After reading the assigned readings for the week, I couldn't
help but notice the parallels between "Anziz Ansari on Acting, Race, and
Hollywood" by Ansari and the reading from Praxus titled
"Understanding the Effects of Mass Media's Portrayals of Black Women and
Adolescents on Self-Image" by Cherish Green. Both pieces of rhetoric
focused on the impact of mass media on race. Although the two essays/articles
had different arguments, they were rooted in the same thought-- minorities are
not accurately represented in the media.
Green ultimately argued that women who have a greater ethnic
identity, identify more with the body images of ethnic media than mainstream
media. This cause is rooted in the fact that mainstream media does not
accurately reflect the ideal body shape of Black women in modern day America.
Rather, it reflects the ideal shape of thin, fair skinned, White women. This point
was highlighted by using a quote from Duke that points out that
"mainstream media is not a looking glass, but rather is a way mirror into
White America" (Duke, 2000, p.383). This is a problem because unrealistic
ideals are made in mainstream media for women who can’t live up to them because
of their biological differences.
Similarly, in Anziz Ansari’s piece, he argues that the
media, specifically TV and Movie, does not correctly reflect the ethnic
diversity of the world. Most of the casting for dramas include White men and
women even if they are playing a character from another culture. Therefore,
most of the casted roles are culturally insensitive and cause an inaccurate representation
of the culture as a whole.
Ansari’s argument was intended to persuade the reader to
consider the shortcomings of casting in popular media and, if they can make a
difference, consider making more authentic casting decisions. He did this by
presenting a personal experience and tying in other instances where White
actors overshadowed minorities. From another perspective, Cherish Green used
rhetoric to present the facts of comparison between the impact of ethnic media
and mainstream media. Her goal was not to persuade the audience to make a
change, but just to be aware of the cultural differences.
The two writers had similar topics, but they delivered their
argument in two completely different ways. This proves the power of rhetoric
and the variety of ways it can be used in literature. Our writing in class will
be a mixture of the two. We will need to use the factual information like
presented in Green’s case along with the persuasive power of Ansari’s argument
to make an effective piece of rhetoric.
Well said! I agree completely with what you’ve stated, and I’d like to expand upon a few points that peaked my interest.
ReplyDeleteYou talked about how Ansari wrote about how the media does not accurately show the true diversity there is in the world, and how is culturally insensitive. I agree with this, as does Tatiana Siegel in the article “Hollywood on Alert: Actors’ Ethnicities Under Scrutiny Amid Heightened Sensitivities.” This a section of this article was about the quest to find a suitable actress to play Tiger Lily without offending anyone. While the media is primarily white, both Siegel and Ansari speak to the possible difficulty of finding an actor/actress of a certain race to play a role. Siegel quotes a producer stating that if a caster waited until he found someone who fit the exact parameters of the race of the character, then “[they] would never cast [their] movie.” Furthermore, in Ansari’s article he says that casting a white person is easy, because “when you cast a white person, you can get anything you want.” However, while both articles agree that there are difficulties finding the perfect person to play a role, this doesn’t mean Hollywood shouldn’t try.
The comment above was from me, Grace Gwin. I'm not sure why it lists me as unknown, but I think I fixed it.
DeleteI enjoyed your analysis of the two readings! Although I read them in the same context of the topic, I hadn't thought to read them in the context of each other! I agree that the two approaches are widely different. I also think, however, that it is important to realize why they might have different approaches. Aziz Ansari is an south-asian american television personality and Cherish Green is a writer. They may have different approaches because of their widely different backgrounds and experiences. Ansari has experience in the media section of society while Green does not have those same experiences. From my personal experiences I more identify with the rhetoric and argument presented by Ansari. Much of my childhood and adolescent life was spent trying to find representation for myself on television and in main stream media and I think that if there had been more made available to me, it may have had some positive effects on my self-esteem and sense of self worth as a child. It is very hard to find asian-american representation on American television, and even harder to find asian-american representation in roles that are not stereotypically asian (nerd, student, or comedic relief due to stereotypes). I do wish Hollywood and mainstream media would make more efforts to not only cast minorities in more roles but also in more diverse roles.
ReplyDelete