Blog #5- Dystopia text selection Jovana Gama

The text/film Ive decided to chose for this assignment is the Hunger Games. I am still deciding whether or not I want to analyze the film version or the book version. I have seen the film version directed by Gary Ross. I may plan on doing my analysis on the book version written by Suzanne Collins.  I will be doing my paper based on the first book/film of the Hunger Games. The Hunger Games is a dystopia because there are different districts that are living in poverty,  within these confined grounds that look similar to concentration camps. One boy and one girl are chosen from 12 different districts and are chosen to fight to the death on a reality show. There survival all depends on a certain skill they obtain and on "sponsors". All the people chosen for the "Hunger Games" can range in variety of age. This is undesirable because it is not often thought as fun to engage in murdering, especially all for a show that others are watching as entertainment. The characters have to literally fight and kill in order to stay alive. The characters are dehumanized and thought of as game players on this show, and not thought of as real people. Life within the districts are a dystopia and those that live within the inner city are wealthy and view the Hunger Games as entertainment although all these "players" are fighting for their life.
I have yet to conduct any research on my text. As far as any analytical lenses or theoretical lens, I am still up in the air on details.

Dystopian Blog Chris Bertrand

The primary text I think I'll be going with is Lord of the Flies. I think everyone is pretty familiar with this text from high school, but the material previously covered was about symbolism or something of that sort.. This text is a good representation of a dystopia because the story line develops a chaotic, unruly group of kids who decent into a very unorganized, lawless group of kids. I'm leaning more towards a Marxist theory paper, I think this lense "fits" best. No research done yet bu I'm pretty sure there will be an abundance of sources to cite.

Dystopia Blog Trevor Coopersmith 4/28/13

The primary dystopia text I selected is the movie Idiocracy. Mike Judge wrote and directed this sci-fi comedy which gives a new meaning to the expression "people are getting dumber all the time." In 2005, Joe Bowers  is a soldier who was chosen to take part in a secret military scientific experiment. The expirement consisted of which he will be put into hibernation for one year, along with a woman named Rita, another main character. Bowers and Rita are forgotten when the military base where the experiment took place is closed down, and when they wake up in the year 2505, Bowers finds himself living in a society where intelligence has taken such a downfall that he's now the smartest man in the world.The specific features that make Idiocracy a dystopia is that it is a critique of American society currently in multiple ways. A professional wrestler is president, plants are watered with gatorade, and starbucks sells prostitutes. Idiocracy attacks consumerism, immortality with women, and sensationalism in politics. Idiocracy is another world used to point out flaws and compare society to others. Idiocracy is exaggerating the fact that many Americans believe everything they are told. Potential theoretical approaches include Feminism due to the mocking of women sexuality rights in the film and a Marxist approach due to the constant economic downfall and roles of people in society. So far I found a review of the movie Idiocracy by Sheri Linden. "Idiocracy" is hardly flawless; much like "Office Space," it delivers a socko premise but can't quite sustain the edge, lapsing into formulaic storytelling that dulls the payoff." I will continue to look for more scholarly sources and watch the movie again before I write the paper.

BLOG #5: Text Selection/Initial Analysis for Research Assignment (Due by Thursday, 05/02)

This one's pretty simple.

Tell me about the primary text you've selected. You should provide basic identifying information as well as a summary. Then: which features make this text a dystopia? Which theory(ies) will work well as analytical lenses? Have you settled on a theoretical lens?

Have you done any research yet? What have you found? List/link anything you've identified as a possible source here. 

I will try to comment on all of these. The more ideas/possible analysis you have, the more I can give you. Will be looking forward to reading these. 

Jennifer Sanchez: Oleanna Play Write up

In the live performance of Oleanna the audience would laugh when John and Carol would say something that "seemed" funny.  The play is suppose to anger the audience.  Which this live performance it made the audience laugh. It didn't get me mad and the actors didn't show emotion. Throughout the play they talked in the same tone it did not change.  It was simply plain, words from act one were changed.
Carol's shyness was there through her acting. There wasn't a change of self-conscious to being confident. 
I was happy that John threw her to the ground but not as satisfied when I saw it in the movie. John most of the time was sitting down and I expected him to be walking around the stage.

Blog Post #4 Oleanna Lee Bowen

When we first started watching the play Oleanna I didn't quite understand what the overall deal was with this student teacher complex. Carol wanted to talk to her professor about receiving a better grade but all John could talk about was his house and that they come from two different social classes. At first it seemed like he used that as an excuse to why she didn't get the grade she wanted even though she knew she had struggled throughout the class. Then he starts comparing her to himself as they go deeper into why she could't understand his style of teaching. Carol uses the claim of sexual harassment to try and get what she wants while making John look like the one at fault for everything. J.K Curry stating "The work obscures the issue of sexual harassment by suggesting that sexual harassment is really a ploy of militant feminists to disempower and destroy white, middle-class, male academics." Carol uses her feminism ways to try to make the situation favor her over the professor. Using this against him as a tactic in order to obtain what she desires is ultra sad.

Chris Bertrand Blog #4/ Q #4

I feel compelled to agree with Scholar Richard Badenhausen (“The Modern Academy Raging in the Dark: Misreading Mamet's Political Incorrectness in Oleanna"), when he acknowledges that “In discussing the 1992 debut of David Mamet's Oleanna, audiences and critics tended to highlight two features of the play: its indictment of political correctness on college campuses in America and its treatment of sexual harassment..” Political correctness on college campuses was an important topic, since there’s this ‘fine line’ of political correctness that administrators can’t cross but the professor in Oleanna most certainly did. The treatment of sexual harassment being a very important topic that was brought up in Oleanna as well, where again there is a fine line you shouldn’t cross, and again John did.  “ characters polarized not only in their gender, but physically, generationally, and educationally.” I agree with Richard Badenhausen here as well, you couldn’t have a found a more demographically polarized cast, unless the student was also a minority.

 It  was important to make these contradicting traits and touch on such highly controversial issues or else it would not have been as easy to explore “the perils of inferior teaching and the subsequent misreadings that necessarily follow in a pedagogical environment that tacitly reinforces (instead of collapsing or bridging) hierarchical differences amongst its participants.” And you see this time and time again, with ample context amplifying the shortcomings of the system at hand with the constant interruptions, the crossings of the ‘political correctedness’ and ‘sexual harassment’ lines, and their overall miscommunication due to pedagogical jargon.

Brianna Engelhorn Blog #4

In the beggining Oleanna, it was very annoying to watch. The dialogue of the professor and student constantly cutting each other off was just very hard to follow and not get distracted. I started to become particularly interested and the characters way of interacting was a little easier to follow towards the middle of the play. It was hard to grasp what Carol's intentions were at first because in my opinion she was a typical hard working student looking to improve a grade she thought should be higher. When Carol claims that the Professor sexually harassed her it started to fall together. I like how J.K Curry described Oleanna as "not being primarily about sexual harassment, but about false or distorted allegations." Carol started to use her need in that class to get a good grade to turning it into targeting the professor into making the public think he was sexually harassing her. J.K Curry stating "The work obscures the issue of sexual harassment by suggesting that sexual harassment is really a ploy of militant feminists to disempower and destroy white, middle-class, male academics." Carol had an advantage and she knew she did because she claimed she came from a lower class than the professor causing it to look like she was less fortunate as well as seeming incredibly vulnerable  By the end I realized that I had sympathized with Carol at first only to at the end kind of have disgust in the way she used her feminism approach to target the professor. 

Extra Credit Question 5 Jess Cantu

At first watching the movie Oleanna was a struggle. Carol's voice got under my skin and she would keep interrupting the professor. I agree with J.K. Curry's statement, "The problem with Oleanna is that it is not really or not primarily, about sexual harassment at all, but rather about false allegations." When Carol went into his office the first time it was innocent. She wanted his help to understand the book he had written and possibly to gain his trust. The second meeting is a lot different from the first. She accuses him of things that he did not due just so that she could get him into trouble. He grabbed her wrist at one point to try and calm her down and talk to her and she turned it around on him and claimed that he raped her. The second part of what J.K. Curry said is true also, "Or, perhaps more accurately about exaggerated forms of harassment or distorted claims of harassment." She exaggerated being raped when all the professor did was try and calm her. And if she was being 'raped,' why would she continue to go to his office to talk to him. Maybe only to rub it in his face that she has the power to ruin his career, which she did. She became power hungry and would lie to get her way and to make she that the professor was fired. 

Extra Credit Blog Quetion #5 - Laura Romero

J.K. Curry explains in his article, "David Mamet's Oleanna as Commentary on Sexual Harassment in the Academy", that he believes the "problem" with Oleanna was not about sexual harassment,"but rather about false allegations...about exaggerated or distorted claims of harassment". I completely agree with what he is saying. Everything that Carol accuses John of is not false, but taken completely out of context, which make it sound a hundred times worse than it actually was. Carol made it seem to the tenure commity as if John was trying to seduce her or attempting to ask her for something inappropriate in exchange for her grade to be changed.
Her initial reason for going in to see him , without an appointment may I add, was to talk to him about her grade. When she got there, she just sat down because he was on the phone, but as soon as he got off the phone, the first question she asks him is "what is a term of art" that has nothing to do with her grade. If she went in to talk about her grade, and her grade was actually her only reason for stepping into his office, why was she using up her time and his, to talk about something that was in the end of no importance to her.
Curry states that "...suggesting that sexual harassment is really a ploy of militant feminists to disempower and destroy white, middle-class, male academics."  I agree with what Curry is saying here. Sexual harassment and rape arevery serious offenses, and from what I know about sexual harassment and rape as a whole and about the victims of these crimes, it is very traumatic and horrendous experience. Carol accuses John of sexual harassment and then of attempted rape, both extremely horrible things. If someone actually went through these crimes the odds are that they would be traumatized. Even looking at the person who harassed and/or raped them would be an extremely difficult and terrifying experience. So if John really sexually harassed Carol and attempted to rape her, why would she go back to meet him alone, in his office? An actual victim of either one of these crimes would never do this.
Victims of these crimes, can be scarred and traumatized for a very long time, possibly the rest of their lives. Something like this does not just go away. A victim of an offense of these magnitudes, does not easily "forgive and forget". Carol , the alleged victim of BOTH sexual harassment and rape, seems to be perfectly fine the next time she meets with John. She even offers him a deal to make her accusations go away. She tells him that her and her "group" would like certain books to be taken off the school list. John's book being one of the books on said list.
I agree completely with Curry. What Carol and her "group" are doing, was not about sexual harassment and getting justice for her agony, it was about taking someone down who held more power than themselves/. No real victim of these crimes, would offer something in exchange for them to recant their accusations. The only justice that some victims of those crimes get, is for the assailants to be put behind bars and locked away so that they are no longer able to hurt them or anyone else. Carol and her "group's" only objective, since the first time Carol set foot into John's office, was to take him down one way or another for their own satisfaction.

Blogg 4 Alex Z

Question #5

When we watched this film in class, I couldn’t help but get upset about it, not literally but figuratively speaking.  David Mamets movie Oleanna was a good movie, it made me think about various aspects of Feminism.  I agree with what J.K Curry said that “The problem with Oleanna is that it is not really or not primarily, about sexual harassment at all, but rather about false allegations”.  When I watched this film I thought of the movie in the same way.  When Carol the student first came into his office, to me it seemed as if she didn’t even need to get help from John the professor.  From the beginning Carols act looked staged, as if she knew she was going to do what she did.  As the film progressed Carol was getting a little more aggressive, and you could see that she was no longer in his office for help anymore, it almost looked as if she was in there to find what she could get John in trouble for.  Towards the middle of the movie she had put together some accusations to get John in trouble with the schools board.  But she showed an aggressive form of feminism to find the most harmless things that John did, like holding her by her arms to try to calm her down, and she took it and turned it around and said “You tried to rape Me”, “…under the statute.  I am told.  It was battery”.  In the view of most of the society it was not battery or rape, it was just a teacher trying to calm down a student that needed it.  But to Carol it was something she could use to get John in trouble with the school.  And this leads to what J.K. Curry said when he states “Or, perhaps more accurately about exaggerated or distorted claims of harassment”.  Carol does use exaggerated forms of harassment as when she uses the time when she was getting a little crazy when she was with john in his office, and John just tried to calm her down but she took it as battery and she wanted to file charges with that occurrence.  With filing charges Carol could have John fired from the university that he has worked so hard to get to.  In doing so Carol may feel some sort of power that she got a such accredited teacher fired from that school, and doing that it would be a achievement to her and her so called group.

Blog #4 Question #2 Cara Dacus, Eng. 201 1073

After watching Oleanna in class we were asked to have discussions amongst ourselves and talk about our initial reactions to the play. It seemed to me that overwhelmingly the class thought of the professor, John, as a victim. That he was "just trying to help" and that he "deserved" respect because he was the teacher, as opposed to her, the student. I definitely felt that John was portrayed as the protagonist, and Carol the antagonist. While I feel like her actions were coming from a morally questionable place, both of their actions were detrimental to each other.  Just because he was not aware, or conscious of misusing his power does not mean that he's innocent. The road to hell is paved with good intentions, or so I hear.
       I do agree with Showalter in that the characters were not equal and fair in their representations. True, they were both incredibly annoying but John was easier to relate to. His goals and ambitions (to rise up the social ladder by teaching at a university, to buy a nice home for his family) line up with typical American ideals. Carlos motives are never fully understood. It is clear that she wants to ruin John's career to make a statement, but her arguments are exaggerations of the truth, at best. Her character is largely unexplored, creating more questions than answers. By portraying the characters as such it seems clear to me that the audience would naturally sympathize with John. In reading how audiences react to this play, especially the end when John beats Carol, by cheering and applauding, it seems hard to argue that the there isn't a "right" or "wrong" side to take.
    Showalter was definitely harsh in her critique of David Mamet. While I do not think he succeeded in his goal of creating a balanced case for each character, the writers goal and what is created do not always have to match up to make a successful piece of art. I think the play was well written. Being able to draw out such strong emotions from an audience, who knows that they are watching a play, that it is not real, and yet they get so emotionally wrapped up in it is a very difficult task. If nothing else this play brings up questions and forces people to think about what they feel and why.

Blog 4: Question 5 -Andrea Abbott

       As the critique J.K Curry stated, the film Oleanna suggests “that sexual harassment is really a ploy of militant feminists to disempower and destroy white, middle-class, male academics” (“David Mamet’s Oleanna as Commentary on Sexual Harassment in the Academy”). Although I’m not completely sure about what Carol’s group’s intentions were, it’s clear that the student used her “innocent” position as a female student to get the professor fired, and did not actually feel sexually threatened. From the gecko Carol plans to take down John which becomes clear when she tries to “dictate a class content reading list, [violating] John's academic freedom and [abusing] [the] campus sexual harassment policy.” Through manipulation, the student’s offensive agenda towards the college’s strict no-tolerance policy allows her to succeed in the end. However, like the play, the film sets out for the audience to sympathize with the professor, so it almost feels acceptable when he begins to beat her (well, at first anyways). It’s because of the shady, dis-honest instances like when Carol yells, “Let me go.  Let me go.  Would somebody help me?  Would somebody help me please…?” (so the faculty members could clearly hear her)  and when she reads from her notes: “The twelfth: ‘Have a good day, dear.’ The fifteenth: ‘Now, don’t you look fetching…’ April seventeenth: ‘If you girls would come over here…’” While she confesses “For two semesters [she] sat there [watching the professor] exploit [their], as [he] thought, “paternal prerogative,” and what is that but rape;”… then adds, “I came here to instruct you,” that we take the teacher’s side. In my opinion, if this film did indeed try to make a Feminist/Marxism point, it got lost due to the overwhelming focus on sexual harassment. As a female, I wanted to like Carol and root for her dedication and commitment to gain power, however she did it in such dis-tasteful matters that I had to sympathize with John. If I (being a young woman) rooted against Carol, then what does that say about the Feminist influence in the production? I think the film was not created for the audience to find one answer or take sides, but pressures us to start thinking about multiple issues about power struggle, poor communication, sexism, and so on. It’s how you interpret it that matters.

Extra Credit blog #4 question #6

As we were watching the Oleanna class, we got to learn a lot about our characters Carol and John. John who is a professor at a university comes in contact with Carol who is one of his students. Carol comes into his office with a problem of failing his class and she is seeking for some guidance and understanding. As the film continues I began to dislike Carol due to the fact the he was rude to her professor the whole time while he was trying to explain to her and make her understand what was going on. He also had other proprieties with his family that he had to get to, but he decided to help her. Looking at Carols character, I do not see her as being a Feminist,or even being a role model. Although my views on Feminist are different, relating to the film, I see someone as a role model if they are setting a good example, and are strong willed. As Carol is a strong willed and determined person, the way she comes off to the professor is rude and arrogant and just trying to get what she wants, which is to pass his class. She is constantly asking "what" and "why" to everything the professor is saying and at times doesn't even let him finish his thought. By her expression, you can tell that Carol gets overwhelmed very easily and tends to come off as a pain and overall rude person.

Brad Wires-Question #1-Analysis of Oleanna

According to Marxist Theory, dominant ideologies are set by the bourgeoisie. The proletariat then adhere to these ideologies. Analyzing Oleanna with Reflection Theory reveals some of these dominant American ideologies. The pursuit of a higher education, for some in America, can be a tantalizing task. This is reflected in the film when Carol says "I have done everything you told me to do. I bought your book. I sit in class and take notes...everything you said" yet Carol still receives a failing grade and a passing grade seems unobtainable. A higher education is, in a sense, required in today's society. This ideology is also reflected when Carol exclaims "How do I...what do they say...get on in my life?" Carol believes a higher education is required to improve her socioeconomic status. This is a dominant ideology in America, go to college, earn good grades, and a good paying job will be waiting. In the film, John's ultimate goal is securing tenure and purchasing a new house for his family. I believe this is something all Americans want, job security. Sexual harassment has been a hot topic in the last few decades. There have been policies put in place to not only protect women from being sexually harassed but also to protect men from false allegations. The film reflects these policies in a realistic way, showing what can happen when false allegations are alleged. I believe sexual harassment ideologies in America are in a transitional grey area. Nothing is really black and white, and this grey area is represented well in the film. Another dominant American ideology is that America is the land of opportunity and anyone is capable of moving up through the social and economic classes, rags to riches, so to speak. Although this is inspiring, the reality is that it only happens on rare occasions. This reality is reflected in Oleanna. Carol says "I come from a different social...a different economic. You don't know what it cost me to come to this school." She has worked very hard and sacrificed to have the same opportunities as someone in a higher social/economic class. I think the author's worldview consists of questioning certain systems. Perhaps sexual harassment policies and the social and economic classes. The author portrays John as the protagonists and Carol as the antagonists. This suggests the author might view radical feminists as a growing concern, and that questioning sexual harassment policies is important.

Sanchez, Jennifer Oleanna Blog #4 (Extra Credit)

Question 5:

   In Oleanna, Carol is a student that goes in professor's John office to get help because she is failing the class. J.K. Curry says that is it a plot from feminist to destroy white men, middle-class, academic career. I agree with him because when John says something Carol immediately writes down, and then she intentionally and/or unintentionally misinterprets what he says. John in the first scene wanted to explain something to Carol, and she would not listen to him so he grabbed her by her harms. Carol screamed, "Let me go. Let me go. Would somebody help me? Would somebody help me please...?” heading toward the hallway. By her doing this it shows the audience that is on purpose is saying that John is trying to rape her who in reality he wanted to calm her down and to explain something she did not understand.
   So compared from the first scene she had changed in her appearance and her vocabulary enhanced. The thing John had said such as him liking her, giving her an A if she came to his office to start the class over, and by him having troubles with his wife have been turned around by one simple student that is in a "group" that is not mentioned throughout the play.
   She must have been known that by screaming those words her professor could be fired because of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 stating that sexual discrimination is illegal; the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission in 1980 stating that verbal and psychical abuse toward students can determine an employment decisions toward a professor. As Carol perception was different than John's she destroyed his life.
   Slowly Carol starts to "button in" into John's conversations then trying to talk to him about buying a house and his wife. As the play started to end his wife called him and then John called her "babe", right before that he had kicked Carol out of his office. Carol then stands by the door waiting for something to happen. Soon that happens and she tells John not to call his wife babe basically trying to interfere, manipulate him by telling him what not to do. Even though she is trying to manipulate him she meets her goal and is beaten by John. John beating her was one of the things she needed in order to have proven so she can sew him. In a sense she wants to feel power as men have, but she takes it on to a different level such as accusing a professor that was trying to help a student without harming her.
   In the end, Carol wanted to feel power and destroy a man’s life. She purposely made false allegations about her professor and would be "nosey" in everything her professor would do during office hours. Her false allegations were John trying to commit sexual harassment, saying he liked Carol, and inviting her into his office in a more than a student relationship level according to her. Her actions make her feel more in power than a white "successful" man and her demand for fair treatment.

Chris Graves Blog Post #4 - Question 1

David Mamit's "Oleanna" is a two-character drama that explores the miscommunication between social classes in reflection of Karl Marx's theory between the bourgeoisie and the proletarians. It is a play about student/teacher relationships, sexual harassment, and political academics reflecting the very superstructure of the American society.  Carol is a female student who meets with the male professor privately in regards to her current struggle in understanding her professor's book. She explains her incompetency to John, the professor, but John lacks sympathy because he is distracting by an issue, purchasing a "big house." John begins to express sympathy for her and soon decides to break the rules, giving her an A for the term if she agrees to meet with him alone to discuss the material. Furthermore, Carol goes from becoming insecure to very well spoken with her words, accuses her professor of sexual harassment, then towards the end,  becomes powerful and reveals charges she has filed against John.
In the first act, Carol is introduced as a struggling student who represents the middle/working class or as Marx would call it, "the proletariat." John, "the bourgeoisie," is the professor, representing the capitalist and showing the power he holds over his students. With an analysis of reflection theory and applying it to Oleanna, the relationship between Carol and John reflect the very relationship between the upper and middle class in the American society, struggling in forms of communication toward another. The text individualizes the reality between the classes through the education system between the professor and students. John uses the phrase, "a term of art." Carol asks John to define its meaning but John isn't sure what it really means. The term of art represents the verbal communication between the classes. There is a sense of discrimination that is revealed indicating that the bourgeoisie is of higher class, possibly more educated by a use of higher vocabulary that diversifies them self from the proletarians, the students.  In society, the middle class is perceived to  be the class of struggle under the capitalist. The capitalist provide the economy with work and order that the proletarians abide to in order to succeed. The proletarians strive to become more power like the bourgeoisie yet the bourgeoisie use their power to keep the proletarians below them. John becomes empathetic towards Carol after he witnesses her determination to succeed and decides to give her an A, not only to attempt to make Carol happy but to keep his position.  Later, Carol's rise in power reflects the theory of the rises of the proletarians over the bourgeoisie. Ironically, Carol then becomes the superior one and puts the professor's position in danger.
Oleanna is a play reflecting David Mamith's world view on power between classes, understanding each other, and harassment. His views represent the realistic issues of discrimination against sex and gender on campus grounds. Sexual harassment is mostly directed towards women, hence the use of Carol as a student, that is often intended and results in discouraging them to be involved in the working or school environment. Students who strive for a higher education yearn for intellectual freedom. Students may experience restrictions from intellectual freedom when asked to drop classes or change majors having been influenced.

Keshav Sharma Blog Post #4

Question 3:

In the play Oleanna written by David Mamet, the writer presents a story about two characters set on a prestigious university campus. The two characters in the play are John, a college professor, and Carol, one of John’s students who comes to him to protest his teaching methods. By noting how Carol and John’s physical appearances and mannerisms change throughout the play, one can track their changes in attitude and position. Initially, John is portrayed as being a “sophisticated” college professor who speaks with etiquette, keeps his hair well kept, and dresses in suit and tie. His office is well organized and consists of both an inner and outer room. Carol, in contrast, dresses in average clothing, keeps her hair frizzy, and talks in a disrespectful manner toward her professor. While John initially talks in words which Carol finds difficult to understand, he later tones down his vocabulary to speak to Carol after she files accusations of sexual harassment against him. Once this event occurs, John actually begins to unravel. His physical appearance begins to deteriorate as seen by the scene in the hotel. Rather than drinking tea like a “sophisticated” person as he used to, John starts smoking cigarettes and drinking alcohol. In comparison, Carol’s mannerisms actually improve after she files accusations against John. She begins dressing in suits just as John used to and starts speaking for a “group” rather than for herself. As the story progresses, Carol and John seem to swap positions, with Carol being the more assertive character by the end of the play. While John is able to keep himself calm throughout the play, after losing his patience with Carol by the end, he savagely beats and degrades her before the play ends.

Everybody's Wrong: Blog 4 Question #2 Charles Schlecht

According to Dr. Professor Bolanski's post, Mamet said that "no matter whose side we're on, we're wrong." This makes it hard to tell who is the protagonist and antagonist in the story. But with that previous statement, I think what Mamet meant was that John and Carol are both protagonists and antagonists (which is like saying neither of them are). In John's perspective, he is the protagonist with Carol as the antagonist; while simultaneously, Carol is the protagonist in her own perspective with John as the antagonist. John is trying to gain tenure at his college, and secure his new house for him and his family. Then he tries to help troubled Carol with understanding his material. Later, she accuses him of different disorderly conducts, one of which is sexual harassment (John's antagonist).

Now from Carol's perspective: all we know is that she is a student who didn't understand any of the course material. She goes to the professor for help. For a student, not understanding material can be very frustrating. And when people (in general) don't understand something, their confusion makes them scared (like, being scared of not passing the class). And when people are confused and scared, they don't exactly think straight. So Carol goes to John for help. Her confusion and apparent lack of intellectual self-esteem cause her to become more confused. With this confusion, she misinterprets what appears to be John's attempts to help her and interprets it as John coming on to her (Carol's antagonist). These attempts are John putting his hands on her shoulders to calm her down, telling her to relax and sit, and making that deal with her where she asks "why" and he replies, "Because I like you" (which is just bad word choice on his part). It also doesn't help that she kept writing notes, using them later on completely out of context. After Carol reports this to the tenure board or whoever, she becomes slightly less confused, allowing her more confidence to dress nicer and use a better vocabulary towards the end. She thinks she is right for reporting John, but she is still confused, allowing the lawyers to tell her that she was in an attempted rape. The sexual harassment becomes rape. She even said, "they told me you tried to rape me." So her confusion allows her to believe this.

John thinks that he was just trying to help a student. Simultaneously, Carol thinks that her professor harassed her. So both characters are protagonists and each other's antagonists, but neither are the story's protagonist or antagonist. In this story, it is hard to decide who is the protagonist and antagonist, but that is because we are not supposed to. The story doesn't have one. I think that if anything (other than making money in the box-office), the play is supposed to focus on confusion and bad communication (both in teaching and in conversation), not on power, status, social class, or sexual harassment. Bad communication can have very bad consequences. Jeez, I wrote a lot...

Blog Post #4, ABBEY VIVAS, Extra Credit Question #3 "Oleanna"

          In David Mamet's Olenna, the physical characteristics are an essential asset to human judgment and their development. When intentionally meeting someone, before you have the engage in a conversation, appearance is key. Automatically, we look at someone’s clothes, hair race, facial expression, and so on. Carol right away is presented in her appearance as sort of a slob-looking girl; physically she looks like an outcast but personally she seems closed off, insecure, and unsure. As for John, who is shown as a groomed, proper, suit-wearing professor surrounded by big books in his office and is shown talking about buying his big new house; a sign of his superior success. While discussing about the course with Professor John she is constantly questioning "what" and "why" to everything. She seems easily overwhelmed. Her facial expressions appear frantic as she goes through her textbook and notes.
          In their first meeting John is dressed professional and appears calm and rational even though chaos is erupting around him concerning his new house. John comes off as almost arrogant as he is consumed with his own self confidence when discussing the topics of his book, class, and ten year. I also think it is interesting how the camera often focuses on John's hands, mainly on his wedding ring, which makes me as the viewer sympathize with his character more simply because I know more about his background than I do Carol's, whose is rather mysterious and unknown. Carol remains distressed throughout the first two parts of this movie claiming “she does not understand” and is constantly acts as the “damsel in distress.” Another oddity is when the professor almost randomly states "I am not your father" and later says he talk to Carol as he would talk to his own son. But Carol continues to appear weak and intangible claiming John has sexual harassed her during their first meeting. Here we begin to see a shift of power as Carol begins to appear mentally strong and forceful when her and John spoke alone but once they are in the eye of the public she once again appears in control.
          By the end of the play, Carol never states that she doesn't understand one of John's comments or big words like in act 1, and is now the one who is literally backing John up against the wall and now "teaching" him a lesson. Another thing that happens was that the roles of power have switched; physically Carol appears strong in a suit and holds her head up high as she talks to John. Carol can often be seen physically cornering John as he attempts to make sense of the accusations at hand. John appears physically disastrous with messy hair, ripped and dirty clothes, and attempts to drink or smoke multiple times throughout their last conversation. Physical appearance is an instant way we judge one another, although not always accurate, we can easily tell if someone is tired, stressed, or calm. Physical appearance in this movie is strongly associated with power and confidence and can be proven through every scene in this film.

Blog Post #4, Kristyn Gumienny, "Oleanna" Question 1

"Oleanna" by David Mament

   The play "Oleanna" is centered around two characters, Carol, the student, and John, the professor. John presents himself with a clean image, and he is well spoken, while Carol appears to be a bit sloppy and unorganized. Carol walks into John's office with a question about the class lecture, and John is quick to help her. Even before he speaks you know he is intelligent, and well organized by looking around the room. Carol is stuttering, and nervous because she does not want to fail the class... the "status" is obvious. I feel that at the beginning of the play, and even towards the middle where there was some tension forming, that John handled himself very well. Even though they were both interrupting each other at times, Carol could wait until John was finished talking. She kept throwing questions at him when he was still explaining the previous. 

     Carol is promised an A if she returns to speak to John, so day after day she returns with more questions, taking notes. At first she is taking down notes while John answers her questions, but from then on, everyday she returns she may have been jotting down his "language," and "gestures." What I found weird about Carol was that she didn't seem bothered by John when he said "I will make you a deal... your grade for the whole term is an “A.” If you will come back and meet with me. A few more times," and he places both his hands on Carol's shoulders. At this point she could have shrugged them off, or even tell him that she is uncomfortable with the way he is speaking/touching her... based on the allegations later in the play.

     Towards the middle of the play things start to get heated. At this point the audience has to be both annoyed and frustrated with Carol. John in a way also uses his power, his knowledge, to perhaps tease  and belittle Carol by continuing to use difficult words. Carol asks John several times what a word means, and when he explains she says "Then why didn't you just say that!" But even after that, John continues to use challenging words, almost as though he wants to her struggling to understand what he is saying. The conversation also shifts quickly from a friendly one to an argument, where both characters end up raising their voices at each other.      

     At the end of the play Carol comes in with several accusations, saying that John tried to rape her. But never did Carol tell him to "stop." She hands the accusations to John, reading, "He told me that if I would stay alone with him in his office, he would change my grade to an A," though I don't ever recall John stressing to Carol to come alone. Carol was just an innocent student when she walked in, I couldn't help but feel bad for her, but my feelings changed again when she came in with her "ridiculous accusations" and tried to get back at John by saying some pretty unnecessary things... for example at the end of the play when John was talking to his wife and said "baby." She demanded John not to call her "baby" and the anger escalated fast from there. I was left not feeling bad for neither of them. Maybe it was sexual harassment, abuse of power, or maybe it wasn't, but the end was sure unexpected and purposely leaves the mind with many questions, and open for some discussion.

Blogg 4: Oleanna Amanda P.G

Oleanna is a play written by David Mamet, explores miscommunication and misunderstanding between a student/teacher relationships.

During the beginning of the video I see a girl that needs help and has a very time understanding the concept of the lecture that the professor gives. She pleads for the professor to help her and explains her situation, once he sees her distraught she puts his hands on her shoulder in order to try to calm her and then he offers to tutor her himself and will give her an A if she comes and meets him because he will take her step to step on the lessons. Even though he does touch her through the play but I think they are gesture and if you don’t like it then why did she not warn him at first and it seemed she did not respect the professor and he makes her seem unworthy of his time. In Act 2 you can see a difference in both characters; he become more messy and disorganized with his thoughts and actions while carol is dressed better and her vocabulary has improve, and she uses it to criticize him. Just like in Curry essay he describe the claims that carol did are very exaggerated and misinterpreted because she did want to prevent the professor from gaining more power or simply trying to bring power of “women in higher education, and to their demand for fair treatment” (Curry).  
Even though in the end she admits of letting the charges go if he is to ban his book and go by her “groups “ rules, this proves that she was preventing him from gaining even more power. The he does hit her its because he has let anger take over but I ask myself if the professor was upper class and you can see that because of the language he uses would he not know how to behave around a student I also think that he made a huge mistake of touching her and now she does have proof of being sexually harassed.

Kendall Butt Extra Credit Question 1: Characterization in Oleanna

With all of the questions posed in Oleanna, it helps to step back and focus on the tools used by the writer that serve as the base for the entire play. First impressions hold strong, as everyone knows, and the first impressions of of both Carol and John provide base for the remainder of the production. Carol is designed in a way to give the audience no choice but to absolutely disregard her authority. She is not only completely obnoxious in her line of question and actions, but her first outfit is quite loose and baggy which can instill a negative view on her character for the viewer. John, on the other hand, is first showcased in his highly prestigious office and clean attire. He is created as not only a educated man, but also a rational character, and this decreases the regard for Carol's intelligence. Carol's character also tends to create facial expressions that are most often scrutinized and confused. John, on the other hand is seen as clear faced and generally calm in his dealings with Carol. His relaxed demeanor and undying effort to use extremely verbose language leads to intensify Carol's panicked and paranoid  attitude and questioning. It can also be easily observed that John is comfortable in his environment. He strides around his office, sitting on desks and table, and does not hesitate on an opportunity to be at an angle above Carol. Opposite this, Carol timidly follows John's lead and only appears headstrong in her efforts  to interrupt and argue with John. Her flustered interjections give away her low self-confidence. Despite the basis of the characters created through their body language and appearance, the play can lead viewers to find a sense of empathy for Carol, and a loathing for John nearing the end--the fact being that the main determinant of one's feelings towards these characters is their own socio-economic standing.

Allison Geviss: Blog post #4 Question #5

In J.K. Curry’s analysis of Oleanna by Davis Mamet she claims that the movie is not themed around sexual harassment but themed more on false allegations. I agree with Curry in that the facts given by Carol in the movie and the tone she has when clarifying the accusations shows that she is pursuing more than just justice, that she wants to prevent him from moving up in the hierarchy of society. An example of this is when she states "under the statute. I am told. It was battery. Yes. And attempted rape." The words chosen hint that she may not truly feel as if she was battered and rapped but yet she agrees with her group and authority that under the definition it is indeed rape and battery. This is a sign that she may not be accusing him of these allegations for the fact that he may have come across as doing such thing but to solely put in his place and show him that he is not god and that no matter how he felt this occurred it does not matter because to her it was. And that is all that matters. She seems to purposely try to prevent him from moving up into the hierarchy of academics and the bourgeoisie. It is a way for her "group" of which we do not know whom it consists of is trying to undermine white male authority and are targeting John due to the fact his beliefs do not consist of those of Carol or her group. Do

Chris Spiers Blog #4 Oleanna

The story of Oleanna demonstrates two separate social and economic standing persons forced to interact because of mutual dependence upon the other person for attaining and maintaining personal growth. Carol, a young, shy, timid looking female student is not passing her crucial college course and requires help and possibly sympathy from her Professor to receive a personally desirable grade in the course. She is most likely from a lower middle class home and demon straits social assumptions of her class. Overwhelmed by her course she becomes anncuis with anxiety's stemming from her need to quickly and successively complete her crucial "higher education". In her attempts to remedy her poor performance she is paired with her "All Knowing" professor John. The story makes me believe John has been raised in the upper social economic class, he carries himself with an all knowing ever deserving grace. In the beginning of the story Carol is nothing more than a typical sub average student in his class that possibly shouldn't even be there. The start of this story inevitably depicts the authors world view plainly stating that people of greater socioeconomic class view themselves in better light that those below them. However, Oleanna dose not finish as it begins, through the course of the story Carol ingeniously cuts down the pillars holding John above her and in true american fashion levels the power scale with wit and law.

Oleanna Extra Credit Blog #4 Brad Petz

In David Mamet's Oleanna, both John and Carol are representitive of actual, real Americans and some of the struggles we all deal with. Carole is the stereotypical mid-college student that is trying her best to get by, but can't seem to ever get a leg up. She takes notes about everything she can in hopes that things will sink in and make sense for her, and even going to her professors for help. Her anxiety and disorganization comes from the way universities stretch its' students so thin on time and energy, most people have trouble keeping up with it. She represents the real life student as opposed to this 'prime example' of a student that universities want all their students to be. I believe everyone should be able to receive higher education, but not everyone is entitled to it necessarily. That being said, if you have the willingness to learn and the ability to pull yourself up, you should be able to get by and get that degree. This is hindered by many factors (having to work to support yourself, enough sleep, a social life) but no student should have to deal with sexual harassment or heckling of any kind, really. This leads me to John.
John is the typical messy, busy professor. Never having enough time to even stand and talk with you, always on the move and looking to the next thing without giving his full attention to the task at hand. Carol changed that. When she comes in he deals with her like any other student, but then changes because he actually cares about her well being. Being the hard, abrasive person that he is, he uses all his gigantic words to try to establish a hierarchy from the beginning. Just because he is up for tenure and has far too many obligations to handle (school board watching him, his wife and their new home, getting to that next step and preparing for retirement) doesn't give him the right to use his tone and belittle both Carol and the school he's working for. He yells, he always cuts her off, which creates a hostile environment for students to be in. "Some say it's a form of aggression. (What is?) ...surprise" This exchange shows that his worldview is that of the bourgeoisie, everything has a place, everything is filed in it's own area and nothing comes out of the blue. Total power and control. This is not the norm in college, at least in my experience, but the main point of all this is to say just because someone isn't from the same upbringing as the 'norm' doesn't mean they are any less capable of learning and becoming a valued member of society. All it takes is some true teaching, instead of this exploitative example of how professors can and do sometimes take their power to the extreme.

Brittany Renaldo Blog #4 extra credit

The language that John uses throughout is all jargon. If I were to put myself in Carols shoes, I would be equally or more confused than she was. When Carol goes to see her professor in order to try to understand his difficult way of teaching, she is constantly being spoken over. John uses his voice and tone to over power Carol. I believe that John's voice is his power, he uses it to show "who's boss." Someone like Carol would be oppressed by the language elite because it's easier to learn or understand material when the language is clear. If a teacher, like John, constantly uses jargon their is no way for the student to possibly learn the material, unless they look up every single word that the professor uses. In the article "P.C. Power Play: Language and Representation in David Mamet's Oleanna," Roger Bechtel  explains that everything Carol is saying is true because John shoves his own book at his students instead of using something easier for the whole class. His book consists of the same jargon that he uses in his lectures, therefore making it harder for students. To me the conversation is not honest, it is heated and irritating for the audience. In the beginning of the play the two characters slide into their prospective roles, John as a professor and Carol as a struggling student.  It's not till the end of the play that Carol stands up for her self, she tells him basically to shut up and listen. John is basically pushing Carol into a corner, as he makes her feel stupid and like its her fault that she can't pick up his material. "... And everybody's talking about "this" all the time. And "concepts," and "precepts" and, and, and, and, WHAT IN THE WORLD ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? And I read your book And they said, "Fine, go in that class." Because you talked about responsibility to the young. I DON'T KNOW WHAT IT MEANS AND I'M FAILING ..." Carol is explaining to him that she is trying to understand, she doesn't want to give up she just wants a little bit of help.

Another Question for Oleanna

What kind of social class conflicts does the text reveal? That is, what sort of conflict will likely arise when a member of the working class and the middle/upper middle class collide? (An example from Oleanna: Carol confronts John again and again about his language, or jargon, consistently asking him to define his terms. John uses academic jargon without even noticing he’s doing so; his complicated lexicon is so internalized that he seemingly doesn’t notice that he may be excluding students by failing to explain terms. Thus, the class conflict at hand involves the use of specialized language, usually acquired only via a college education, versus the use of the vernacular (everyday, ordinary language). Is John’s jargon elitist? Exclusionist? Does it afford him a particular kind of power? Would Carol or someone like her (since we know that, ultimately, she understands John just fine) be considered oppressed by the language of the dominant educated elite? Another possibility: the “group’s” ideology versus John’s/ideology of the university.)

***Several of the articles I posted deal particularly with language and power in Oleanna.