MAN IN THE HIGH CASTLE - Fanfiction

Juliana Fink threw the coins six times and held her breath as they fell. She could feel the meaning then, without using the chart, as if it had been inside her all along.

“Sun at the top. Tui at the bottom. Empty at the centre (1)” Read Hawthorne Abendsen, and there was silence as they processed the information.

Instantly, Juliana was transported back, to her life before, to the time when she was married to Frank. How she thought she would have been happy. She remembered the store, and the nervous character who had run it, what was his name … something Childan … Robert? The artefacts inside had taken her back in time, to when America was different, when it was not a communist republic of the Soviet Union. She had heard people whispering about the book even then but she had not been interested. Not until the time was right, and her herald came. Joe. Brooding, sombre Joe. He had entered into her life briefly, and blown her life apart. He was the one who had introduced her to it, “The Grasshopper Lies Sleeping”, and awoken her curiosity. She hadn’t exactly welcomed his ideas – her life, empty as it was, was her own, and she was content with the tediousness of her daily routine – waking up, teaching Judo, cooking dinner, bed. Her later actions, cutting his throat when he had barred the door to prevent her from leaving, was something she would never forget. The memory made her tremble. I can't believe it. I can't stand it. Evil is not a view ... it's an ingredient in us. In the world. Poured over us, filtering into our bodies, minds, hearts, into the pavement itself (2).

What had kept her sane was the I-Ching, a legacy of the short-lived Japanese invasion, its words of wisdom coming directly from the oracle itself. It had spoken to her in her time of need, and pushed her forward, just when she had felt all hope was lost. “It furthers one to undertake something. It furthers one to cross the great water” (3)

Those were the exact words it had spoken to her as she had shaken in her car, squinting in the light of the department store window. It was then that she had resolved to continue her journey alone to Hawthorne Abendsen, and his fortress in the ‘high castle’. She recalled the nerves in her stomach as she had brushed her hair and unfolded the blue Italian dress from the box, dressing nervously before crossing the Cheyenne in the taxi, on her way to meet the Abendsen’s.

The writing itself was nothing special, but no-one could deny its spell. Perhaps it was because the idea was so vivid and so blasphemous which was why no-one could stop reading. Juliana certainly couldn’t. Imagine a world out of the grasp of Russia … the book certainly did not paint an age of happiness and roses but its ideas were enough to take hold in the people’s minds and plant questions. What would it have been like, if the war had turned out differently…? Everyone was talking about it, even the Russians. The subject had once come up at a dinner party she was present at, and the responses of her hosts had surprised her. The talk had turned to the book, as so often it did, and Frank had commented loudly, “We have had to suffer, pay the cost. But we did it for a good cause (4). To stop German world inundation.”
“Personally, I do not believe any hysterical talk of ‘world inundation’ by any people. Slavic, Chinese or Japanese.” (5) Olga had replied, her cheeks blushing slightly. Frank was taken aback and the conversation had swiftly changed. It was moments like that, that had shown Juliana the lack of common ground. Witness them, she had thought, drinking from English bone china cups, eating with U.S silver, listening Negro style music. Its all on the surface (6).

The Abendsen family home had surprised Juliana. There was music, and lights, and children’s toys visible. What about the rumours and the stories (7) ? Betty Abendsen had shown her into the study and she had finally met him, Hawthorne. A simply ordinary man, but with less then ordinary ideas.
“Do you know the Oracle?” She had pounced and he had declined. No, he did not know the Book of Changes either. Why did he write the book? His answers depressed her deeply.
“Your book showed us that there is a way out! You’ve done a lot for me; now I can see there’s nothing to be afraid of, nothing to want or hate or avoid, or run from. Or pursue (8)”
“Its just a story” Hawthorne had replied quietly.
Juliana shook her head in disbelief. “Just a story? I drove up here with one of the Gestapo, he was coming here to kill you! The next one who comes here won’t have me to stop him!”
“You say the next one. What happened?” Betty had asked brusquely.
“I killed him. You’re so fatalistic, so resigned to your fate. Do you know that too, the way you knew the world in your book?” (9)
Hawthorne exchanged a long look with his wife, and sighed.
“Fine. Considering what you have done for me, I’ll tell you. Yes. I made thousands of choices, and asked the Oracle. I asked about the historic period. The subject. The characters. The plot. It took years. So yes, you are right. You must consult the Oracle quite a bit yourself, to have known.”
“But why? Why is the Oracle talking to us in this way? Why a novel? And why about the Russians losing the war? Why this particular story?”
Hawthone and Betty were silent.
“I’ll ask it, if you won’t. I need to know.”
And so Juliana Fink had thrown the coins six times and held her breath as they fell:
Sun at the top. Tui at the bottom. Empty at the centre (1)
“Its Chung Fu” Juliana said, “Inner truth.”
“This means … that my book is true, doesn’t it? That Russia lost the war?”
“Yes. And Germany and Japan invaded America.”
“I’m not sure of anything anymore” Juliana whispered.
Abendsen stared into the fireplace, his eyes distant, his thoughts foggy.
“Would you like me to autograph a copy of the book for you?” (10) He mumbled. Juliana stared at him for a moment, then shook her head.
“No … thank you. I should be going. I’m terribly sorry.” She began to make her way to the door.
“Its terribly, terribly disruptive,” Betty replied, “but so is reality” (11)
“The truth can be as terrible as death, just harder to find” Juliana answered and stepped out the front door.
“Thank you. And good night” She said then turned and began retracing her steps along the cobbled path. She could feel the Abendsen’s eyes boring into her back as she walked, their mind’s still grappling with the weight of the Oracle’s revelations. It didn’t matter that the Oracle didn’t reveal a new, happier ending, it was the fact that the option was there – she could see now how life really was. As she made her way down the street, back to the motel, Juliana moved easily, bright and living, as one does who finally understood.
This reality anyway.
*
The following quotes have been taken from Philip K Dicks Man In The High Castle:
1 - p. 246
2 - p. 97
3 - 209
4 - 113
5 - 113
6 - 112
7 - 240
8 - 244
9 - 245
10 - 247
11 – 247

Dick, Philip K. (1962). Man in the high castle. London: United Kingdom. Orion Publishing Group




The Narrative Structure
According to Vogler (1998, as cited on Wikipedia) there is a common narrative structure visible in most stories. We can see they are present in Philip K. Dick’s story, and also in my fanfiction.
The Man in the High Castle sets the scene of an ORDINARY WORLD. In my fanfiction, this world is revealed in Juliana’s flashback, in which the United States has been invaded by the Soviet Union during the Cold War period. The CALL TO ADVENTURE is signalled by Joe, the ‘Italian truck driver’ from Philip K. Dick’s story. Juliana is reluctant at first, as she is settled in her ordinary life as a judo instructor in Colorado, but something is sending along this journey. After she kills Joe (one of her TESTS), she is furthered along her journey by her MENTOR, which in my view, would be the Oracle itself (or the I-Ching). The SUPREME ORDEAL is her penultimate meeting with the writer of the “Grasshopper Lies Heavy”, Hawthorne Abendsen, and his wife Betty (all characters from the original story), and the subsequent . Her REWARD is learning the truth about the nature of reality – the Chung Fu – which is that there are many possible dimensions and versions of history. Leaving the house of the Abendsen’s signals the ROAD BACK to the Ordinary World, and it is her walk back to the motel that signifies the RESURRECTION – she knows who she is now and that there is much more to life then she realised before taking this journey. She has been ‘transformed by the experience’.
I have not used all of Vogler’s character archetypes in my story. However, I have used the HERO, which would be Juliana Fink. She is willing to sacrifice (she kills Joe, to save Hawthorne Abendsen), she is unique (female, strong), she appears as an ‘antihero’ (her presence at the Abendsen’s is not overly appreciated) and also as a ‘loner’ hero (she continues her journey after Joe’s death alone, and leaves the Abendsen’s alone).
The MENTOR would be the I-Ching itself, as it is constantly guiding Juliana. It is inventive (it takes one form as the ‘Grasshopper Lies Heavy’ story), and its appearance in the story is very significant (it proves its own presence and the theory of other realities). The HERALD is Joe, who appears early on in the story and issues the challenge to Juliana to find Hawthorne with him. This part can also be shared by the SHADOW. Joe is one, and the other one I would say is political situation itself. This is because the presence of the Soviet Union in America is also about the suppressing of an idea or a reality, it is “unexpressed” and “unrealised”. It’s very function is to challenge the HERO on all levels and Vogler (1998, as cited on Wikipedia) writes that it may take several forms.
I believe that Hawthorne Abendsen takes on the role of three of Voglers (1998) archetypes. He is the TRICKSTER because he embodies the desire for change (he wrote the book). He is also the SHAPESHIFTER because he keeps the hero guessing (he does not want to own up to the truth of the Oracle’s involvement in the story) and because of this brings doubt in to the story. Finally, he is the HERALD, as it is his story that inspires Juliana to set out on her journey (further pushed by Joe).

REFERENCES
The Writer's Journey: Mythic Structure for Writers. 2011, August 4. Retrieved 2 November, 2011 from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Writer%27s_Journey:_Mythic_Structure_for_Writer

week 11

Week 11: How does Hill define reality TV?

Hills classifies reality TV as three main parts in defining a genre which are television industry, television scholar and television audiences. The most of television industries is creating factual entertainment as realty TV show or popular factual television in traditional. But now, Hill says reality TV is flexible which could fit any types of TV programs that industry wants to make high audiences watch rate.

There is an argument of defining reality TV from scholar in the text. Hill points that most of television scholars have same trend to discuss reality TV to ‘reality genre’. They highlight that “subgenres within realty TV are the result of a complex borrowing from other television genres.”(p 49).  The definitions from television audiences are quite different as well. The reason they have several definition is because they have added what they think of reality TV and it depends on what show they have been watched.

Thus, why reality TV shows is so successful is because it has created the real environment, some real personality on character and manipulate how the viewers would feel. There is no such correct definition of reality TV but many completed definition of reality genre.

Hill, A. (2005) The reality genre. In A. Hill, Reality TV: Audiences and Popular Factual Television. (pp. 14 – 40). Oxon: Routledge. 

week 6

Week 6 : What are the underlying thematics of Princess Mononoke? How does it ‘defamiliarise’ its historical setting, according to Napier (2005)?

Princess mononoke is a story about how human ignore natural environment to mine ores. The consequence of being destroy nature is that animals from forest revenge. Living in a harmony with nature always is a issue until now. Through the whole story, love has been a clue between Ashitaka and San, between San and wolf and between forest spirit and forest.

At the beginning of the films, San is not the one playing the hero, but is Ashitaka shows up with a handsome looking and ride in a horse. This is quite clear for audiences that Ashitaka is a key character for the whole film. However, for the whole film, the animals in forest are the clue is a clear clue; they fight for freedom and get survival. The love between Ashitaka and San is another clue that is potential. The most wonderful sense is when Ashitaka says to San that she is so beauty. Why is that so impressive? From Ashitaka’s point of view, he is into her and it’s a reveal. He is nearly dead, so it’s what he want to tell San and hope she can understand. However, San seems shocked, the reason why she so uncomfortable is because she never like human before even though she is a human and no one says what Ashitaka says before. She is brought up by wolfs. She changes from wanting to kill Ashitaka at first to fall in love with him. That wells up out of a theme with ‘love’, closely link with ‘freedom’. From my point of view, the behavior that these animal fight with human although they know that’s would be no chance to win is a dauntless spirit. The ‘family love’ is happening at Moro saves San when she is nearly dead. And at the ends, the forest spirit, Jigo sacrifices its life to restore the earth. That’s a love to his forest.

According to Napier (2005), he points out “de-familiarizes the myth of the Japanese as living in harmony with nature de-familiarizes conventional notion of Japanese history through Miyazak’s decision to set the film during the fourteenth-century.  ” (2005, p. 233). Furthermore, Miyazaki choose make the film while anime is being ‘high cultural’ at that time to represent the inharmonious between human and nature when the world is being technical. This film is made from myth which is not real history.   

Napier, S. (2005). Anime: from Akira to Howl's Moving Castle. Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan.

week 10

Week 10 : How do you think Buffy has influenced the contemporary vampire drama “True Blood” and the “Twilight” series of novels and films?

In late 1990s, Buffy the Vampire Slayer actually can be thought as a master work of this type of TV, it's one of the most popular American TV series. Later on, there is a great mass fervour of vampire move in American. There are two examples of contemporary works which are ‘true blood’ and ‘twilight’. I am most of teenagers have seen any of them and wait to see more with passion.

These three works have similarity that they all got romantic gothic literature. Romantic gothic literature emphasizes that creation freedom, against classism and requires breakthrough literature reality. They re-excavate the history themes that classism thinks it’s dark. These three vampire TV shows do break the normal traditional way of against forces of darkness. Not only excellent special effects and confusing plots have appeal us so much but also the film has add the elements of youth and love. In these stories, love has been a clue. Buffy has fallen in love Angel however it makes Angel loses his soul become a monster. In season 5, Buffy sacrifice herself in order to save the world. While Buffy is hunting the vampires, she is try find a balance of the family, friendship and love.

Through what I find in the ‘Buffy’, these are what happen in the ‘true blood’ and ‘twilight’ as well. ‘Buffy’ has been the leader of this type of film is because it breaks the rules of saying darkness and love. Vampires are not always bad, they have got love same as human. But human sometimes can be so selfish and evil while they feel lost. We can easily find the later work of vampire films has some shadow of ‘Buffy’.

Has courage to break down the normal rules to represent the niceness in a different way. It’s like find a little bit sunshine in the dark, its novelty. That’s the reason ‘buffy’ would have a impressive effect to later vampire works.

Rose, A (2002) Of creatures and creators: Buffy does Frankenstein, in R. Wilcox & D. Lavery (eds) Fighting the forces: what’s at stake in Buffy the vampire slayer. Lanham: Rowman and Littlefield.

week 9

Week 9 what role does Hills (2004) suggest the fans play in the construction of cult TV? How is new media central to this?

According to Hill (2004), fandom has enthusiastic passions with cult TV. Once they are into any one of cult TV they will appreciate of the work and keep their loyalty to watch cult TV. Audiences would like to watch cult TV through the fan culture. Fans for cult TV distinguish to other genres TV program because they might make the elements of making TV show. A great cult TV wouldn’t be made for commercial activities; it’s more for fans activities, because “always define themselves against ‘consumers’.”(p.p 4, pg 517). Cult TV would become one of their habits through their lifestyle.

Media helps fans have more than one show or one star, they share qualities with others. They use ‘intersexual network’ to connect cult into their life. There are lost of website use ‘cult’ as a title because that’s what fans would like to see. Internet would be a new stage for fans to collect, share and discuss what they have found about ‘cult’ from their daily life

According to Hill (2004), the definition of cult is more equal fan audience rather than a TV show. In somehow, cult TV shows is made of audiences rather than made by produce, because fandom actually has big effect for propaganda.

Hills, M. (2004). Defining Cult TV; Texts, Inter-texts and Fan Audiences, The Television Studies Reader, in R. C. Allen & A. Hill. London and New York:Routledge.  

week 4 late post

Week 4:  how does the fantasy genre relate to modern media such as video games?

There are many modern media around us such as computer games, Facebook, email, video games.  Through the text, I can tell most of the video games are made from fantasy. “The Lord of the Rings gave rise to one of the most popular of the modern game-genres, the RPG (roleplaying game).” (Burn, 2005, n.p).

Harry potter stories have been considered as a good structure of games. In the video game, players don’t need to be Harry Potter,  they can be themselves in the game they can play the way they like. Now days, players don’t like the game is too safe and regulated. Although the video game is based on fantasy genre, it’s different from the book or film. In the film, we only see Harry has the power to against the spider, in the game is different players’ skill become most important power , they have their own way to make game has the scene only happens in the game.  So actually, a fantasy move could be shown so many types in the video games.

Furthermore, Harry is gaining his power for later challenges by go the lesson in the games, in the meantime,  the players  is improving their play skills as well.  One of the group, they are caring about how they feel of Harry, is like in the move. They do feel the same position. However, there are some plays don’t have time to worry about Harry’s feeling.  That’s may is the difference between film and games. The person controls the feeling whoever is the narrator or the players.

Reference:

Burn, A (2005). ‘Potter-Literacy-from book to game and back again; literature, film,game and cross-media literacy’, in papers: Explorations into Children’s Literature Vol 14,NO3

week 3 late post

Week 3 ：how does Attebery(1980) define fantasy? Find at least 5 definitions?

Atterbey thinks the fantasy world is like the film ‘The Lord of Rings’. Fantasy is an arbitrary construct with all sorts of imagination.

 “Any narrative which includes as a significant part of its make-up some violation of what the author clearly believes to be natural law-that is fantasy.” Fantasy can be made up with around magic objects. The environment can be one of the elements to show fantasy. According the text, except from the objects, characters, events can help us make difference between fantasy and related genres. “Fantasy is a game of sorts, and it demands that one play whole-heartedly, accepting for the moment all rules and turns of the game.” The ‘marvelous’ Is the point of fantasy because all supernatural happenings is unquestionably of fantasy. Fantasy is like ‘fairytale’ more generally termed nonsense or absurdity. Fantasy can be found any of normal and basic things in the life they are happened in normal life such as life, death, good, and evil. This is folktale. “folktale was one of the early genres of folktale.

Attebery, B. (1980). Locating fantasy. In The Fantasy Tradition in American Literature: From Irving to Le Guinn (pp. 2-9). Bloomington: Indiana UP, 1980

week 2 late post

Week 2: what does Baetons(2001) mean by ‘monstration’, ‘graphiation’,and ‘graphiateur’?

As my point of view, the graphic is narrative utterance. It’s going to give readers a first rough copy which makes them discover something of the initial narrative drawing. Sometime even it gives reader different impression compare with ending it doesn’t matter because it might be an unfinished drawing.

All drawing is made of three features what are lines, contours and color that the narrative is the agent who is responsible for it. Marion does not see garphiation as a different and parallel type of narration, but as a subordinate part of it.

To analysis the specific narrative situation of movies as the hierarchical combination of several types of narration or, that Marion calls it as “monstration”.

From the article, garhiation is more about self is like narration. It obviously shows self identity and thoughts. By proposing to add to the point, it mentions that monstration is going to be more detail and far from having the same figurative transparency in comics.

Therefore, ‘garphiation’ is related to the character in the drawing by adding personality of artist.

References  
Baetons, J. (2001). Revealing Traces: a new theory of graphic enunciation. In Varnum,R.& Gibbons, C. (Eds), The Language of Comics: world and image (pp/ 145-155), Jackson: U Press of Mississippi. 

week 1 late post

Week one: Do you think comics are a children’s or adult genre/media?

Firstly I think comics are children’s and adult genre. Comics are perfect combinations of images and words. It’s visual art. Comics are a most popular genre at moment because it has got function such as humours, cheap and easy-understanding.

 Although I think it fit both different groups of people, I still find it fits children better than adults. On the one hand, image is a most shine point that comic has got, we always be attacked by those funny, cute characters which means kids would love it when they first see comics. On the other hand, less word may mean more interesting. Through one page of pictures, kid will understand the situation and image more to link it then a few words will tell them the story happens in that page. Kids don’t need much detail descriptions of what they want to read and know.

Comics will be a fast way of getting knows new knowledge for kids. From my point of view, picture reading do seems quite interesting and it appeals me, however if I want to know more information of what I am reading with I would prefer read articles and book with more words and less images. For me, comic is far away not enough of information. It’s normally use indirect way to represent an event or a place.  It’s genre but may not be popular. So as my analysis, I think comics are the balance of visual arts and images. 

Herge (2005 ；1935). The Adventures of Tintin : The Blue Lotus. London: Methuen.

Week 12

How have game shows influenced reality TV?

According to Hill (2005, p. 102), the reality gameshow has been an international bestseller, since its arrival in 2000. The Birth of reality gameshows could be related back to british producer Charlie Parson, who created the idea for the programme survivor in 1990. Edemole who was a Swedish company worked on the programme called Big Brother which became a Hit.

Hill (2005), states that although there are similarities between gameshows and reality TV shows, such as observational documentary but formats differ in terms of tone and style. According to Hill (2005), there is a strong competition between reality gameshows and production of reality TV shows like the American Idol which are increasing day by day in their costs, which places pressure on gameshows. However, reality TV has been influenced by gameshows like reality programming such as cops or Survivor, though they deal with realism they are unable to stick with the convention due to their strong reliance on entertainment such as soap opera or gameshows (Hill, 2005)

Furthermore, there are documentary in reality gameshows such as Big Brother claims and shows that it deals with real life situations but it heavily includes or is highly influenced by gameshows formats. Hill (2005, p. 97), states that different types of documentary have influenced reality programming such as reflexive/performative documentaries, docu- drama and mock documentaries. I think Reality TV has been influenced by gameshows and not only by gameshows but other formats of entertainments as well, due to its popularity among its audience and high in entertainment. Therefore, the reality TV shows have produced and developed reality gameshows.

Reference:

Hill, A. (2005) The rise of reality TV. In A. Hill, Reality TV: Audiences and Popular Factual Television. (pp. 15 – 40). Oxon: Routledge

Week 12

How have game shows influenced reality TV?

The most popular form of reality television today involve winners and losers, and a nice bundle of millions at the end. Reality tv has embraced the game show format and extended its general idea. We see Survivor, the most obvious comparison with a game show, forcing all kinds of tasks on its contestants, the only way to differentiate it with a regular game show is its setting and duration. I shall explore this idea further now.

Gamedocs (as they are referred to) began with The Spelling Bee in 1938 but the first commercially broadcast show was Truth or Consequences in 1941 (Wikipedia, 2011). The latter originally began as a radio show before moving to television. These early shows utilized the concept of everyday contestants using intellectual skill to win prizes, however Truth or Consequences began to involve many stunts. Who’s Line is it Anyway, which New York Times has revealed to be Britain’s most successful export in thirty years (Hills, 2005), is a show that elaborates the “everyday contestant” idea. We see that possible contestants are introduced and randomly chosen, then Chris Tarrant (the British host) spends at least 5 minutes asking questions, which he continually refers back to throughout their moment of fame. There are constant shots of family members in the audience, and the “Phone A Friend” tool helps to position the contestant as just a regular viewer, like you and me. It always used to annoy me, this constant chatter, but I can see now that it is actually a clever ploy to encourage this notion.

Game shows often took an intellectual stance over the silly. This was changed in 1946 with People Are Funny, which contestants won prizes for how funny they were. This idea has been used in several “impromptu” shows like Who’s Line Is It Anyway. However, this is a common facet of reality television, where there is the underlying assumption that all is adlibbed and spontaneous (Mittell 2004 p. 37).

Game shows have also begun to take a rather negative position towards the contestants. We can see this with The Weakest Link, which was first broadcast in 2000 in Britain (Wikipedia, 2011). The host is notoriously mean and is known for making fun of the contestants. After each round, there are questions/answers and general banter. Contestants are forced to work together but then to separate, and often many play dirty. The prize money is much smaller on this show, giving a greater number of possible contestants for each screening. This idea of dividing the contestants can be seen in Big Brother, Temptation Island and the like.
Today, many reality shows push the extremities for contestants. This is an idea that began in Japanese game shows (Couldry, 2004) such as Gaki no Tsukai! This show often forced situations such as kissing strangers and other crazy stunts, which was later picked up in shows like Survivor, but most notably taken further in Fear Factor and Distraction. Couldry (2004) writes “the myth that in the face of extreme physical challenges, especially those requiring team collaboration (however artificially constructed), an important aspect of human reality is shown”.

To conclude, we can see that game shows have influenced and are still an important part of reality television today. This is interesting as reality tv does not interest me in the slightest, but I always have time for intellectual game shows. It is interesting that they follow the same structure and concept, and to see that the genre is intertwined. The evolution of game shows from the standard question/answer format, to the silly and the obscene, and now to extreme life situations is a staggering rise. We can see that reality television – no matter what form it takes – is really just an extension of the game show.





REFERENCE LIST

Couldry, N (2004). Reality TV, or the Secret Theater of Neoliberalism. Review of Education, Pedagogy, and Cultural Studies 30:1 (January–March 2008), p. 1.

Hill, A. (2005) The rise of reality TV. In A. Hill, Reality TV: Audiences and Popular Factual Television. (pp. 15 – 40). Oxon: Routledge

Mittel, J (2004). Reflections on reality relevision (p.94). Routeledge: New York.

Truth or Consequences, October 8, 2011. Retrieved 18 October, 2011 from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Truth_or_Consequences

Weakest Link, October 8, 200. Retrieved 18 October, 2011 from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weakest_Link

Week Eleven

How have they constructed our conceptualisation of reality (or at least what we recognise as being real at the visual level)?

"Far from being the faithful depiction of reality it is supposed to be, realism, through the various forms it has taken throughout its history, shows itself to be neither a window nor mirror but a set of conventions" Robert Lapsley and Michael Westlake (1988; 158). This quote provides a good entry way for this weeks question - how does reality tv construct our own conceptualisation of reality? Or does reality tv just target our societal conventions?

There are several ways that reality tv can construct its own reality.
Reality tv began with hidden camera techniques, first filming shows, such as Candid Camera, and later, Miss America in 1984 (Wikipedia, 2011). The reality genre evolved to include Cinema Verite, which makes use of the fly on the wall position. The Docosoap focuses on clear cut characters who work in service-based jobs, that we revisit each time and get a sense of understanding for, such as Animal Hospital (Biressi & Nunn, 2005).
The use of handheld cameras, voice-overs and snappy story narration help to create an atmosphere of urgency (example being Cops). The "fly on the wall" as an an atypical reality show was pioneered by Survivor, which stressed the "ordinary people in extreme situations" theme, and focuses on the exagerrated behavior of contestants. This is a style of cinema described as "Cinema Verite with an Orwellian aura" (Brenten & Cohen, 2003). We feel as though we are watching a version of reality due to the Orwellian presence of the cameras, whilst forgetting the input of the directors, producers, writers etc.

Is our own reality influenced by this genre? Perhaps this also has much to do with the media. I recall being in England during the Big Brother phase. It would screen after school, there would be nightly reviews of the day, a LIVE channel, updates available for mobiles AND Facebook, internet sites including live streaming and of course all the magazine and newspaper coverage! It was everywhere! We have seen regular people become overnight celebrities purely for being on a reality show, we have seen unpopular celebs become likeable (i.e Jordan on "I'm A Celebrity Get Me Out of Here!), we have seen out of work celebs taste fame once more (i.e Peter Andre on above show), and we have seen contest winners achieve huge fame thanks to the media interest (i.e. Leona Lewis on The X Factor, and all other talent shows). Then theres people like Jessica Simpson who branch out and make millions, or Kim Kardashian who it appears impossible to escape from. How do they influence our reality? I am unsure how much reality tv is responsible for, but it is clear it shares the position with media and entertainment. For example, our language has mutated at a shocking rate and popular culture is referenced more and more by youth today (try and understand children I ask you!). Slang now includes many american idioms, as copied by shows such as The Hills and Jersey Shore (grenade, anyone?). It is an often spoken truth that our level of education is failing in areas such as spelling. Can we put this down to a script that takes place almost entirely in slang/made up words, which we then copy?
Additionally, many of the reality shows popular today can be found on Sky's E Channel. It is my personal view that the constant presence of materialistic shows such as Keeping up with the Kardashians and the like, increase our greed and capacity for envy. We start to want an exotic life like Khloe's, we want the Louis Vuitton handbag that Kourtney has, and we want the fame and money that Kim flaunts. Because we are bombarded with lifestyles of the rich and famous every day, our perception of reality is thwarted. Furthermore, reality tv relies strongly on the outrageous antics of particpants, such as pairing the most unimaginable people together on shows such as Wife Swap, causing some horrific situations, and often involving children. Our reality of what is right and wrong gets blurred.

To continue on with this idea, we also see that reality tv can affect its participants reality as well. For example, Brenton and Cohen (2003) explain that these forced situation experiences forces people to take on new facets of personality, and consequently lose their own identity. Additionally, participants may appear healthy but how does anyone really know, given that the psychologists are likely to be paid by the producers, and the media is more than likely owned by the same people? The attention some contestants may receive - especially negative - can never be seperated from someone as there is no longer the distinction between person and character. The viewers reality is confused, and so is the particpants. The worst case scenario of this is shown by the suicide of the first evictee from Survivor forerunner, Expedition Robinson (Brenton & Cohen, 2003).

There is a very good film called The Condemmed starring Steve Austin, that explores the idea of reality tv, and how far we are willing to go with it. It really makes you stop and think long and hard for a minute about the form reality tv may take in the future, and our notions of right and wrong (reality tv is the Frankenstein of TV!). Additional viewing could be The Cube, which also continues along this vein.

Our reality may be further influenced by reality tv. For example, Drifters (1929) and Coalface (1935) assisted in not only bringing understanding to the fishing/mining professions, but also helped to unify the nation during the second world war (Biressi & Nunn, 2005). Or sometimes, reality tv may play to stereotypes, such as Jessica Simpson and Paris HIlton, in their respective tv shows. It may even create desire to experience life on the other side of the world, such as Intrepid Journeys, while at the same time instilling bias from the sole point of view broadcast.

To conclude, reality tv can take on many shapes and forms, but at the end of the day, its hold over us - the humble viewer - is far reaching. I almost feel there is no point debating the reality of what we are watching, or the good/bad effects, as reality television has now become so firmly a part of our society that i cant imagine a time without it (and I dont even watch tv!). Human beings are simple creatures - we believe everything our eyes tell us, even though our eyes miss nearly everything of importance in this life, and deceive us every day.




REFERENCES
Biressi, A. & Nunn, N. (2005). Real Lives, documentary approaches. In Reality TV: realism and revelation. (pp. 35-58) London: Wallflower.

Hill, A. (2005) The reality genre. In A. Hill, Reality TV: Audiences and Popular Factual Television (pp. 14 – 40). Oxon: Routledge.

Brenton, S & Cohen, R (2003). Shooting people: adventures in reality tv. Verso: London.

Reality television. October 7, 2011. Retrieved October 17 2011 from: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reality_television