Brain Drain Blog

Archive for March, 2006

Media Analysis: Presentation and Influence

Publications interpret and present information differently, influenced by many factors or filters. These filters include, but are not limited to, political foundations, advertiser support, and corporate interests, all of which are taken into consideration. (Myth of the Liberal Media: The Propaganda Model of News, 1997) A publication has the power to set its agenda and a journalist frames a story through a representative point of view. For this reason, the article?s perspective is something to seriously consider, determining whether its focus serves to present both sides of the issue allowing the reader to make an educated choice on which side they stand, or whether it intentionally sways the reader?s opinion in one particular direction. In any case, discussion is provoked and influenced within the public, private and political sectors.

By analyzing three articles from three separate sources, each addressing the topic of patients? access to birth control versus pharmacists? rights to abstain from dispensing, it becomes obvious that the issue is presented with intent to influence an audience. Conflicts surrounding the issue are presented with varying influential degrees ranging from nearly unbiased, to more persuasive, to drastically taking sides. By contrasting approaches of The Washington Post?s educational article ?Pharmacists Right?s at Front of New Debate? by Rob Stein against The Nation?s unilateral article ?Prochoice Puritans? by Katha Pollitt, the thin veil of unbiased reporting will be lifted from the conservative Christian Science Monitor article, ?Culture War Hits Local Pharmacy? by Amanda Paulson.

The Washington Post story ?Pharmacists Right?s at Front of New Debate? by Rob Stein offers the most unbiased presentation of the issue in this analysis. One could argue that the title highlights pharmacists? rights but, in fairness, the article?s final word resonates with patients? rights in a strong quote from Kathleen Pulz who, affected by her pharmacist?s decision to refrain from distributing emergency contraception, states, ?It?s just not right.? (Stein, A1) The piece moves logically from the newness of pharmacists expressing their personal beliefs in a professional setting to the effect that this has on patients experiencing their lack of access to prescriptions. While it discusses heated battles between sides, Stein never infuses the article with his own passion:

The trend has opened a new front in the nation’s battle over reproductive rights, sparking an intense debate over the competing rights of pharmacists to refuse to participate in something they consider repugnant and a woman’s right to get medications her doctor has prescribed. It has also triggered pitched political battles in statehouses across the nation as politicians seek to pass laws either to protect pharmacists from being penalized — or force them to carry out their duties. (Stein, A1)

Examining the number of quotes and paragraphs addressing each side of the argument, Stein equally applies weight to the issues using both quantity of column space as well as quality of content. Facts, ideas and events are purposefully connected using neutral language while the use of quotes from pertinent interest groups, patients and pharmacists directly portray the opinions of the parties concerned. This article, of the three, most closely represents an ideally educational and unbiased account of the issues and provides no clear revelation as to which side of the issue Stein personally supports.

Alternately, The Nation?s ?Prochoice Puritans? by Katha Pollitt is designed, with salacious and pointed language, to chastise the moralist views of the pro-life movement, promote the idea of keeping abortion legal, and thus influence support of accessible contraception. There is no question here as to which side of the issue Pillott resides. By first defining the average pro-life supporter, she then explains that since the movement has become so extreme, holding on to the average views, by comparison, will ?make you a pro-lifer.? (Pollitt, 9) This sets the stage for the rash of criticism to follow. By attacking the moral high ground of those who promote shame and humiliation to those who have had, or desire to protect legal abortions, she attempts to undermine their criticism with her own fierce variety by shedding light on how misunderstood the issue is, likening it to? flag burning?something that offends all right-thinking people but needs to be legal for reasons of abstract principle (choice).? (Pollitt, 9)

In a bold move, Pillott denounces abortion critics not only in pro-life camps, but in pro-choice camps as well. Specifically, she attacks journalist William Saletan of The New York Times, accusing him of framing his op-ed piece around the idea that, while choice should be preserved, ?abortion is bad,? (Pollitt, 9) and it is the responsibility of the pro-choice movement to promote zero abortion and more contraception, their only common ground along side the pro-lifers. Pointing out the short sightedness of this approach she believes that, not only is zero abortion an impossible goal, but that abortion opponents hate birth control. They consider The Pill an abortifacient while barrier methods ?promote a ?contraceptive mentality?: a selfish, licentious attitude that leads straight to abortion hell.? (Pollitt, 9) This is a direct call for choice supporters to dispel the attack and shame campaign of the anti-choice movement rather than joining it and find realistic solutions.

Using logic, Pollitt explains that restriction on contraception means more abortion by renouncing the policies of slashing of family planning funds and ?laws enabling pharmacists to deny women EC and the Pill.? (Pollitt, 9) Liberal Democrats, as the largest political source of pro-choice supporters, are also delivered a blow for ?95-10,? a plan to reduce abortions by 95% in ten years without any mention of effective birth control. Pollitt effectively sheds light on their flawed logic, in contrast to her own, which hinders the accomplishment of their goal.

In her final attempt to sway opinion, Pollitt references a number of polls from 1998 reflecting that Americans disapproved of legalized abortion for every reason on the list. While these numbers do not support keeping abortion or access to contraception a legal right in America, Pillott persuasively makes the point that abortions are also performed for every reason on that list. Calling the reader to question the respondents? motives in answering, she suggests that they may have simply been trying to voice their disapproval, not make abortion illegal. The reader must, at this point, question the legitimacy of the poll.
In ?Culture War Hits Local Pharmacy? by Amanda Paulson of The Christian Science Monitor, conservative presentation can be less obvious in its attempt to sway an audience than an emotionally charged piece like Pollitt?s ?Prochoice Puritans,? and yet it still carries a significant influential tone. As with Stein?s approach, Paulson appears to equally represent both sides of the story, but upon closer examination, the language and point of view of the piece reflect undertones of journalistic opinion.

The word choice for the title includes ?war? invoking the sense of battle between each side, while the line ?Many druggists across the country refuse to give out morning-after pills? (Paulson, p01 s01) also conveys a larger problem than The Washington Post headline reading, ?Some refuse to fill birth Control Perscriptions.? (Stein, A1) This war is presented as an infiltrating force, breaking into every arena of daily life. Paulson is saying this is something that can?t be ignored, portraying pharmacists with moral agendas as rebellious disturbances of the peace.

When presenting the pharmacists? case, Paulson says little to reflect their personal moral conflict. Instead, she addresses their opinions through the viewpoint of their critics. These critics point out the inability of pharmacists to rely on a ?conscience-clause? afforded to doctors because the job of ?filling a prescription is a very different job from writing one.? (Paulson, p01 s01) Presenting inequality of rights for doctors and pharmacists in this way knocks their profession down a notch and subtly undermines their argument. This is also achieved in a similar manner when presenting the patients? side of the story. Those patients denied their prescriptions ?are simply angry to see their prescriptions become fodder for public debate.? (Paulson, p01 s01) These people read as victims in this war on moral rights, again presenting moralistic pharmacists in an unfavorable light.

Paulson lists a series of judgments from politicians on both sides of the issue, but it is difficult to determine her reasoning for their placement. The first two points collectively reflect five states in favor of patients? rights while the third reveals that thirteen states are considering laws to protect the individual pharmacists? beliefs. The fourth describes additional support for individual rights of Catholic hospital medical staff in Colorado. It appears that by listing the small number of patient supporters first, she may have been trying to give their significance more weight, perhaps an influential move in a seemingly random list.

To illustrate that these ?pharmacist battles? are occurring more frequently, Paulson lists three cases within two paragraphs which, intended or not, reads like a criminal rap sheet. Also, when pointing out the view of medical ethicists, her paragraph poignantly begins with ?Still, in a conflict, the patient?s rights should win.? (Paulson, p01 s01) This surely has an undermining effect on her eventual presentation of the pharmacists? point of view. By the time she addresses their concerns in detail, the reader has already derived a sense of disapproval from the text.

In conclusion, because the media has such influential power over public debate, and politics, it is important, as a reader, to determine what a story says whether intended or not. These three articles approach the issues surrounding birth control access with different and sometimes subtle intentions. It is the subtle presentation which requires the most scrutiny as one side of the argument tends to be imperceptibly glossed over or discredited. If reading only one article, as in the case of The Christian Science Monitor, the audience has been presented limited or skewed information and may side with patients? rights. Regardless of the journalistic approach on any issue, the importance of consulting several varied sources of information is key in achieving the greatest understanding of any argument. This is the responsibility of any citizen who cares enough to be fully informed.

Bibliography

Paulson, Amanda. “Culture War Hits Local Pharmacy.” The Christian Science Monitor 08 April 2005: p01 s01.

Paulson, Amanda. ” Culture War Hits Local Pharmacy.” The Christian Science Monitor 08 April 2005. 10 Mar 2006

Pollitt, Katha. “Prochoice Puritans.” The Nation 282.6 (2006): 09.

Pollitt, Katha. “Prochoice Puritans.” The Nation 282.6 (2006). 10 Mar 2006 .

Myth of the Liberal Media: The Propaganda Model of News. Prod. Sut Jhally. Perfs. Noam Chomsky, Edward Herman. Videocassette. Media Education Foundation, 1997.

Stein, Rob. “Pharmacists’ Rights at Front Of New Debate Because of Beliefs, Some Refuse To Fill Birth Control Prescriptions.” Washington Post 28 March 2005: A1.

Stein, Rob . “Pharmacists’ Rights at Front Of New Debate Because of Beliefs, Some Refuse To Fill Birth Control Prescriptions.” Washington Post 28 2005. 10 Mar 2006 www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A5490-2005Mar27.htm

In The Secret Agent by Joseph Conrad, No. 32 Brett Street is residence to four people related through blood or marriage who experience nothing more intimate than one-sided relationships. In mere coexistence, Mr. Verloc, his wife Winnie, Winnie?s mother and brother Stevie are completely alone in their own thoughts, disengaged from each other without any meaningful communication. Winnie, in particular, is unwilling to investigate further into anything which lies beneath the surface, serving her own interests without full observation of the circumstances surrounding her or collaboration from the others.

Family life for Winnie holds no intimacy. She and Mr. Verloc produce no children after seven years of marriage. Although Mr. Verloc often admires her from afar, Winnie prides herself on being a good wife in the sense that she provides her husband good meals, a clean home, and her share of responsibility at the shop. She knows she is to be kind to Mr. Verloc?s political friends, a group of anarchists, which she tolerates by allowing their conversations to roll off her, unless they upset Stevie. At best, to her, this is a business relationship, one that ensures shelter for her mother and brother from the streets or a charity house. The only detail that consistently lends credence to the ?goodness? of Mr. Verloc is his acceptance of her family in his house. Beyond that, she knows very little about him.

Mr. Verloc?s shop is positioned at the very front of the house, where pictures of scantily clad women and flimsy yellow envelopes known for camouflaging contraception are distributed. In the selling of pornography and condoms, Mr. Verloc directly promotes more one-sided relationships for the patrons who enter. The shop patrons are generally men who do not want to be seen or known intimately, especially when Winnie answers the bell. Oddly, it is Winnie who does not seem to mind the wares or the patrons. In fact, nothing about the shop gives her cause for question. She manages, daily, not to notice that this small, ineffectual business could never fully support her household. Never questioning Mr. Verloc as to where the subsequent funds originate, she knows only that she and her husband appear to be able to care for themselves as well as her mother and brother financially. Winnie seems willing accept that this end justifies any unknown means.

Without children of her own, Winnie?s brother Stevie acts as her surrogate son. It is Winnie who understands him better than anybody, and yet, this too is one sided. She cannot convey to him the enormity of her devotion, He can only conceptualize the safety of her protecting him from his abusive father in her bed when they were children. He cannot show her love beyond the simple action of proudly escorting her through the street. Unable to articulate his negative emotions beyond acting out aggressively, Stevie?s actions are often misunderstood. There is only one occasion when Winnie presses Stevie for the reason why he set off of fireworks at work but, more often than not, she fills in the blanks with what she believes to be true, unwilling to delve into the intricacy of his thoughts. Inevitably, Winnie simplifies Stevie?s intolerance of social injustice with the word ?sensitive.? His thoughts are not the object of her devotion. By keeping him productive and in line as best she can, Winnie hopes that Mr. Verloc will, some day, act the role of his father.

Winnie?s mother is ?taken over with the furniture? when the family joins Mr. Verloc on Brett Street. Oddly, for never being without each other, it becomes clear that Winnie and her mother never share anything of substance. First, Winnie?s mother observes that Winnie?s suitor, the butcher?s son, drifts out of the picture without explanation only to be replaced shortly after by Mr. Verloc. Winnie?s mother thinks this is odd but they never discuss it. This relationship is one sided in both directions as, next, Winnie?s mother never shares her motives with Winnie about leaving Brett Street for the charity house. They only address the chronological details at length, never asking or answering why. Unbeknownst to each of them, their motivation is the same. Each one wants to ensure the security of the family, Winnie through marrying a provider, and her mother by keeping Stevie dependant upon Winnie and Mr. Verloc.

In the end, Winnie is as much a secret agent as her husband. She enters into this loveless marriage for the sake of her family, acting the role of wife to provide for them all. Unfortunately, unwilling to look beneath the surface of the world around her, she cannot successfully achieve her goal of protecting Stevie. Without knowing the true nature of Mr. Verloc, Winnie unwittingly sends Stevie into harms way.

Scarlett O?Hara Makes the Hero?s Journey

Joseph Campbell, in his book Thou Art That, argues that every hero?s journey consists of three parts: the departure, the initiation and the return. He also identifies the four functions of myth as ?reconciling consciousness to the preconditions of it?s own existence? (2), ?to present a consistent image of the order of the cosmos? (3), ?to validate and support a specific moral order? (5), and ?to carry the individual through the various stages and crises in life? with integrity.? (5). In the movie Gone with the Wind (1939), adapted from the book by Margaret Mitchell, the character of Scarlett O?Hara neatly follows Campbell?s analysis of the hero?s journey and also follows his functions of myth.

As Campbell explains, the departure begins with a call to adventure or with an event which spurs the character to leave what they know. The hero may teeter between going and not going, but they eventually cross the threshold into the belly of the whale. When we meet Scarlett O?Hara, she is a stubborn, sixteen year-old, Southern belle, living comfortably within the supportive and nurturing environment of her parents? home. She romantically daydreams of her love, Ashley Wilkes, and is oblivious to the hard realities of the world. In one day, everything begins to change for Miss Scarlett. She learns that her Ashley is intended for Melanie Wilkes, news of the Civil War breaks out during her much anticipated barbeque, and the young men in attendance at the barbeque rush off to sign up as soldiers. Suddenly, nothing remains as she knew it. Scarlett is entering that belly of the whale through no choice of her own.

Campbell points out that the hero is never alone on their journey. People often accompany the hero, such as a wise old man. The wise old man of this film is Scarlett?s father, Gerald O’Hara. In the midst of all this change, he expresses his wishes that Scarlett won’t fawn over Ashley when Ashley doesn?t love her, and that he doesn?t believe Ashley could make her happy anyway. In the same scene, when Scarlett complains that Tara, the family plantation, doesn’t mean anything to her, her father reinforces the value of “the land” and the priceless inheritance that Tara represents.

The next step on the hero?s journey is the initiation. Here our hero is confronted by trials in which she meets with the goddess, achieves atonement with her father, and experiences a transformation when she receives her boon. Scarlett experiences a break with the goddess, as Campbell describes it, when her mother dies from typhoid during the ravaging of Tara by Yankee soldiers. Scarlett atones with her father by caring for him, in his failing mental state, on his plantation. In the role of adult, she begins to see why he took so much pride in his land. After Mr. O?Hara dies, Scarlett leaves Tara again and marries Rhett, but their child dies along with Rhett?s love. Everything she knows has been stripped away, including Melanie and Ashley, leaving on her own to face her destiny. With nothing left, her dead father?s voice calls to her, telling her of the importance of Tara, that land is the only thing that matters and the only thing that lasts, a reminder of what she truly finds important. Scarlett realizes that even if she doesn’t get Rhett back, she can draw her strength from Tara. In truth, she has had the strength within her the entire time, with or without the land.

Upon return, Campbell says that the hero is no longer the same person they were when they left. Scarlett has drastically transformed from a spoiled, short tempered and pouty young girl into a heroic woman with the ability and will to survive nearly impossible feats. She has also graduated from caring only for her own interests to expanding her care toward others. She has developed an enlightened sense of value in both herself and her family heritage. This is a far cry from where she began, although the physical location is the exact same point.

In reference to Joseph Campbell?s functions of myth, the following aspects of Gone with the Wind account for all four. First, when faced with the deaths of her family, friends, and many thousands of soldiers, and after shooting a defected Yankee in self defense, each of these instances lie in direct contrast to Scarlett delivering Melanie Wilkes? baby. Scarlett becomes very aware of the life and death cycle as well as her place in it. Second, Scarlett is exposed to ?a consistent image of the order of the cosmos? (3), thanks to her mother who raised her with the teachings of Christianity and demonstrated these practices often. Third, Scarlett?s parents, sisters, aunt, Mammy and Melanie Wilkes, constantly reminded her of what was proper and what was not. This could possibly to be construed as the story teaching society?s moral order, although Scarlett surely had a tough time with this lesson. It is unclear whether or not she would hold to morals of her society any more after her journey than she did before and during it?s duration. Fourth, she did come through a state of crisis with integrity, experiencing herself, her culture, her universe and the tremendous mystery beyond herself. When she realized that Melanie was her best friend, when she previously saw her as the enemy who had stolen Ashley away, this required insight beyond her own desires. This story has elements of myth embedded within it even if the story is not necessarily sacred.

Gone with the Wind has an impact much in the way a myth is intended to. It carries with it the message that women can be strong in the face of adversity. While Scarlett?s character is not the type of person that I would wholly aspire to be, she does embody aspects that appeal to me. It is Scarlett who offers hope and the belief that one can overcome any misfortune.

The following assignment was to gather information about a particular myth, summarize it for ourselves, and then write from the subject’s point of view in an attempt to better understand the emotions behind the story. I chose…

The Matsya Purana Myth of Saraswati

According to the Matsya Purana, the God Brahma was self-contained and self-content at a time when the cosmos did not yet exist. Eventually, however, he began to long for company. He decided to split his being in two, creating a consort and feminine counterpart. This is how the Goddess known as ?the one with a hundred beautiful forms? emerged from Brahma?s forehead. She is called by many different names in mythology, including Sandhya, Brahmi, or Saraswati.

Inspired by her beauty, Brahma fell in love with Saraswati and stared at her longingly. To avoid his gaze, she moved to his left, then behind him, and then to his right. Wherever she moved a head sprang up enabling Brahma to continue looking at her. In desperation, she jumped into the air, but a fifth head appeared on top. Brahma then asked her to help him create the universe.

As his wife, Saraswati provided the creative force to execute what Brahma had conceived with his intelligence. She is said to have invented Sanskrit, the language of Brahmins, scriptures and scholarship. She is also known as the Mother of the Vedas, having created the primary texts of Hinduism.

Saraswati, the goddess of knowledge, is the muse of all creative arts, particularly poetry, music, learning and science. Additionally, the Rigveda mentions that Saraswati manifests in the form of a divine river, thus associating her with fertility and purification. Literally, the word Saraswati means ?the one which flows,? pertaining not only to water, perhaps, but to the flow of knowledge as well.

Sources:
http://www.dollsofindia.com/brahma.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saraswati
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brahma

From Saraswati’s Perspective

I remember the first time that Brahma saw me. His eyes rested upon every inch of my body with insatiable lust. He studied the mechanics of my movement, the curve of my flesh, all the while taking pride in the beautiful creature he had created. He was looking at an aspect of himself in awe as this was the first time he had seen himself as a feminine manifestation.

Under his gaze, I initially froze, still as a pool in the throes of a long, deep winter. Then, without warning, I rushed to the right as swiftly as a river after a pouring rain. When I looked back at Brahma, I could scarcely believe what I saw. With the shift of my direction, a second head had grown from his neck. Two new eyes, wild with desire, met with mine. How could this be? I rushed behind him, but another head appeared from the back of his neck with a third set of beseeching eyes. As I darted to the left, he produced a fourth.

Unable to break free from his eight-eyed gaze, the only possible escape was into the air above. With a running start, I shut my eyes tight and leapt high above him. Looking down, I hesitantly peered through one slit eye hoping that I had finally escaped. There below me, a fifth set of moist, wild eyes grew from the top of his head and met my weary gaze. I simply could not escape his wanting.

Exhausted and bewildered, I was still again when I finally heard him speak. His godly voice was deep and strong. His adoration rang out through the vast space surrounding us, resounding fully within every chamber of my heart. With a few small words, Brahma simply asked, ?Will you help me to create the Universe?? It was in that moment that my desire for him grew. In the pregnant space of silence, with the millions of words he didn?t speak, I understood how much he loved me.

This was not a proposal to be taken lightly. I knew that a marriage of our talents would create a new domain, born from each of our compatible efforts, where mortals would roam and look to us for guidance. I can say now that I had no full idea of what that meant at the time, but I knew that I wanted to learn. My existence had just begun and I was already handed the greatest responsibility and honor one could hope for. With all the love of a wife and mother, I accepted the role of co-creator.

Brahma shared all of his goals with me and, as he talked about his ideas, I provided a creative solution to achieve them. First we molded all of the stars, the sun, the planets and the moon and spun them into motion within a complex system. These celestial bodies, much like an engine, worked in concert to provide energy to the plants, animals and mortals we created next.

These mortals, in particular, were a misguided bunch. Each was on their own individual journey and yet constantly bumping into each other?s existence. These interactions proved to be an interesting and sometimes entertaining chain of events but, unfortunately, these events could also result in discord. It was for this reason we decided that a written guide to ?living a good life? might be helpful. I developed Sanskrit which could be used for language, scriptures and scholarship. I then created the Vedas, primary texts of Hinduism. With all this possibility in the world of communication, we let the mortals experiment with it as they saw fit. The mortals, as a result, developed expressive poetry, art and music which, at times, was dedicated back to us.

The process of building our new creation was equally as beautiful as the results we achieved. Working together, Brahma?s dream was realized through me. Enjoying the fruits of his labor, he went into retirement, although he wouldn?t mind if anyone still wanted to worship him. Alternately, I don?t think I?ll ever stop working as long as the mortals keep searching for inspiration and knowledge. We?ve tried to lead good lives, and for that we are proud.

(?Of course there is evidence of drama in our lives, like the incident where Shiva cut off Brahma?s fifth head, believing our relationship to be incestuous, or the unyielding grudge I carry toward my sister, but we like to focus on the positive these days.)