Unit Two The United States In-depth Reading Pre-reading Questions: 1.Do you like Hollywood movies?Use one of your favorite as an example to evince the merits of Hollywood movies. 2.How different are Hollywood movies from Chinese films? Hollywood's Poison Factory Michael Medved 1 1 America's long-running romance with Hollywood is over.For millions of people, the entertainment industry no longer represents a source of enchantment,of magical fantasy,of uplift,or even of harmless diversion.Popular culture is viewed now as an implacable enemy,a threat to their basic values and a menace to the raising of their children.The Hollywood dream factory has become the poison factory. 2 This disenchantment is reflected in poll after poll.An Associated Press Media General poll released in 1990 showed that 80 percent of Americans objected to the amount of foul language in motion pictures;82 percent objected to the amount of violence,72 percent objected to the amount of explicit sexuality,and by a ratio of 3 to 1 they felt that movies today are worse than ever. 3 Hollywood no longer reflects-or even respects-the values that most Americans cherish 4 Take a look,for example,at the most recent Oscars.Five very fine actors were nominated for best actor of the year.Three of them portrayed murderous psychos: Robert DeNiro in Cape Fear,Warren Beatty in Bugsy,and Anthony Hopkins in The Silence of the Lambs (this last a delightful family film about two serial killers-one eats and the other skins his victims).A fourth actor,Robin Williams,was nominated for playing a delusional homeless psycho in The Fisher King.The most wholesome character was Nick Nolte's,a good old fashioned manic-depressive-suicidal neurotic in The Prince of Tides. 5 These are all good actors,delivering splendid performances,compelling and technically accomplished.But isn't it sad when all this artistry is lavished on films that are so empty,so barren,so unfulfilling?Isn't it sad when at the Academy Awards-the annual event that celebrates the highest achievement of which the film industry is capable-the best we can come up with is movies that are so floridly,strangely whacked out? 6 I repeat:The fundamental problem with Hollywood has nothing at all to do with the brilliance of the performers,or the camera work,or the editing.In many ways, these things are better than ever before.Modern films are technically brilliant,but they are morally and spiritually empty
Unit Two The United States In-depth Reading Pre-reading Questions: 1. Do you like Hollywood movies? Use one of your favorite as an example to evince the merits of Hollywood movies. 2. How different are Hollywood movies from Chinese films? Hollywood’s Poison Factory Michael Medved 1 1 America’s long-running romance with Hollywood is over. For millions of people, the entertainment industry no longer represents a source of enchantment, of magical fantasy, of uplift, or even of harmless diversion. Popular culture is viewed now as an implacable enemy, a threat to their basic values and a menace to the raising of their children. The Hollywood dream factory has become the poison factory. 2 This disenchantment is reflected in poll after poll. An Associated Press Media General poll released in 1990 showed that 80 percent of Americans objected to the amount of foul language in motion pictures; 82 percent objected to the amount of violence, 72 percent objected to the amount of explicit sexuality, and by a ratio of 3 to 1 they felt that movies today are worse than ever. 3 Hollywood no longer reflects—or even respects—the values that most Americans cherish. 4 Take a look, for example, at the most recent Oscars. Five very fine actors were nominated for best actor of the year. Three of them portrayed murderous psychos: Robert DeNiro in Cape Fear, Warren Beatty in Bugsy, and Anthony Hopkins in The Silence of the Lambs (this last a delightful family film about two serial killers—one eats and the other skins his victims). A fourth actor, Robin Williams, was nominated for playing a delusional homeless psycho in The Fisher King. The most wholesome character was Nick Nolte’s, a good old fashioned manic-depressive-suicidal neurotic in The Prince of Tides. 5 These are all good actors, delivering splendid performances, compelling and technically accomplished. But isn’t it sad when all this artistry is lavished on films that are so empty, so barren, so unfulfilling? Isn’t it sad when at the Academy Awards—the annual event that celebrates the highest achievement of which the film industry is capable—the best we can come up with is movies that are so floridly, strangely whacked out? 6 I repeat: The fundamental problem with Hollywood has nothing at all to do with the brilliance of the performers, or the camera work, or the editing. In many ways, these things are better than ever before. Modern films are technically brilliant, but they are morally and spiritually empty
The Messages 7 What are the messages in today's films?For a number of years I have been writing about Hollywood's anti-religious bias,but I must point out that this hostility has never been quite as intense as in the last few years.The 1991 season boasted one religion-bashing movie after another in which Hollywood was able to demonstrate that it was an equal-opportunity offender. 8 For Protestants there was At Play in the Fields of the Lord,a lavish $35 million rainforest spectacle about natives and their wholesome primitive ways and the sick, disgusting missionaries who try to ruin their lives.And then for Catholics there was The Pope Must Die,which was re-released as The Pope Must Diet.It didn't work either way.It features scenes of the Holy Father flirting with harlot nuns and hiding in a closet pigging out on communion wafers.For Jews there was Naked Tango,written and directed by the brother of the screenwriter for The Last Temptation of Christ.This particular epic featured religious Jews operating a brutal bordello right next door to a synagogue and forcing women into white slavery. 9 And then most amazingly there was Cape Fear,which was nominated for a number of the most prestigious Academy Awards.It wasn't an original concept.Cape Fear was a remake of a 1962 movie in which Robert Mitchum plays a released convict intent on revenge who tracks down his old defense attorney.Gregory Peck portrays the defense attorney,a strong,stalwart and upright man who defends his family against this crazed killer.In the remake,by Last Temptation director Martin Scorsese,there is a new twist:the released convict is not just an ordinary maniac,but a"Killer Christian from Hell."To prevent anyone from missing the point,his muscular back has a gigantic cross tattooed on it,and he has Biblical verses tattooed on both arms. 10 When he is about to rape the attorney's wife,played by Jessica Lange,he says, "Are you ready to be born again?After just one hour with me,you'll be talking in tongues."He carries a Bible with him in scenes in which he is persecuting his family, and he tells people that he is a member of a Pentecostal church 2. 11 The most surprising aspect of this utterly insulting characterization is that it drew so little protest.Imagine that DeNiro's character had been portrayed as a gay rights activist.Homosexual groups would have howled in protest,condemning this caricature as an example of bigotry.But we are so accustomed to Hollywood's insulting stereotypes of religious believers that no one even seems to notice the hatred behind them. 12 The entertainment industry further demonstrates its hostility to organized religion by eliminating faith and ritual as a factor in the lives of nearly all the characters it creates.Forty to fifty percent of all Americans go to church or synagogue every week. When was the last time you saw anybody in a motion picture going to church,unless that person was some kind of crook,or a mental case,or a flagrant hypocrite? 13 Hollywood even removes religious elements from situations in which they clearly belong.The summer of 1991 offered a spate of medical melodramas like Regarding Henry,Dying Young,and The Doctor.Did you notice that all these characters go into
The Messages 7 What are the messages in today’s films? For a number of years I have been writing about Hollywood’s anti-religious bias, but I must point out that this hostility has never been quite as intense as in the last few years. The 1991 season boasted one religion-bashing movie after another in which Hollywood was able to demonstrate that it was an equal-opportunity offender. 8 For Protestants there was At Play in the Fields of the Lord, a lavish $35 million rainforest spectacle about natives and their wholesome primitive ways and the sick, disgusting missionaries who try to ruin their lives. And then for Catholics there was The Pope Must Die, which was re-released as The Pope Must Diet. It didn’t work either way. It features scenes of the Holy Father flirting with harlot nuns and hiding in a closet pigging out on communion wafers. For Jews there was Naked Tango, written and directed by the brother of the screenwriter for The Last Temptation of Christ. This particular epic featured religious Jews operating a brutal bordello right next door to a synagogue and forcing women into white slavery. 9 And then most amazingly there was Cape Fear, which was nominated for a number of the most prestigious Academy Awards. It wasn’t an original concept. Cape Fear was a remake of a 1962 movie in which Robert Mitchum plays a released convict intent on revenge who tracks down his old defense attorney. Gregory Peck portrays the defense attorney, a strong, stalwart and upright man who defends his family against this crazed killer. In the remake, by Last Temptation director Martin Scorsese, there is a new twist: the released convict is not just an ordinary maniac, but a “Killer Christian from Hell.” To prevent anyone from missing the point, his muscular back has a gigantic cross tattooed on it, and he has Biblical verses tattooed on both arms. 10 When he is about to rape the attorney’s wife, played by Jessica Lange, he says, “Are you ready to be born again? After just one hour with me, you’ll be talking in tongues.” He carries a Bible with him in scenes in which he is persecuting his family, and he tells people that he is a member of a Pentecostal church 2 . 11 The most surprising aspect of this utterly insulting characterization is that it drew so little protest. Imagine that DeNiro’s character had been portrayed as a gay rights activist. Homosexual groups would have howled in protest, condemning this caricature as an example of bigotry. But we are so accustomed to Hollywood’s insulting stereotypes of religious believers that no one even seems to notice the hatred behind them. 12 The entertainment industry further demonstrates its hostility to organized religion by eliminating faith and ritual as a factor in the lives of nearly all the characters it creates. Forty to fifty percent of all Americans go to church or synagogue every week. When was the last time you saw anybody in a motion picture going to church, unless that person was some kind of crook, or a mental case, or a flagrant hypocrite? 13 Hollywood even removes religious elements from situations in which they clearly belong. The summer of 1991 offered a spate of medical melodramas like Regarding Henry, Dying Young, and The Doctor. Did you notice that all these characters go into
the operating room without once invoking the name of God,or whispering one little prayer,or asking for clergy?I wrote a non-fiction book about hospital life once,and I guarantee that just as there are no atheists in foxholes,there are no atheists in operating rooms-only in Hollywood. 14 Religion isn't Hollywood's only target;the traditional family has also received surprisingly harsh treatment from today's movie moguls.Look again at Cape Fear. The remake didn't only change the killer,it also changed the hero,and this brings me to the second message that Hollywood regularly broadcasts.As I mentioned,the original character Gregory Peck plays is a decent and honorable man.In the remake, Nick Nolte's character is,not to put too fine a point on it,a sleazeball.He is repeatedly unfaithful to his wife;when his wife dares to question that practice,he hits her.He tries to beat up his daughter on one occasion because she is smoking marijuana.He is not a likeable person.That a happily married,family-defending hero-the kind of person that people can identify with-is transformed into a sadistic,cheating,bitter man,says volumes about the direction of American movies. 15 Did you ever notice how few movies there are about happily married people? There are very few movies about married people at all,but those that are made tend to portray marriage as a disaster,as a dangerous situation,as a battleground-with a long series of murderous marriage movies. 16 There was Sleeping with the Enemy,in which Patrick Bergin beats up Julia Roberts so mercilessly that she has to run away.When he comes after her,she eventually kills him.There was also Mortal Thoughts in which Bruce Willis beats up his wife and he is killed by his wife's best friend.In Thelma and Louise,there is another horrible,brutal and insensitive husband to run away from.In A Kiss Before Dying,Matt Dillon persuades twin sisters to marry him.He kills the first one and then tries to kill the second,but she gets to him first. 17 In She-Devil,Rosanne Barr torments her cheating husband Ed Begley,Jr.,and in Total Recall,Sharon Stone pretends to be married to Arnold Schwarzenegger and tries to kill him.When he gets the upper hand,she objects,"But you can't hurt me!I'm your wife."Arnold shoots her through the forehead and says,"Consider that a divorce."And then there was a more recent film,Deceived,starring Goldie Hawn.The advertisement for the movie says,"She thought her life was perfect,"and,of course, her model husband turns out to be a murderous monster.Deceived is an appropriate title,because we all have been deceived by Hollywood's portrayal of marriage.It even applies to television.The New York Times reports that in the past TV season there were seven different pregnancies.What did six of the seven pregnancies have in common? They were out of wedlock.The message is that marriage is outmoded,it is dangerous, oppressive,unhealthy. 18 But is it true?Recently,I made an interesting discovery.The conventional wisdom is that the divorce rate in America stands at 50 percent.This figure is used repeatedly in the media.But the 1990 U.S.Census Bureau has a category listing the number of people who have ever been married and who have ever been divorced.Less than twenty percent have been divorced!The evidence is overwhelming that the idea of
the operating room without once invoking the name of God, or whispering one little prayer, or asking for clergy? I wrote a non-fiction book about hospital life once, and I guarantee that just as there are no atheists in foxholes, there are no atheists in operating rooms—only in Hollywood. 14 Religion isn’t Hollywood’s only target; the traditional family has also received surprisingly harsh treatment from today’s movie moguls. Look again at Cape Fear. The remake didn’t only change the killer; it also changed the hero, and this brings me to the second message that Hollywood regularly broadcasts. As I mentioned, the original character Gregory Peck plays is a decent and honorable man. In the remake, Nick Nolte’s character is, not to put too fine a point on it, a sleazeball. He is repeatedly unfaithful to his wife; when his wife dares to question that practice, he hits her. He tries to beat up his daughter on one occasion because she is smoking marijuana. He is not a likeable person. That a happily married, family-defending hero—the kind of person that people can identify with—is transformed into a sadistic, cheating, bitter man, says volumes about the direction of American movies. 15 Did you ever notice how few movies there are about happily married people? There are very few movies about married people at all, but those that are made tend to portray marriage as a disaster, as a dangerous situation, as a battleground—with a long series of murderous marriage movies. 16 There was Sleeping with the Enemy, in which Patrick Bergin beats up Julia Roberts so mercilessly that she has to run away. When he comes after her, she eventually kills him. There was also Mortal Thoughts in which Bruce Willis beats up his wife and he is killed by his wife’s best friend. In Thelma and Louise, there is another horrible, brutal and insensitive husband to run away from. In A Kiss Before Dying, Matt Dillon persuades twin sisters to marry him. He kills the first one and then tries to kill the second, but she gets to him first. 17 In She-Devil, Rosanne Barr torments her cheating husband Ed Begley, Jr., and in Total Recall, Sharon Stone pretends to be married to Arnold Schwarzenegger and tries to kill him. When he gets the upper hand, she objects, “But you can’t hurt me! I’m your wife.” Arnold shoots her through the forehead and says, “Consider that a divorce.” And then there was a more recent film, Deceived, starring Goldie Hawn. The advertisement for the movie says, “She thought her life was perfect,” and, of course, her model husband turns out to be a murderous monster. Deceived is an appropriate title, because we all have been deceived by Hollywood’s portrayal of marriage. It even applies to television. The New York Times reports that in the past TV season there were seven different pregnancies. What did six of the seven pregnancies have in common? They were out of wedlock. The message is that marriage is outmoded, it is dangerous, oppressive, unhealthy. 18 But is it true? Recently, I made an interesting discovery. The conventional wisdom is that the divorce rate in America stands at 50 percent. This figure is used repeatedly in the media. But the 1990 U.S. Census Bureau has a category listing the number of people who have ever been married and who have ever been divorced. Less than twenty percent have been divorced! The evidence is overwhelming that the idea of
a 50 percent divorce rate is more than a slight overstatement;it is a destructive and misleading myth. 19 Yet for years Hollywood has been selling divorce.Remember The Last Married Couple in America,starring the late Natalie Wood?That may be a Hollywood prophecy,but it is not the reality of the American heartland.In this matter,as in so many others,by overstating the negative,the film industry leads viewers to feel terrified and/or insecure,and their behavior is adversely affected.I know many people who say,"I'm reluctant to get married because I know there's a 50 percent chance I'm going to get divorced."Wouldn't it make a difference if they there was an 80 percent chance of staying together? Rekindling Our Love Affair with Hollywood 20 There are many indications that the entertainment industry may be eager to reconnect with the grass roots-and to entertain an expanded notion of its own obligations to the public.The industry has,in some areas,behaved responsibly.In the past five years it changed its message about drugs.No longer is it making movies in which marijuana,cocaine and other drugs are glamorized.Hollywood made a decision Was it self-censorship?You bet.Was it responsible?Yes. 21 We can challenge the industry to adopt a more wholesome outlook,to send more constructive messages.We can clamor for movies that don't portray marriage as a living hell,that recognize the spiritual side of man's nature,that glorify the blessings in life we enjoy as Americans and the people who make sacrifices to ensure that others will be able to enjoy them. 22 The box office crisis put Hollywood in a receptive mood.Already two film corporations have committed to a schedule of family movies for a very simple reason: they are wildly successful.Only two percent of movies released in 1991 were G-rated3 -just 14 titles-but at least 8 of these 14 proved to be unequivocably profitable.(By comparison,of more than 600 other titles,at most 20 percent earned back their investment.)Look at Beauty and the Beast,my choice for Best Movie of 1991.It was a stunning financial success.We need many more pictures like this,and not just animated features geared for younger audiences.Shouldn't it be possible to create movies with adult themes but without foul language,graphic sex or cinematic brutality? During Hollywood's golden age,industry leaders understood that there was nothing inherently mature about these unsettling elements. 23 People tell me sometimes,"Boy,the way you talk,it sounds as though you really hate movies."The fact is that I don't.I'm a film critic because I love movies.And I want to tell you something:All of the people who are trying to make a difference in this business love movies and they love the industry,despite all its faults.They love what it has done in the past,and they love its potential for the future.They believe that Hollywood can be the dream factory again. 24 When I go to a screening,sit in a theater seat,and the lights go down,there's a little something inside me that hopes against all rational expectation that what I'm going to see on the screen is going to delight me,enchant me,and entice me,like the
a 50 percent divorce rate is more than a slight overstatement; it is a destructive and misleading myth. 19 Yet for years Hollywood has been selling divorce. Remember The Last Married Couple in America, starring the late Natalie Wood? That may be a Hollywood prophecy, but it is not the reality of the American heartland. In this matter, as in so many others, by overstating the negative, the film industry leads viewers to feel terrified and/or insecure, and their behavior is adversely affected. I know many people who say, “I’m reluctant to get married because I know there’s a 50 percent chance I’m going to get divorced.” Wouldn’t it make a difference if they there was an 80 percent chance of staying together? Rekindling Our Love Affair with Hollywood 20 There are many indications that the entertainment industry may be eager to reconnect with the grass roots—and to entertain an expanded notion of its own obligations to the public. The industry has, in some areas, behaved responsibly. In the past five years it changed its message about drugs. No longer is it making movies in which marijuana, cocaine and other drugs are glamorized. Hollywood made a decision. Was it self-censorship? You bet. Was it responsible? Yes. 21 We can challenge the industry to adopt a more wholesome outlook, to send more constructive messages. We can clamor for movies that don’t portray marriage as a living hell, that recognize the spiritual side of man’s nature, that glorify the blessings in life we enjoy as Americans and the people who make sacrifices to ensure that others will be able to enjoy them. 22 The box office crisis put Hollywood in a receptive mood. Already two film corporations have committed to a schedule of family movies for a very simple reason: they are wildly successful. Only two percent of movies released in 1991 were G-rated 3 —just 14 titles—but at least 8 of these 14 proved to be unequivocably profitable. (By comparison, of more than 600 other titles, at most 20 percent earned back their investment.) Look at Beauty and the Beast, my choice for Best Movie of 1991. It was a stunning financial success. We need many more pictures like this, and not just animated features geared for younger audiences. Shouldn’t it be possible to create movies with adult themes but without foul language, graphic sex or cinematic brutality? During Hollywood’s golden age, industry leaders understood that there was nothing inherently mature about these unsettling elements. 23 People tell me sometimes, “Boy, the way you talk, it sounds as though you really hate movies.” The fact is that I don’t. I’m a film critic because I love movies. And I want to tell you something: All of the people who are trying to make a difference in this business love movies and they love the industry, despite all its faults. They love what it has done in the past, and they love its potential for the future. They believe that Hollywood can be the dream factory again. 24 When I go to a screening, sit in a theater seat, and the lights go down, there’s a little something inside me that hopes against all rational expectation that what I’m going to see on the screen is going to delight me, enchant me, and entice me, like the
best movies do.I began by declaring that America's long-running romance with Hollywood is over.It is a romance,however,that can be rekindled,if this appalling, amazing industry can once again create movies that are worthy of love and that merit the ardent affection of its audience. Cultural Notes: 1.Michael Medved(1948-):an American radio show host,author,political commentator and film critic.His Seattle-based nationally syndicated talk show,The Michael Medved Show,airs throughout the U.S.on Salem Radio Network.This article first appeared in Imprimis,a publication of Hillsdale College,in November 1992.The text is from Elements of Argument:A Text and Reader (4th edition,Boston:Bedford Books of St.Martin's Press,1994),edited by Annette T.Rottenberg 2.Pentecostal church:Church of Christianity that places special emphasis on a direct personal experience of God through the baptism with the Holy Spirit.The term Pentecostal is derived from Pentecost,the Greek name for the Jewish Feast of Weeks. 3.G-rated:G stands for general audiences.The Motion Picture Association of America's(MPAA) film-rating system uses G-rated to mean that the movie contains little or no content that would offend parents or children. Background Research Questions: 1.At least 20 Hollywood movies are mentioned in the essay to argue for the opinion that Hollywood movies are detrimental to the viewers,but Medved also ranked Beauty and the Beast as the best movie of 1991.Choose one out of those harmful movies and compare it with Beauty and Beast,and illustrate how the latter convey constructive messages. 2.Do prime-time TV shows in China reflect“dreams'”or“poison'”or both?Examine one popular show in China to prove that TV is like or unlike Hollywood in its presentation of values. Comprehension Exercises: Answer the following questions based on the text. 1.The title suggests the author's attitude toward Hollywood movies today.Explain the terms poison and dream as indicative of values that Medved wants to promote. 2.What is people's general attitude towards the popular culture as represented by the Hollywood film industry? 3.According to Medved,what is the fundamental problem that made the Hollywood movies no longer a source of enchantment,and uplift? 4.How do the Hollywood movies attack religion and traditional family values? 5.How can Hollywood be the dream factory again? Paraphrase: Paraphrase the following sentences,paying special attention to the underlined parts. 1.America's long-running romance with Hollywood is over.(from paragraph 1)
best movies do. I began by declaring that America’s long-running romance with Hollywood is over. It is a romance, however, that can be rekindled, if this appalling, amazing industry can once again create movies that are worthy of love and that merit the ardent affection of its audience. Cultural Notes: 1. Michael Medved (1948- ): an American radio show host, author, political commentator and film critic. His Seattle-based nationally syndicated talk show, The Michael Medved Show, airs throughout the U.S. on Salem Radio Network. This article first appeared in Imprimis, a publication of Hillsdale College, in November 1992. The text is from Elements of Argument: A Text and Reader (4 th edition, Boston: Bedford Books of St. Martin’s Press, 1994), edited by Annette T. Rottenberg. 2. Pentecostal church: Church of Christianity that places special emphasis on a direct personal experience of God through the baptism with the Holy Spirit. The term Pentecostal is derived from Pentecost, the Greek name for the Jewish Feast of Weeks. 3. G-rated: G stands for general audiences. The Motion Picture Association of America’s (MPAA) film-rating system uses G-rated to mean that the movie contains little or no content that would offend parents or children. Background Research Questions: 1. At least 20 Hollywood movies are mentioned in the essay to argue for the opinion that Hollywood movies are detrimental to the viewers, but Medved also ranked Beauty and the Beast as the best movie of 1991. Choose one out of those harmful movies and compare it with Beauty and Beast, and illustrate how the latter convey constructive messages. 2. Do prime-time TV shows in China reflect “dreams” or “poison” or both? Examine one popular show in China to prove that TV is like or unlike Hollywood in its presentation of values. Comprehension Exercises: Answer the following questions based on the text. 1. The title suggests the author’s attitude toward Hollywood movies today. Explain the terms poison and dream as indicative of values that Medved wants to promote. 2. What is people’s general attitude towards the popular culture as represented by the Hollywood film industry? 3. According to Medved, what is the fundamental problem that made the Hollywood movies no longer a source of enchantment, and uplift? 4. How do the Hollywood movies attack religion and traditional family values? 5. How can Hollywood be the dream factory again? Paraphrase: Paraphrase the following sentences, paying special attention to the underlined parts. 1. America’s long-running romance with Hollywood is over. (from paragraph 1) ____________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________
2.But isn't it sad when all this artistry is lavished on films that are so empty,so barren,so unfulfilling?Isn't it sad when at the Academy Awards-the annual event that celebrates the highest achievement of which the film industry is capable-the best we can come up with is movies that are so floridly,strangely whacked out?(from paragraph 5) 3.The 1991 season boasted one religion-bashing movie after another in which Hollywood was able to demonstrate that it was an equal-opportunity offender.(from Paragraph 7) 4.That a happily married,family-defending hero-the kind of person that people can identify with-is transformed into a sadistic,cheating,bitter man,says volumes about the direction of American movies.(from paragraph 13) 5.In this matter,as in so many others,by overstating the negative,the film industry leads viewers to feel terrified and/or insecure,and their behavior is adversely affected.(from paragraph 18) 6.During Hollywood's golden age,industry leaders understood that there was nothing inherently mature about these unsettling elements.(from paragraph 21) Questions for discussion: 1.Do you agree that all the movies he cites "poisonous"are antagonistic to mainstream American values?If you disagree with some of his interpretations,point out the differences. 2.Medved thinks that movies should“delight'”,“enchant'”,and“entice'”.Why do you go to the movies?Pick out several reasons and tell why they satisfy some basic needs.Use examples of specific movies to make the reasons clear. 3.Do you think recent Hollywood movies still poisonous or not?Use examples to illustrate your argument
2. But isn’t it sad when all this artistry is lavished on films that are so empty, so barren, so unfulfilling? Isn’t it sad when at the Academy Awards—the annual event that celebrates the highest achievement of which the film industry is capable—the best we can come up with is movies that are so floridly, strangely whacked out? (from paragraph 5) ____________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________ 3. The 1991 season boasted one religion-bashing movie after another in which Hollywood was able to demonstrate that it was an equal-opportunity offender. (from Paragraph 7) ____________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________ 4. That a happily married, family-defending hero—the kind of person that people can identify with—is transformed into a sadistic, cheating, bitter man, says volumes about the direction of American movies. (from paragraph 13) ____________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________ 5. In this matter, as in so many others, by overstating the negative, the film industry leads viewers to feel terrified and/or insecure, and their behavior is adversely affected. (from paragraph 18) ____________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________ 6. During Hollywood’s golden age, industry leaders understood that there was nothing inherently mature about these unsettling elements. (from paragraph 21) ____________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________ Questions for discussion： 1. Do you agree that all the movies he cites “poisonous” are antagonistic to mainstream American values? If you disagree with some of his interpretations, point out the differences. 2. Medved thinks that movies should “delight”, “enchant”, and “entice”. Why do you go to the movies? Pick out several reasons and tell why they satisfy some basic needs. Use examples of specific movies to make the reasons clear. 3. Do you think recent Hollywood movies still poisonous or not? Use examples to illustrate your argument
Further Reading Why the Rich Are Getting Richer and the Poor,Poorer Robert B.Reich 1 The division of labor is limited by the extent of the market. ---Adam Smith,An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations(1776) 1 Regardless of how your job is officially classified (manufacturing,service, managerial,technical,secretarial,and so on),or the industry in which you work (automotive,steel,computer,advertising,finance,food processing),your real competitive position in the world economy is coming to depend on the function you perform in it.Herein lies the basic reason why incomes are diverging.The fortunes of routine producers are declining.In-person servers are also becoming poorer,although their fates are less clear-cut.But symbolic analysts-who solve,identify,and broker new problems-are,by and large,succeeding in the world economy. 2 All Americans used to be in roughly the same economic boat.Most rose or fell together,as the corporations in which they were employed,the industries comprising such corporations,and the national economy as a whole became more productive-or languished.But national borders no longer define our economic fates.We are now in different boats,one sinking rapidly,one sinking more slowly,and the third rising steadily. 3 The boat containing routine producers is sinking rapidly.Recall that by midcentury routine production workers in the United States were paid relatively well.The giant pyramid-like organizations at the core of each major industry coordinated their prices and investments-avoiding the harsh winds of competition and thus maintaining healthy earnings.Some of their earnings,in turn,were reinvested in new plant and equipment (yielding ever-larger-scale economies).Another portion went to top managers and investors.But a large and increasing portion went to middle managers and production workers.Work stoppages posed such a threat to high-volume production that organized labor was able to exact an ever-larger premium for its cooperation.And the pattern of wages established within the core corporations influenced the pattern throughout the national economy.Thus the growth of a relatively affluent middle class,able to purchase all the wondrous things produced in high volume by the core corporations
Further Reading Why the Rich Are Getting Richer and the Poor, Poorer Robert B. Reich 1 The division of labor is limited by the extent of the market. ---Adam Smith, An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations (1776) 1 Regardless of how your job is officially classified (manufacturing, service, managerial, technical, secretarial, and so on), or the industry in which you work (automotive, steel, computer, advertising, finance, food processing), your real competitive position in the world economy is coming to depend on the function you perform in it. Herein lies the basic reason why incomes are diverging. The fortunes of routine producers are declining. In-person servers are also becoming poorer, although their fates are less clear-cut. But symbolic analysts—who solve, identify, and broker new problems—are, by and large, succeeding in the world economy. 2 All Americans used to be in roughly the same economic boat. Most rose or fell together, as the corporations in which they were employed, the industries comprising such corporations, and the national economy as a whole became more productive—or languished. But national borders no longer define our economic fates. We are now in different boats, one sinking rapidly, one sinking more slowly, and the third rising steadily. 3 The boat containing routine producers is sinking rapidly. Recall that by midcentury routine production workers in the United States were paid relatively well. The giant pyramid-like organizations at the core of each major industry coordinated their prices and investments—avoiding the harsh winds of competition and thus maintaining healthy earnings. Some of their earnings, in turn, were reinvested in new plant and equipment (yielding ever-larger-scale economies). Another portion went to top managers and investors. But a large and increasing portion went to middle managers and production workers. Work stoppages posed such a threat to high-volume production that organized labor was able to exact an ever-larger premium for its cooperation. And the pattern of wages established within the core corporations influenced the pattern throughout the national economy. Thus the growth of a relatively affluent middle class, able to purchase all the wondrous things produced in high volume by the core corporations
4 But,as has been observed,the core is rapidly breaking down into global webs which earn their largest profits from clever problem-solving,identifying,and brokering. As the costs of transporting standard things and of communicating information about them continue to drop,profit margins on high-volume,standardized production are thinning,because there are few barriers to entry.Modern factories and state-of-the-art machinery can be installed almost anywhere on the globe.Routine producers in the United States,then,are in direct competition with millions of routine producers in other nations.Twelve thousand people are added to the world's population every hour, most of whom,eventually,will happily work for a small fraction of the wages of routine producers in America. 5 The consequence is clearest in older,heavy industries,where high-volume, standardized production continues its ineluctable move to where labor is cheapest and most accessible around the world.Thus,for example,the Maquiladora factories cluttered along the Mexican side of the US border in the sprawling shanty towns of Tijuana,Mexicali,Nogales,Agua Prieta,and Ciudad Juarez-factories owned mostly by Americans,but increasingly by Japanese-in which more than a half million routine producers assemble parts into finished goods to be shipped into the United States 6 The same story is unfolding worldwide.Until the late 1970s,AT&T2 had depended on routine producers in Shreveport,Louisiana,to assemble standard telephones.It then discovered that routine producers in Singapore would perform the same tasks at a far lower cost.Facing intense competition from other global webs,AT&T's strategic brokers felt compelled to switch.So in the early 1980s they stopped hiring routine producers in Shreveport and began hiring cheaper routine producers in Singapore.But under this kind of pressure for ever lower high-volume-production costs,today's Singaporean can easily end up as yesterday's Louisianan.By the late 1980s,AT&Ts strategic brokers found that routine producers in Thailand were eager to assemble telephones for a small fraction of the wages of routine producers in Singapore.Thus,in 1989,AT&T stopped hiring Singaporeans to make telephones and began hiring even cheaper routine producers in Thailand. 7 The search for ever-lower wages has not been confined to heavy industry.Routine data processing is equally footloose.Keypunch operators located anywhere around the world can enter data into computers,linked by satellite or transoceanic fiber-optic cable,and take it out again.As the rates charged by satellite networks continue to drop, and as more satellites and fiber-optic cables become available (reducing communication costs still further),routine data processors in the United States find
4 But, as has been observed, the core is rapidly breaking down into global webs which earn their largest profits from clever problem-solving, identifying, and brokering. As the costs of transporting standard things and of communicating information about them continue to drop, profit margins on high-volume, standardized production are thinning, because there are few barriers to entry. Modern factories and state-of-the-art machinery can be installed almost anywhere on the globe. Routine producers in the United States, then, are in direct competition with millions of routine producers in other nations. Twelve thousand people are added to the world's population every hour, most of whom, eventually, will happily work for a small fraction of the wages of routine producers in America. 5 The consequence is clearest in older, heavy industries, where high-volume, standardized production continues its ineluctable move to where labor is cheapest and most accessible around the world. Thus, for example, the Maquiladora factories cluttered along the Mexican side of the US border in the sprawling shanty towns of Tijuana, Mexicali, Nogales, Agua Prieta, and Ciudad Juárez—factories owned mostly by Americans, but increasingly by Japanese—in which more than a half million routine producers assemble parts into finished goods to be shipped into the United States. 6 The same story is unfolding worldwide. Until the late 1970s, AT&T 2 had depended on routine producers in Shreveport, Louisiana, to assemble standard telephones. It then discovered that routine producers in Singapore would perform the same tasks at a far lower cost. Facing intense competition from other global webs, AT&T's strategic brokers felt compelled to switch. So in the early 1980s they stopped hiring routine producers in Shreveport and began hiring cheaper routine producers in Singapore. But under this kind of pressure for ever lower high-volume-production costs, today’s Singaporean can easily end up as yesterday's Louisianan. By the late 1980s, AT&T's strategic brokers found that routine producers in Thailand were eager to assemble telephones for a small fraction of the wages of routine producers in Singapore. Thus, in 1989, AT&T stopped hiring Singaporeans to make telephones and began hiring even cheaper routine producers in Thailand. 7 The search for ever-lower wages has not been confined to heavy industry. Routine data processing is equally footloose. Keypunch operators located anywhere around the world can enter data into computers, linked by satellite or transoceanic fiber-optic cable, and take it out again. As the rates charged by satellite networks continue to drop, and as more satellites and fiber-optic cables become available (reducing communication costs still further), routine data processors in the United States find
themselves in ever more direct competition with their counterparts abroad,who are often eager to work for far less. 8 By 1990,keypunch operators in the United States were earning,at most,$6.50 per hour.But keypunch operators throughout the rest of the world were willing to work for a fraction of this.Thus,many potential American data-processing jobs were disappearing,and the wages and benefits of the remaining ones were in decline. Typical was Saztec International,a $20millionayear data-processing firm headquartered in Kansas City,whose American strategic brokers contracted with routine data processors in Manila and with American-owned firms that needed such data-processing services.Compared with the average Philippine income of $1,700 per year,data-entry operators working for Saztec earn the princely sum of $2,650.The remainder of Saztec's employees were American problem-solvers and identifiers, searching for ways to improve the worldwide system and find new uses to which it could be put(Maxwell Hamilton 1989) 9 By 1990,American Airlines was employing over 1,000 data processors in Barbados and the Dominican Republic to enter names and flight numbers from used airline tickets(flown daily to Barbados from airports around the United States)into a giant computer bank located in Dallas.Chicago publisher R.R.Donnelley was sending entire manuscripts to Barbados for entry into computers in preparation for printing. The New York Life Insurance Company was dispatching insurance claims to Castleisland,Ireland,where routine producers,guided by simple directions,entered the claims and determined the amounts due,then instantly transmitted the computations back to the United States.(When the firm advertised in Ireland for twenty five data-processing jobs,it received 600 applications.)And McGrawHill was processing subscription renewal and marketing information for its magazines in nearby Galway. Indeed,literally millions of routine workers around the world were receiving information,converting it into computer readable form,and then sending it back-at the speed of electronic impulses-whence it came. 10 The simple coding of computer software has also entered into world commerce. India,with a large English-speaking population of technicians happy to do routine programming cheaply,is proving to be particularly attractive to global webs in need of this service.By 1990,Texas Instruments maintained a software development facility in Bangalore,linking fifty Indian programmers by satellite to TI's Dallas headquarters. Spurred by this and similar ventures,the Indian government was building a teleport in Poona,intended to make it easier and less expensive for many other firms to send their
themselves in ever more direct competition with their counterparts abroad, who are often eager to work for far less. 8 By 1990, keypunch operators in the United States were earning, at most, $6.50 per hour. But keypunch operators throughout the rest of the world were willing to work for a fraction of this. Thus, many potential American data-processing jobs were disappearing, and the wages and benefits of the remaining ones were in decline. Typical was Saztec International, a $20millionayear data-processing firm headquartered in Kansas City, whose American strategic brokers contracted with routine data processors in Manila and with American-owned firms that needed such data-processing services. Compared with the average Philippine income of $1,700 per year, data-entry operators working for Saztec earn the princely sum of $2,650. The remainder of Saztec’s employees were American problem-solvers and identifiers, searching for ways to improve the worldwide system and find new uses to which it could be put (Maxwell Hamilton 1989). 9 By 1990, American Airlines was employing over 1,000 data processors in Barbados and the Dominican Republic to enter names and flight numbers from used airline tickets (flown daily to Barbados from airports around the United States) into a giant computer bank located in Dallas. Chicago publisher R. R. Donnelley was sending entire manuscripts to Barbados for entry into computers in preparation for printing. The New York Life Insurance Company was dispatching insurance claims to Castleisland, Ireland, where routine producers, guided by simple directions, entered the claims and determined the amounts due, then instantly transmitted the computations back to the United States. (When the firm advertised in Ireland for twenty five data-processing jobs, it received 600 applications.) And McGrawHill was processing subscription renewal and marketing information for its magazines in nearby Galway. Indeed, literally millions of routine workers around the world were receiving information, converting it into computer readable form, and then sending it back—at the speed of electronic impulses—whence it came. 10 The simple coding of computer software has also entered into world commerce. India, with a large English-speaking population of technicians happy to do routine programming cheaply, is proving to be particularly attractive to global webs in need of this service. By 1990, Texas Instruments maintained a software development facility in Bangalore, linking fifty Indian programmers by satellite to TI’s Dallas headquarters. Spurred by this and similar ventures, the Indian government was building a teleport in Poona, intended to make it easier and less expensive for many other firms to send their
routine software design specifications for coding (Gupta 1989) 11 This shift of routine production jobs from advanced to developing nations is a great boon to many workers in such nations who otherwise would be jobless or working for much lower wages.These workers,in turn,now have more money with which to purchase symbolic analytic services from advanced nations (often embedded within all sorts of complex products).The trend is also beneficial to everyone around the world who can now obtain high-volume,standardized products (including information and software)more cheaply than before. 12 But these benefits do not come without certain costs.In particular the burden is borne by those who no longer have good-paying routine production jobs within advanced economies like the United States.Many of these people used to belong to unions or at least benefited from prevailing wage rates established in collective bargaining agreements.But as the old corporate bureaucracies have flattened into global webs,bargaining leverage has been lost.Indeed,the tacit national bargain is no more. 13 Despite the growth in the number of new jobs in the United States,union membership has withered.In 1960,35 percent of all nonagricultural workers in America belonged to a union.But by 1980 that portion had fallen to just under a quarter,and by 1989 to about 17 percent.Excluding government employees,union membership was down to 13.4 percent(US Government Printing Office 1989).This was a smaller proportion even than in the early 1930s,before the National Labor Relations Act created a legally protected right to labor representation.The drop in membership has been accompanied by a growing number of collective bargaining agreements to freeze wages at current levels,reduce wage levels of entering workers, or reduce wages overall.This is an important reason why the long economic recovery that began in 1982 produced a smaller rise in unit labor costs than any of the eight recoveries since World War II-the low rate of unemployment during its course notwithstanding. 14 Routine production jobs have vanished fastest in traditional unionized industries (autos,steel,and rubber,for example),where average wages have kept up with inflation.This is because the jobs of older workers in such industries are protected by seniority.The youngest workers are the first to be laid off.Faced with a choice of cutting wages or cutting the number of jobs,a majority of union members(secure in the knowledge that there are many who are junior to them who will be laid off first) often have voted for the latter
routine software design specifications for coding (Gupta 1989). 11 This shift of routine production jobs from advanced to developing nations is a great boon to many workers in such nations who otherwise would be jobless or working for much lower wages. These workers, in turn, now have more money with which to purchase symbolic analytic services from advanced nations (often embedded within all sorts of complex products). The trend is also beneficial to everyone around the world who can now obtain high-volume, standardized products (including information and software) more cheaply than before. 12 But these benefits do not come without certain costs. In particular the burden is borne by those who no longer have good-paying routine production jobs within advanced economies like the United States. Many of these people used to belong to unions or at least benefited from prevailing wage rates established in collective bargaining agreements. But as the old corporate bureaucracies have flattened into global webs, bargaining leverage has been lost. Indeed, the tacit national bargain is no more. 13 Despite the growth in the number of new jobs in the United States, union membership has withered. In 1960, 35 percent of all nonagricultural workers in America belonged to a union. But by 1980 that portion had fallen to just under a quarter, and by 1989 to about 17 percent. Excluding government employees, union membership was down to 13.4 percent (US Government Printing Office 1989). This was a smaller proportion even than in the early 1930s, before the National Labor Relations Act created a legally protected right to labor representation. The drop in membership has been accompanied by a growing number of collective bargaining agreements to freeze wages at current levels, reduce wage levels of entering workers, or reduce wages overall. This is an important reason why the long economic recovery that began in 1982 produced a smaller rise in unit labor costs than any of the eight recoveries since World War II—the low rate of unemployment during its course notwithstanding. 14 Routine production jobs have vanished fastest in traditional unionized industries (autos, steel, and rubber, for example), where average wages have kept up with inflation. This is because the jobs of older workers in such industries are protected by seniority. The youngest workers are the first to be laid off. Faced with a choice of cutting wages or cutting the number of jobs, a majority of union members (secure in the knowledge that there are many who are junior to them who will be laid off first) often have voted for the latter