiro or the Statue of Liberty’s torch held high over New York Harbor, they send the same message from the people of two different nations: we will embrace you, take you in and welcome you home.

——————————

1. Boorstein, Michelle. “The many meanings of Rio’s massive Christ statue.” The Washington Post. August 09, 2016. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/acts-of-faith/wp/2016/08/09/the-many-meanings-of-rios-massive-christ-statue/?utm_term=.a28d827cdec9&wpisrc=nl_faith&wpmm=1.

2. “Christ the Redeemer (statue).” Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christ_the_Redeemer_(statue)#cite_note-The_Sun-10.

3. Dard, Bertrand. “Liberty as Image and Icon.” In The Statue of Liberty Revisited. Smithsonian Institution Press.

4. Bowater, Donna, Stephen Mulvey, and Tanvi Misra. “Arms wide open.” BBC News. March 10, 2014. http://www.bbc.com/news/special/2014/newsspec_7141/index.html.

5. Ibid.

6. Lazarus, Emma. “The New Colossus by Emma Lazarus.” Poetry Foundation. https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/46550/the-new-colossus.

7. “Aquele Abraço – Gilberto Gil.” Www.letras.mus.br. https://www.letras.mus.br/gilberto-gil/16138/.

The Godfather, the Statue of Liberty, and Capitalism by Lena-Marie Lannutti

The Godfather films are an epic saga that is often credited as some of the best films ever made. Within its narrative is a cultural tie between the criminal underworld and the American Dream.  Francis Ford Coppola, the director, has remarked “it’s not a film about organized gangsters, but a family chronicle. A metaphor for capitalism in America”[1]. Besides these ideas of capitalism there are other concepts with gender roles as well.  The use of an icon like the Statute of Liberty in these films represent these two concepts. As cited in the third chapter, Bodnar cites how from the beginning, Americans associated through the Statute of Liberty, concepts like liberty with capitalism. “It is not the pursuit of happiness that allies with life and liberty as inalienable rights, but property that anchors and stabilizes American liberty.”[2]

The Godfather was one of the first films of New Hollywood cinema, and the first film since the early 1930s to feature criminals in main role instead of a secondary character[3]. In Italian-Americans in film, the author states the film, “…became the prototype and most important legitimator of the new wave of Italian-American sex-and-violence odysseys”[4] The film became a huge success and a cultural touchstone because of its complicated narrative and overall quality of production.

On the surface, the film presents typical gender roles “The older generation the traditional earth mothers, provide passive and stoic support for their men. The younger…. Modern nags become Italian-American spoiled brats”[5] Though there is evidence in the film of subversion of gender roles, visually and narratively traditional gender roles are reinforced. The Statute of Liberty in these scenes can be seen as a heightened extension of “earth mother” of the older generation as cited by Cortes. This connection has been linked to the statute itself in the past, “Standing upon the threshold of New York, which is the doorway of the Union, she will seem to offer the freedom of the New World to the thousands that shall flock to us from the Old…”[6] This line shows how people imprinted maternal qualities onto to the Statute because of her gender, and her connection to immigration.

In one scene in The Godfather some underlings of Don Vito assassinate a guy on the outskirts of New York, in the background the Statute of Liberty is in view in a sense “watching” everything happen. The scene alone juxtaposes the ideas of the American Dream the Statue with its representation of freedom, with these gangsters, who commit crimes in pursuit of the American Dream. Visually this scene resembles one of the last scenes in the film where Kay looks through the doorway (at the moment) unaware of her husband’s position as the head of a criminal organization.  Both scenes place women (in one case the Statute of Liberty) as passive observers to corruptions of the American Dream.

This final connects the narrative of The Godfather with the immigrant experience, and executes this by invoking the Statue of Liberty. Once again, the Statute is cast as an observer, this time a witness to the origins of the Godfather himself. The fictional character presents an immigrant narrative that is rooted in American history. “The individualistic liberties with which arriving immigrants invested the Statue of Liberty—as linked to preconceptions or early impressions of America—often emphasized hopes for new prosperity and wealth.”[7] This new prosperity is exactly what the Godfather achieved, the complication is that this was achieved through notorious means. It is this paradox that has made the narrative so engaging almost forty years after the films were released. The power of this legacy is consistently tied with the iconography and the mission of the American Dream, and this is best exemplified in the films’ use of the Statute of Liberty.

  

 

Fig 1-2 Scenes from The Godfather[8]

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 3 Scene from The Godfather Part II[9]

 

[1] Browne, Nick Francis Ford Coppola’s The Godfather Trilogy Cambridge University Press, 2000 28

[2] Bodnar John The Changing Faces of the Statue of Liberty 2005 62

[3] Browne, Nick Francis Ford Coppola’s The Godfather Trilogy Cambridge University Press, 2000 81

[4]  Cortes, Carlos Italian Americans in Film: From Immigrants to Icons Oxford University Press 1987, 117

[5]  Ibid., 117

[6] Bodnar, John The Changing Faces of the Statue of Liberty 2005 98

[7] Ibid., 102

[8] Coppola, Francis Ford The Godfather 1972 Paramount Pictures (images found on Netflix)

[9] Coppola, Francis Ford The Godfather Part II 1974 Paramount Pictures (images found on Netflix)

The Two Faces of the Statue of Liberty in the Feminist Movement by Emily Grimaldi

The moment I thought to write about the Statue of Liberty as a strong female icon, I immediately found some depiction of her deep in the abyss of my television knowledge. The animated Netflix show, Big Mouth, follows the exploits of young teens trying to navigate the art of becoming an adult. In the second episode of the series, the kids take a field trip to the Statue of Liberty, where Jessi gets her first period. The Statue of Liberty takes Jessi into her hands and gives her the harsh facts about being a women in today’s society.

Portrayed as a French-speaking, cigarette smoking, doesn’t-take-crap-from-anyone kind of woman, the Statue of Liberty asserts herself as the strong, independent figure we believe she is. However, she is a hopeless pessimist who does not find any inspiration in herself. Even when Jessi accuses the Statue of being a bit cynical, the Statue sarcastically apologizes for not being “more America, sunny Mickey Mouse”. Here, not only does the Statue of Liberty represent women, but she depicts the age old struggle of women by saying that life is hard and there aren’t very many good things about being a woman in a male driven society. Liberty has stood in the New York Harbor for decades and has yet to see a woman rise to power in America.

This is quite contrary to how we as Americans view the Statue of Liberty. As Bodnar points out, women during the suffrage movement used the statue as a symbol of their cause.[1] These women addressed the contradiction that a woman had become the symbol of a land where women had no rights. Because this movement succeeded, we regard the Statue of Liberty as an inspiration and representation of a confident, powerful woman. She is optimistic and hopeful. She is a positive and figure. She is a strong, independent woman. We believe she is here to inspire us, which is where the Big Mouth portrayal comes in. Some believe she is antiquated while some believe she is still relevant. Some believe there is still some inspiration to be found while some believe the torch has gone out. Some have hope that a woman’s place in society will change while some are resigned to the current state of affairs. These various understandings and interpretations truly make the Statue of Liberty an American icon.

1. Bodnar, JohnLaura BurtJennifer Stinson, and Barbara Truesdell2005The Changing Face of the Statue of LibertyBloomington: Center for the Study of History and Memory, Indiana University.

Martin Luther King Jr. and the Myth of John Henry by Suet Yuk (Rainie) Au Yeung

The myth of John Henry sacrificing his life to compete with a mechanical drill reminds me of Martin Luther King Jr., who also devoted his life to contribute to the cause of fighting against a powerful social system with racial inequality.

Photo from http://www.intanibase.com/shorts.aspx?shortID=713#page=general_info

It is important to note that historian Scott Nelson discusses the legend of John Henry, a powerful black man who competed against a steam-powered hammer and died after his victory.[1] This myth could be associated with a true story of convicted laborer, who was another John Henry.[2] John Henry was a victim of the black codes when racial discrimination laws in Southern states that targeted newly freed slaves post-Civil War. He was arrested because of “housebreaking and larceny” with a10-year sentence and became a convict laborer who was leased to the C&O Railroad by the Virginia Penitentiary. [3] There is always a gap between history and legend. However, the answer to the question of “who was John Henry” seems less essential, because John Henry already transformed from a man to a myth and became an iconic figure. John Henry was an icon of African American folk hero, who portrayed the courage of a common man to challenge a powerful opponent through sweat and self-sacrifice. King also illustrated this iconic figure, as he demonstrated unyielding persistence and a fighting spirit under racial discrimination that was widespread in the legal system in the American society in 1960s.

Photo from https://tinyurl.com/ybycknnt

In the Letter from Birmingham Jail, King emphasized that fighting for racial equality is a battle between all African Americans and the segregated social system in the United States. King believed that it is essential to race against time to lead the African American community fighting the battle against discrimination because “justice too long delayed is justice denied.” [4] Similar to the myth of John Henry in which he seizes every minute and second to compete with a mechanical drill that made him an icon of a courageous man against a machine, King is an icon of a brave man going against the social system as he competes against time unremittingly to challenge racial discrimination that was established in American society for hundreds of years.

Although the 14th Amendment, ratified in 1868, gave African Americans citizenship and equal protection under the law and the 15th Amendment in 1870 granted Blacks the right to vote, African Americans remained far away from obtaining equality. Southern states established “Jim Crow” laws in the late 19th century, which segregated African Americans from whites in all public facilities.[5] Even though the roots of racism deeply shaped the American society, it did not prevent King from challenging inequality that was established in America since its founding. In Martin Luther King: “Now is the time,” author Angela Herbert demonstrates the struggles of King as a civil rights activist. Not only did King face intense pressure, he was also “arrested 30 times and imprisoned along with a number of students and fellow colleagues as a result of their engagement in non-violent protests.”[6] The oppression faced by King did not stop him from challenging racism; he contributed to unite the African American community through his public speeches and literature work.

Photo from http://hero.wikia.com/wiki/John_Henry

Like John Henry in the legend, who sacrificed his life and illustrated a heroic fighting spirit, King made powerful speeches that fiercely criticized racial discrimination and his assassination shaped him as an epic martyr who devoted his life to push an important step that catalyzed the Civil Rights Movement against racism. Literary critic Michiko Kakutani emphasizes that King “knew how to read his audience and react to it.” [7] King used the power of words with vivid imagery and strong emotion to give African Americans courage and hope. Today, many children watch the Disney version of John Henry and they might fall into sadness when they see John Henry die after his victory. King’s powerful speeches evoke the same emotions and are able to bring people to tears. King united African Americans and challenged the formidable racism in American society, which made him an iconic hero.

Similar to the myth of John Henry, hammering again and again to compete with a massive machine, King attacked the intensive racism that had deep roots in this country through word by word in his speeches. Even though John Henry and King faced mighty opponents, their indomitable fighting spirit demonstrate an iconic American spirit of struggle in which a victim in predicament could become a hero through persistence and self-sacrifice for a greater cause.

 

[1] Scott Nelson, “Who Was John Henry? Railroad Construction, Southern Folklore, and the Birth

of Rock and Roll,” Labor: Studies in Working-Class History of the Americas,Vol. 2. No. 2 (2005): 53.

[2] Ibid., 66.

[3] Ibid.

[4] Martin Luther King Jr., “Letter from a Birmingham Jail [King, Jr.],” Africana Studies at

University of Pennsylvania, April 16, 1963,

https://www.africa.upenn.edu/Articles_Gen/Letter_Birmingham.html, accessed February 14, 2018).

[5] “Civil Rights Movement,” Black History, HISTORY.com,

http://www.history.com/topics/black-history/civil-rights-movement, (accessed February 14, 2018).

[6] Angela Herbert, Martin Luther King: “Now is the time”( London: Springer International

Publishing, 2016), 10.

[7] Michiko Kakutani , “The Lasting Power of Dr. King’s Dream Speech,” New York Times,

August 27, 2013, http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/28/us/the-lasting-power-of-dr-kings-dream-speech.html (accessed February 14, 2018).