Culture

What is the “American dream”? The American dream is defined as, “the ideal that every US citizen should have an equal opportunity to achieve success and prosperity through hard work, determination, and initiative’fl The keyword (s) in that definition are “US citizen”. Why? In the states it is more likely to have a higher quality of living based on the better climate, economy, and social structure Because of these aspects, many cultures choose to immigrate and pursue their American dream in the land of opportunity. Unfortunately, opportunity comes with a price for migrants as opposed to natural-born US citizens. For example, in the novel, The Gangster We Are All Looking For by Thi Diem Thuy Le, the American dream of a Vietnamese family faced numerous challenges when coming to America.

They came to the states for refuge, but unknowingly they would still face discrimination, poverty, and many other adversities This holds to be true for most people coming from other countries to the states looking to acquire a better life in America. These migrating individuals envision the possibility of starting a business, owning a home, and having stability in their families based on the ideology society puts out about the “American dream”. The American dream is even hard for most Americans to accomplish. In the poem, “Dandelion”, a young girl narrates the sad tale of her mother’s lost dreams. She said her mother had hoped for a “white picket fence”. Typically the connotation to a white picket fence means a nice home with a well-rounded all-American family.

This has been put into society’s head for decades through media (especially sitcoms based around families). The mother in “Dandelion” struggles to meet her everyday needs for herself and her daughter which seems simple, but is it? Is the American dream merely just a dream? The reader sees the mother of the narrator turn cynical and hopeless as she realizes the American dream is just as difficult for her as it is to people living outside of the US. However, a positive similarity between American and foreign cultures is that they are always growing. In an example, the “dream“, whatever that may be, may not be as difficult to younger generations. The unemployment rate has declined in the millennial which has driven further opportunities for financial stability in current and migrating families. It has also become possible for the” American dream” to now differ from generation to generation because people are starting to take matters into their own hands and change it.

Young adults are building a new American dream because they are facing different struggles than their parents and grandparents, The new dream is not how to live comfortably, it is how to get rich quick – how to be known Finally, the American dream is not only different culture to culture, or generation, it is also based on individuality The one thing an individual of any race, shape, or color can agree on is the place to look for success — America, America has and always will be the land of opportunity Americans have the luxury to build their own success from nothing, it just takes dedication and determination to get that task accomplished. Stop sleeping, wake up from the dream, and turn it into a reality.

Individual growth is a staple of humanity, Throughout a person’s lifetime, one is bound to encounter success, failure, and obstacles, and no matter who a person is, they are never the same at age sixty as they were at age six. To this rule, American playwright Christopher Durang is no exception, The difference between writers like Durang and an everyday citizen, however, is that the former’s thoughts, viewpoints, values, and belief structures are penned and preserved for all history—documented and analyzed for years to come It is because of this that we are able to read and interpret the ways writers change and the ways they stay the same, Durang is fairly consistent with his writing style, but it is important to also realize how it develops.

The theatre is often used as a source of humor to convey a strong thematic presence With their whimsical sense of urbane humor, writers such as Oscar Wilde and plays such as The Lion in Winter are remarkable for their blithe and lighthearted tone while at the same time conveying serious and oftentimes dark subject matters, The same is true of Durang’s plays Beyond Therapy (first produced in New York in 1981) and Vanya and Sonia and Masha and Spike (first produced in New Jersey in 2012} The former focuses on two romantic characters who each rely on their therapists for help finding relationships, with much of the humor originating from the fact that the psychiatrists come across as more troubled than their patients.

The latter revolves around three middle-aged siblings and their bickering about love and life, and much of its significance is found in its homages to—and, arguably, parodies of—Russian playwright and theorist Anton Chekhov. Both are set in the modern day (1981 and 2012 respectively), which offers a historical inspection into the culture of the time periods as well as an insightful look into the current mind of the author. While to the unobservant viewer, many of his pieces may come across as nothing more than meaningless farces, the alert reader is able to notice that they could in fact be  interpreted as dramas deliberately masquerading as comedies. One interpretation of Durang’s work is that he oftentimes draws an audience or a reader in with comedy and uses humor and outrageous dialogue to hide his more serious intentions.

Through a critical analysis of these two playsflne early in his career and one late in his career—it is possible to determine the way Durang has changed as an individual throughout his lifetime, Specifically, through the lens of certain characters, it is possible to witness the gradual personal change of his values, as Durang becomes more nostalgic and a bit more serious as the years go by This comparative argument will seek to define both sides as independent entities and then bring them together in an analytical comparison with a specific focus on Durang’s development as an individual and how it affects his works, We will examine the ways in which he uses absurdism and farcical elements to indicate his personal growth and to communicate his usually controversial themes of homosexuality, family, therapy, and religion.

Nowadays kids are expected to go to college to explore life and grow into independent individuals. College is a whole new world for students. Students are faced with many challenges and are forced to make choices that affect them either positively or negatively. Now, more than ever before in a young adult’s life. it is the time for smart and effective decision making. Security at schools such as West Chester University make it very difficult for their students to grow and make decisions on behalf of themselves. It is one thing to help keep a campus safe, but excessive security nonstop is unnecessary. College is a time for young adults to explore life on their own and get a glimpse of what it is like grow up, College is not a place that is solely centered around academic growth however, it is centered around personal development too, Students have four years to find themselves without the help of their parents guiding them in the right direction.

Students no longer have their mother and father hovering over them making sure they make the right decisions or complete their homework. In this helicopter-parenting world. it is becoming harder and harder for young people to establish independence. In this generation, kids are spoiled and do not have to work for much. A lot of children are lucky and their parents give them almost everything they ever want or need; most parents even pay for their children’s college education. Students no longer have their parents holding their hand anymore, but they have security now to fill their role. There are security guards roaming the streets and campus nonstop, Some may say this is a good thing and that it helps keep everyone on campus safe, however it isjust giving students false accusations of what the real world is going to be like.

As adults, public safety will not constantly be nearby if anything were to go wrong. Adults have to handle situations on their own and make the right decisions without public safety. College students face security every night from 8pm to 4am. There are typically one to two officers in the lobby waiting for you to show your ram card with the sticker indicating that you live in the building. They claim they do this to keep everyone safe and only let students into the building, however during the day almost anyone can get into the building. Us students all tend to hold the door for one another, so most of the time you do not even have to swipe in. If you decide you want to have a friend come visit for the night, it is a huge ordeal. Students have to sign in everyone coming into their building even, if it is another West Chester student who lives in another resident hall.

Your friend must have a form of identification on them or they are unable to enter the building. A picture of your license is not good enough because they claim it could be photocopied. Even if student so decide to sign a guest in, that person has the ability to do whatever they want in the building once they pass security. There have already been incidents on campus relating to this issue such as the Schmitt Hall problem. A man dressed in West Chester gear entered the resident hall and walked the halls pretending to be a student. He then went into the women’s bathroom and stared at girls while they showered. lf schools are going to have such a strict security system, at least make sure they are doing a good job at it. West Chester University is ranked #4 for on campus arrest. This statistic makes the university seem to be filled with a bunch of delinquents, however we are all just teenagers trying to find our way.

Not saying that it is okay for kids to be underage drinking, but arresting all of their students is not going to solve anything. Student need to make mistakes in order to learn from them and grow as a person, Students are now responsible for themselves and are held accountable for all of their actions. In all honesty, living on campus is similar to prison. Everyone always makes college out to be an amazing time where you have the ability to grow up and gain independence, but I feel more coddled than ever. I thought living at home with my parents was bad, until I came here and realized I had it so good When I lived with my parents and came home I did not have any one searching my bag when I just finished class. I did not have to sign in my friends, or feel like I was constantly being watched; I had the ability to grow.

Olivia Pope is a dynamic character that commands the attention of her audience and co-stars with one carefully decisive stare and her signature line “consider it handled.” She is the epitome of power, wielding her influence over powerful men in politics: namely the President, his Chief of Staff, and the District Attorney. That power does not only originate from her intimidating personality and striking beauty, it also comes from her wardrobe. Similar to magic, the business suit transforms its wearers. The pantsuit for women is no different, but until its creation in 1960, the pantsuit was just a figment of domestic housewives imagination. However, once it was created, it enabled women to command the same presence and power their male counterparts had. The only thing missing to give them an edge over their male counterparts was the femininity that was inherently their own.

Women in corporate America adhere to dress codes that force them to become vague objects that fade into the background with muted tones, making sure it is difficult to tell if the wearer underneath is male or female. This touch of femininity that was missing in corporate America became prevalent when Olivia Pope graced televisions across America in 2012 in the hit television show Scandal. Her stylists played to the strength of her femininity rather than hiding it inconspicuously; Olivia’s pantsuits were tightened to fit the shape of her body and colored to stand out. This point of power in feminism first occurred from women such as Hillary Clinton, breaking boundaries and shattering corporate America stereotypes. The hit television show Scandal incorporated many different powerful women who were taking these initiatives to stand out and put them into one person- Olivia Pope.

The pantsuit has been a staple in the closets of professional women around the United States since its origin, but few know how that hard-fought origin came to be. The evolution of clothing in business hasn’t diverted much from its original theme. The dress code became standard for men in business and professional settings; they were instructed to look groomed and put-together at all times, the business suit and tie became staples for professionalism. Men dress would dress in traditional business suits, and based on their wealth and status, dress that suit up with superfluous accessories or have it designed based off of custom lengths. Until the war, women were banned from corporate America. The introduction of their dress code was more strict than their male counterparts, and was designed to be as inconspicuous as possible. Women covered themselves in neutral colored skirts and blouses that were modest in construction.

The jacket was finally added to this strict dress code in 1945 when more jobs became open for women. However, once the war was over, women went back to their domestic lives and put their suits away. It wasn’t until 1960 that women made another shot at cracking into the professional working world and away from domestic life. This time, women wore pants and introduce a new professional style: the pantsuit (. Gender had become a social construction of what was acceptable for those with different genitalia to wear and present themselves in. It became evident that dressing was role-playing, and was inexplicably tied to power relations. Men mentally link their business attire to power and success, and women emulating them is their way of stealing that power. Many men refuted the trend of women wearing pantsuits that emulated their own suits by claiming specific reasons for women to remain in their traditional garb. A prominent supporter of these was Gregory Stone. He climbed that,“Gender should be silently known and established by ones appearance.”

It wasn’t until the mid 1950’s, early 1960’s that it became more socially acceptable for women to wear pants at their respected Universities and business professions. “this was a visible assertion of their (women) ascension into corporate America.” However, even then, women who wanted to break the ‘glass ceiling’ did not wear bright colors that would allude to their sexuality. Alluding to sexuality would break the spell that the emulation of power wearing pants created. Pansuit’s were expected to be worn in neutral tones and the coverage of the business uniform needed to be modest. All of these trends and unspoken rules for women who sought out success were outlined in texts for women to purchase, specifically “Dress for Success” and “Color Me Beautiful” that included grooming and fashion advice. Breaking this trend of women in business wearing pantsuits that hid their physique was the entrance of Olivia Pope to televisions across America in 2012.

Women had been attempting to break this stereotype in political America, but had been critiqued for their stylistic decisions. Later in the paper, Hillary Clintons role in the creation of Olivia’s character will be outlined, as well as the influence of Monica Lewinsky. Scandal became an instant hit not only because of its juicy drama and mysterious intrigue, but also because of its striking main character. This character was the marriage between good and bad, but never lacking in power or command. Olivia Pope takes on many forms, with many facets to her personality in the hit tv show Scandal. Olivia is an African American female who has entrapped the president with her beauty and powerful personality. This is scandalous not only because an African American female had not starred in a television show for decades that aired prime-time on ABC, but because the Scandal the show is initially speaking about is the relationship Olivia has with her white president, a relationship that some people believe should not occur- especially when infedelity is at the forefront of that relationship.

Olivia’s character is so intriguing because of the role she plays in the show; even though she has not been elected by the voters, Olivia controls what goes on in the White House. This is an interesting concept to ponder when considering if that really goes on in our own government. Women elected into the political scene are a minority in today’s society. While the number is growing every election, there are people who still believe that women are too emotional to make the important decisions that they are given. Olivia’s personality is shown as emotional, but also as level headed. When it is practical to be emotional about something, she shows her emotion, when it is not and she has an important decision to make- she makes that decision by following her gut feeling. As the people who work in Olivia’s business, Olivia Pope and Associates, say- “Her gut is never wrong.” However, even with her heart of steel, Olivia has a tumultuous relationship with the President of the United States.

This relationship shows the vulnerable side of Olivia, because she is very much in love with Fitz. Their relationship is the backbone of the television show, and recurs as Olivia’s weakness throughout every season. Even when powerfully dressed, she succumbs to her feelings for him and their history. It is refreshing to see a character come alive on the screen that is relatable and has flaws just as every human does; even if her job isn’t that relatable. However, Olivia’s striking personality needs to be matched with an equally powerful wardrobe, which is where costume designer, Lyn Paola, and the iconic pantsuit come into the picture. Each color, each fabric, each accessory were paired to match the emotion that Olivia was feeling in the scene she was filming, while also embodying feminism. The outfit was not complete without the Olivia Pope confidence that Kerry Washington gave each outfit when she put it on, transforming from fabric into a statement.

The detail that Paolo put into each outfit for Olivia was astounding. She is able to capture one single emotion in a tiny accessory like a pair of gloves, a trench coat, or a hat. She pulls all of that together for a whole host of emotions to be present in Olivia’s signature outfit: the pantsuit. In an interview that Paola did for FASHIONISTA, she was nostalgic when reminiscing on past seasons. Her favorite item to craft for Olivia was naturally the pantsuit, and she told followers of the show her thorough process that she used in the creation of each outfit; she painstakingly worked down to minuscule details such as the color and shape of broaches that were used as accessories, or the length of the collar on a suit jacket. While as an audience we may not have noticed these minute details, without each one of them the atmosphere and emotion of different scenes could have been immeasurably different, changing an important scene in the show forever.

Olivia was dressed in her pantsuit for specific scenes, those scenes typically being when her character needed to make difficult decisions, or needed to prove a point to male characters in the show. The color of that pantsuit differed depending on her attitude and the setting. When Olivia needed to be pure and a follower of the law, she wore the white pantsuit and Paola paired it with a sometimes metaphorical white hat, bringing along the famous line: “I’m wearing the white hat.” When Olivia metaphorically wore her white hat, she did good for the people. In contrast, towards later seasons Olivia strays from her good deeds and begins to work away from the confines of the law, the power that she took for herself leading her to believe that she controls the United States and therefore has the power to act however she pleases. In these scenes and sometimes whole episodes, she is never pictured in white.

Rather she is shown in red, a deep blue, and black. These scenes continue to highlight her femininity, but they do it in a way that is different from the white pantsuit. Rather than being a powerful agent for good, she is depicted as powerful in a way other than just from her commanding personality, she is shown as sexy. This is something that women in politics are criticized for doing, by putting Olivia in a place that showcases this side of her feminism, the writers of Scandal and the costume designer Paola were making a political statement not only on the television show, but in the real world. In the real world, politicians are put under severe scrutiny, the American people taking into account the candidates gender, race, body size and shape. However, not only the candidate themselves are put under scrutiny, their families are put under the same microscopic lens.

Groomed appearance and physical attractiveness are two main things that the public looks for, as shown in a study done by students at Stanford University, also accompanied by their political party and the amount of exposure the candidate has had. Candidates often also choose signature accessories so that they have a memorable appearance, rather than being lost in a sea of other candidates. However, while the need to look groomed and put together is a necessity, voters do not like it when their party candidates have expensive habits. Candidates that seem frivolous and spend campaign money for their own gain are often booted out of contingency quickly. The middle lane between this is to bridge politics and aesthetics with dress. The twentieth century gave rise to the new political uniform that all men in politics had to adhere to: the business suit. They typically wore gray or blue, but not black.

This was something that female politicians copied, up until Hillary Clinton was running for Senator and wore a monochromatic suit. While her suit was inconspicuous, it gave her more leeway to focus on her politics and gave the voters less time to focus on her appearance. That is, until the voters decided to focus on her evolving hairstyles throughout her time as first lady, up until her own campaign. This proved the statement that politics and aesthetics must have a bridge, because the voters need something to focus on other than just political ideals and affiliations. Females in politics also were also shown that they could not be too masculine, but in turn could not show off their femininity. It was also a delicate line that was crossed on either side several times for the few women that are in politics today. Basically, political substance is marginalized in favor of paying attention to how candidates appear physically and what they put on their bodies to enhance that physicality.

When people were ushered into the Lewinsky-Clinton scandal, they called Monica a whore and home-wrecker, commenting on her items of dress as a telling sign that she would end up in the scandal she found herself apart of. In turn, the public also scrutinized Hillary’s dress, stating that she looked more like a man than a woman in her clothes, making statements such as “no wonder her husband lost interest.” These statements were particularly hypocritical, in the sense that when Hillary did wear clothing that showed her femininity, she was criticized for it.

One night while in a pantsuit, her blouse was buttoned low enough that a small amount of her cleavage could be seen. That cleavage almost became as much of a political scandal as the sex-affair between her husband and Lewinsky. Taking this event into consideration, it is evident that people will find criticism with female political candidates no matter what they are wearing, taking the events out of context. The creator of Scandal, Shonda Rhimes, crafted a marriage of young Lewinsky and seasoned Hillary, intertwining their personalities, status, and dress to form one of the greatest television characters in history.

Olivia is a mixture of powerful women in history, and when an image of her comes to mind, she will be imagined in a pantsuit. Although it isn’t her pantsuit that gives her an aura of power, it is Olivia Pope embodying confidence and the power of her own personality. While she seems more powerful when wearing her pantsuit than any other item of clothing, it is an illusion. By saying that the pantsuit transforms its wearers, we give it a sort of magical power. That magical power doesn’t exist, and the only transformation that occurs to the wearer is that they are instilled with more confidence than they previously had.

That confidence comes from societies notions that wearing a pantsuit or business suit of any kind means that the person holds a high station. That being said, the pantsuit does elevate the status of its feminine wearers who showcase their femininity. Olivia Pope is a prime example of the fact that women who wear pantsuits that showcase the feminine side take women out of the box that they are supposed to be put into. Women prove that it is possible to be both beautiful and powerful at the same time. Has this idea not already been explored with women in history such as Cleopatra? Women who chose to embrace what made them feminine as a source of power because it made them different, often are noted in history as the most powerful of all. Even though Cleopatra never wore a pantsuit, it is easy to see the parallel’s in gender and power.

If putting on a form fitting pantsuit in a bold color is what it takes for women to embrace their confidence and internal power, then they should go for it. Olivia Pope will be known as a character who broke boundaries and Kerry Washington will forevermore be the face of that character. While Olivia did not usher in the #pantsuitnation movement, she quickly became a participant. People saw Olivia Pope wearing pantsuits on televisions across America and wanted to emulate her, wearing pantsuits themselves. However, their pantsuits more mirrored hers than those of years past, highlighting their gender and showing their personality through the colors they choose to wear and the accessories they choose. Olivia’s pantsuits are iconic, their creativity showcasing that powerful women can wear things that make them look feminine and still be powerful. They have the potential to be immeasurably powerful if the wearer of the pantsuit can embrace their own internal power and confidence.

Dress codes aren’t a new thing, Fashion has always been radical, and there have always been people who stand opposed. I was doing research into the history of various dress codes, and it was considered, radical, immoral, and completely outrageous when girls wanted to wear pants to school. The dress code said skirts only, so girls wore skirts, simply because that‘s the way things were always done. When pants began to take off in North America earlier on in the twentieth century, many religious leaders said they would lead to woman becoming promiscuous and to question male authorityt Pants would lead to girls being wild, instead of quiet and modest, and no one would want to marry them. It would lead to the complete collapse of society as they knew it.

There weren‘t actually laws in the US preventing schools from forcing girls to wear skirts until 1972. Today, that logic sounds completely ludicrous, but how far have things really come? There are still some schools today with uniforms in place where girls have to wear skirts as part of the uniform, and are being challenged by parents and students as the rule being outdated and sexist How different is that really from more typical dress codes found in most schools today? The leading reason girls wanted to wear pants to school isn’t some great campaign for human rights, it‘s because they were cold. That‘s it. To anyone who’s never worn a skirt, 1 inform you of this fact now, they are cold in winter. Pants are a million times warmer, and girls wanted to wear them out of sheer practicality.

The same thing is happening now. Schools all over have forbidden shorts that they deem ”inappropriately short’fl Not only is that impossible to quantify, and the reasons for the rule disgusting, it’s impractical. Girls campaigned for the right to wear pants because they were cold, and they campaign for the right to wear shorts and tank tops because they‘re hot. It’s not about “distracting boys”, or even making a fashion statement most times, it’s simply about the fact that it’s twenty-five degrees outside and they don’t feel like baking for the sake of forced modesty. It’s a practical reason, and in a few decades I don’t doubt it shall seem as ludicrous that it was denied as the pants issue does now. So, strike one against dress codes is that they can be impractical. No one should have to wear capris’ for the sake of modesty when the paint’s peeling off the gym door from heat. The second problem is, clothing manufacturer’s now this.

They know no girl wants excess material in the summer months, and they make their products accordingly, It is nearly impossible to buy shorts that fall above the knee with an acceptable, school appropriate inseam measurement. That is not the fashion, and that is not what people are buying, so that’s not what stores are selling, Meaning even if someone wants to follow the dress code with all her heart, finding the material to do so is nearly impossible, So you‘re left with the choice of buying capris’ that fall mid»calf and roastng in their seats, or of wearing the high-waist shorts that fill the shelves these days and ducking into a restroom to hide whenever a staff member walks buy. Neither are good options Furthermore, what‘s considered inappropriate is an unquantifiable thing.

Inappropriate dress on one student may be inappropriate on another student, and that’s not fair, No one ever breaks out the measuring tape, but a three inch inseam looks very different on a girls who’s 5‘3 than a girl who’s 5’9. What’s considered appropriate to staff and officials can change based on height, weight, and body type, and that isn’t fair, to the girls or to the staff who have to defend their decisions. The biggest problem with dress codes is that they are sexist. In my twelve years of public school, I have never seen any boy called on a dress code violation, though you‘ll see many in tank tops during the warmer months, the same tank tops that a girl would be required to cover up, Many argue that different dress codes should be required for different genders, as though somehow boy’s shoulders are less distracting to a girl than girls shoulders are to a boy.

The biggest reason for dress codes, and all the stories I’ve read about girls fighting dress code, all stem from one word: distracting. Dress codes are wielded as a sword to create a “distracting free learning environment”, and that’s not always a bad thing. But when you pull a girl out of class, detracting from her learning experience, to change her outfit in order to create a “distraction free” learning environment for her male classmates, you are telling that girl, and every other girl in that room, that their males classmates are more entitled to an education than they are, Girls are taught to wear higher necklines so boys can’t see down their shirt, instead of boys being taught not to stare at a girl‘s cleavagei This kind of environment promotes rape culture and misogyny, which is poison to schools and society.

It teaches boys that they can do whatever they want, and it‘s her fault for being a tease, or a distraction That you’re allowed to harass her because she’s wearing a crop top, or a mini skirt, It teaches students that girls are responsible for how boys react to their presence and appearance, and that’s not okay Instead of harsh dress code measures, and staff on the prowl with a ruler and a gym shirt, schools should have very basic guidelines for what’s appropriate, and stick to them regardless of gender, height, weight, body shape, or any other factor. Strict dress codes only hurt people in the long run, both the girls that feel oppressed and the boys that are being told that they are unaccountable for what they do. Instead, basic education on harassment, consent, and general decency towards the opposite gender should be mandatory in schools.

It’s unfair and wrong to ask girls to police themselves to protect boys, and it‘s insulting to boys that dress codes paint them as uncontrollable morons who just have to be humored, Dress codes are an issue, but the bigger problem is the attitudes they create. There have always been and will always be radical ideas, and young people who want to make changes to the world they live in. But that doesn‘t mean they’re wrong. The idea of women wearing pants was radical, and for a time women in government was spectacularly insane. But that doesn‘t make them had ideas, or unnecessary changes. Sometimes, what seems radical and outlandish at the time is exactly what the world needs to move forwards Writing Variables Central Idea: Dress codes are an outdated social norm that perpetuates the oppression of women and misogynist attitudes in society Form: Opinion piece, Purpose: To educate people about the harmful effects of strict school dress codes.

Public Audience: School administrators, staff, or policy makers, It could also be presented to anyone campaigning for feminist rights or against dress codes, Context: In a magazine or newspaper concerned with woman‘s rights and feminist issues, such as Herizons, Room, or Shameless. The central idea of my opinion piece is that dress codes are an outdated social norm that hurts everyone; boys, girls, and society as a whole They further misogynistic attitudes and promote rape culture, and the purpose of my piece is to explain why, and what measures should be taken to rectify this issue I chose to do an opinion piece because I have knowledge and strong opinions in this area, and I feel the best way to convince people that the current policies are harmful is a sincere statement from personal experience.

The public audience to this piece is school administrators and staff, as well as people concerned with feminist issues and woman’s rights. Many people sincerely don’t see this as a problem, or make snide comments about “first world problems”, not realizing that this is a real issue that can shape our culture and society School administrators often don’t consider the long term affects dress codes are having on developing humans. The attitudes learned in schools last a child a life time, so it’s important that the policies be reviewed to make sure they’re teaching children correct behavior, which dress codes are not As such, I’d like to see this piece in a magazine orjournal concerned with woman’s rights, and in more mainstream newspapers and magazines where it can be seen by educational professionals The attitudes dress codes create are a societal issue, and people need to be made aware of that.

Satoru Gojo is one of the protagonists in an anime called ‘Jujutsu Kaisen‘. He is a hero. Satoru is a special-grade jujutsu sorcerer and also the strongest. He is also a teacher at Tokyo Jujutsu High. He is 28 and was born on December 7. 1989. Satoru has a well-built physique and quite a pale complexion. His whitish hair is usually spiked up but he lets it down in casual events. Satoru Gojo has sky-crystal eyes, which now and then he covers with his signature black blindfold. His teeth are pearly white.

Satoru is a complex individual. He is also playful and helpful with his students, close colleagues and friends. 0n the other hand, he can be unsympathetic and cruel towards his enemies. Satoru is confident in his skills and abilities, a determined person who believes that he is unstoppable. His opinions of others are generally limited to his perception of their strength. Besides being very strong, Satoru has many supernatural powers which include Gravity Manipulation, Superhuman Reflexes, and speed.

He uses these powers when helping vulnerable persons and whenever he is fighting curses which are made up of a race of spiritual beings developed from the negative emotions that flow out of humans. On a particular occasion, he used his powers when fighting a special grade cursed spirit called logo. The fight started off when Satoru is confronted by Jogo on an undisclosed road in an assassination attempt. The fight ended up with Hanami, a friend of the cursed spirit rescuing Jogo. I like Satoru Gojo because he has a great personality especially when it comes to his determination and the will to help others.

Overweight otakus trundling around at comic book conventionsStylized hair and skimpy schoolgirl uniforms.Children’s fare and pornography. There are many stereotypes associated with manga and its more visual representation of anime, Often criticized and discredited by those of a more lofty artistic presence, despite whatever prejudice any given member of the population may hold, mango and anime remain an integral part of Japanese cultural memory, “all those processes of a biological, medial or social nature which relate past and present (and future) in sociocultural contexts”  Inherent to mango and anime is the concept of nihonjin-banare (ethnic bleaching), a concept with strong ties to “the representation of traumatic pasts” (Erll 1), “the afterlives of literature”, and ”transnational and transcultural memory”.

Though manga and anime predictably entertain the largest fan base in The Land of the Rising Sun, the dark undercurrent in these forms of media is the perpetuation of the implicit desires of the Japanese to forego their own cultural identity for that of the West. Though most individuals have a basic grasp of the fact that mango and anime are Japanese in origin, “a fascinating characteristic of anime is that it usually does not seem Japanese”. Indeed, “many [examples of manga and] anime feature Caucasian-looking characters either from the West, or Orientals with Western names”, This is because manga and anime deal with ”the Japanese people’s deeply entrenched sense of self»loaLhing, extending even to their own ethnic traits”.

Characters lack the physical characteristics of the Japanese, Settings are often European, or set in generic fantasy or science fiction worlds. Topics are rarely Japanese in nature. While many would point to the nuclear bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki as Japan’s inherent traumatic narrative, a less physically violent example can be found in “the experience of colonialism and decolonization” (Erll 2) that was present during the Meiji Restoration, A period of unprecedented national growth, “Japan’s turbulent and phenomenal advance in both the political and economic realms inevitably created new pressures and new demands” (Morton 164), primarily a conflicted Japanese inferiority complex that has its roots in Meiji Era aspirations “to becomes accepted by the leading nations of the world so that the unequal treaties would be revised, tariff rates improved, extraterritoriality abolished, and Japan accorded its full place in the comity of nations”.

Ever since the Meiji Restoration, Japan has always held Westernization and modernization in the highest regard, an attitude that pervades even in the modern age. This notion has facilitated and encouraged the ”de-politicized internationalization that has made anime more open, allowing for more participation” since ”audiences seemnot any specific cultural characteristics but a blend of different cultures”. This in turn contributes to the “complex entanglements of memory and media in the social arena”, as in the current age, the Meiji Restoration is a “cultural memory,,.produced through objects, images, and representations”. Monga and onime transmit “the memories of those who experienced the events first-hand to people not immediately involved in the events”, As Japan’s most successful export, the risk of mango and anime lie in their “ability…to produce empathy and social responsibility as well as political alliances that transcend race, class and gender”, mainly empathy for and social responsibility and political alliance to the West.

What types of memory do mango and anime engage in? I believe the sense of ethnic bleaching to be so firmly engaged in the Japanese mindset that the “declarative memory requir[ing] a conscious act of recall” is not in play, Unfortunately, ethnic bleaching has been dealt with to such an extent that its perpetuation through mango and anime “is not a conscious act, but a by-product of humans engaging in certain routines” (Mayer- Schonin 18) This is how the ethnic self-loathing in question has entered “implicit memory- memory that we acquire and recall without realizing it”, Obviously manga and anime weren’t around in the time of Meiji Restoration, and I do not mean to implicate them in the origination of these unfortunate national ideologies.

However, their de-politicized internationalization was directly influenced by Meiji Restoration anxieties, and they now continue to pass on those anxieties to countless new generations. For indeed, manga and anime are forms of external memory, ”drawing [and] writing, [that] captures an event, an emotion, a thought”. ”External memory is an extension of our own human memory”, one that “can”.be used to facilitate the construction of shared common memory” , Granted manga and anime do not have explicit creations of “images of a scene or an event” (Mayer 29) that continue to place the West above Japan, but every time a Japanese person looks at these cartoon characters with Western features there’s not a small bit of regret and self-consciousness? Applying a more general interpretation of the word literature to include anything that can be defined as a “text”, the “afterlife” of manga and anime is troubling considering the dubious nature of de-politicized internationalization discussed above.

Mango and anime “manage to “live on” and remain in use and meaningful to readers” (Erll 4), possessing a great propensity for ”continuation and actualization” (Erll 3). However, what is particularly unique about manga and anime is that the ethnic bleaching they encourage doesn’t change with the generations The ”new lease of life in changing social contexts” (Erll 3) seems to continue because all Japanese social contexts other than the “deeply entrenched sense of self-loathing” (Lu 172) are in the process of changingJapanese women are getting more rights in the workplace.

Efforts are being taken by the government to combat the alarmingly declining birth rate (which in turn is critically tied to the rights of Japanese women, but that’s a topic for another time), Yet despite positive changes such as these, the ethnic bleaching and self-loathing it perpetuates still remain ubiquitous. What is interesting in terms of mango and anime is the distinct lack of a Japanese “methodological nationalism” (Errl 4) and the fact that the art forms are adamantly insistent upon remembering and championing Western ideological colonization as opposed to ”forget[ting] the history of culture exchange” (Errl 4). A ”methodological nationalism” is present, but it’s not a methodological nationalism centered around Japan.

The “history of culture exchange” is not forgotten in such a way that glorifies pre—Restoration Japanese society; rather, it would appear as ifJapan wants to forget the time that it wasn’t dominated by the West. It would appear that the only nationalism being committed to methodology is one in which Japan will always be inferior to the West, constantly striving to be considered equalt The most obvious deleterious effect is of course the aforementioned national self-loathing, But a more subtle but no less harmful consequence is the sour seed of ”self-orientalized internationalism” (Lu 169) that continues to be perpetuated. “Japan considers itself a Western country in Asia” (Lu 179), a fact that may initially seem positive.

If the topic so far has been dealing with Japan’s desire to be considered a Western equal, than isn’t this a signifier of success? Unfortunately, much like the West has Orientalized virtually all of the East, now l’another kind of Orientalism has developed in Japan, primarily as a result of cultural exchanges between the East and the West” (Lu 179), Japan now looks at other Asian countries with the prejudiced and patronizing eye that was bestowed upon them by the West, turning them into ”cultural imperialists” (Lu180)t This is dangerous because the self- loathing sparked by the West’s interactions with Japan may be sparked in another nation, this time centered around Japanese interactions, The cute cartoon characters of mango and onime champion some ominous ideals.