So this is just the beginning

Just another WordPress.com weblog

The Insights of an Audience’s Audience February 27, 2007

Filed under: Blog Assignment 1 — firefly18 @ 3:52 pm

Lurking in the far left, back corner of the movie theatre allows for quite the entertainment. By entertainment, I am not referring to the show that is being played on the oversized screen, but rather the behaviour of the audience in the theatre. Upon arrival most larger groups head towards the middle row of the theatre. This is not only because they all need to be able to sit in a row together but also the influences of social cohesion. All smaller groups tend to head to the sides of the theatre and if they do stick to the center the make sure that there is a descent distance between themselves and the larger groups. Under the contexts of this social cohesion smaller groups are not meant to challenge the larger groups that dominate the center of the theatre. If they were to try and create some type of challenge then all the smaller groups would sit together in a cluster, opposed to scattering across the theatre.  

 

There is a tendency for groups of people to stick to the back half of the theatre. Upon entering it can be noted that the larger the group the more confusion there is going to be about where they should be seated. These groups don’t really seem to realize that two minutes into the ad, they won’t really be aware of their seating anymore. When one or two individuals walk into the theatre there is a more pre-determined sense of where they are going to sit. Maybe in this moment they recognize that people are watching them and developing ideas based on how the choose where to sit and where they do. However, this mentality of how to behave while people are watching you will soon be lost. 

 

At this specific 10:05 show of “Ghost Riders” ten groups of people showed up to watch the film. The movie theatre has done a commendable job at engraving it in their customers’ heads that a movie is not a movie with out some overpriced popcorn. Only one of these ten groups at this particular showing was not eating popcorn or drinking pop. Of all these groups of people there was only one man who had come alone and only one couple turned out for the show. This suggests that movie theatres are socially organized and are designed for a group environment; it can also be assumed that this movie is not a “date movie”.  

 

Movie theatres like most social institutions have created their own social code of conduct as well as unique social norms. Roughly fifteen minutes after the movie started a teenaged usher walked up and down the first aisle, he stopped once to ask one person to lower their legs off the seat in front of them. It can be assumed that the usher is checking for young adults or children who have sneaked into to witness a PG14 film, people who are behaving inappropriately or maybe just putting their feet up.  As for the norms in a movie theatre- it could be assumed that they would be similar to those in a class room or perhaps a play or performances. It has a similar set-up the audience enters from the very back of the room and knows to sit down, they know that they are meant to face forwards and focus on what is being displayed before them. However, what is deemed appropriate seems to vary a bit. For example, in the movie theatre you can walk in late after the movie had started and make your way up to the front walk through the middle row and find a seat. In any other similar situation that would be seen as disruptive and rude, but here, well it’s just a movie theatre. Once the lights go down and the speakers that are far too loud, almost to the point where it is uncomfortable starts up and the over-sized screen is flashing rather large colors at the audience, people start to forget where they are. All of a sudden there is this new mentality in the crowd that no one is watching each other and everyone is focused on the film. This is when the individuals’ behaviour really starts to change, all of a sudden it is okay to touch your face, pick at things on your skin and force large handfuls of popcorn or candy into your mouth. Despite the fact that the chairs are dirty, from the hundreds of people who have sat their before and that they have just handled money there is no hesitation to put their hands on their food, in their mouths and on their faces. In any other social setting this would not be appropriate, which indicates that there is something different about the movie theatre. Maybe this social setting is homier and individuals are feeling more comfortable or maybe they are just so distracted that they do not consciously control their actions nor do they realize that some sociologist might be watching them.  

 

Having gone to a movie just to watch individuals watch a movie, maybe Smith does have some valid points. His “sensory stressfest” idea is quite validated, the speakers are too loud and the screen is too bright, but it is acceptable in this atmosphere and the audience arrives ready for it. However, the audience that I witnessed was rather quiet, no one was over the top excited before the movie, and maybe it is because the movie was lacking in quality, but the audience remained quite calm throughout the film. It may still be shocking that so many people are familiar with celebrities even though they don’t feel like they pay any attention celebrity events. However, seeing that happen in a movie theatre, is really not that startling, it is seen everywhere else: newsstands, grocery stores, on TV and on the radio, why wouldn’t they get people involved so close to the source? In the end going to a movie is really not that strange or socially bizarre, this question could be directed at any social institution. They all have their own flaws and exceptions and they all attract different types of people with different interests and tastes.

 

Watching “Barenaked Ladies” as a Group Event February 14, 2007

Filed under: Sociology 3390 — firefly18 @ 1:32 pm

      Over the weekend I went to see the “Barenaked Ladies” (BNL) concert at the enmax center. Which explains my title, which hopefully was not too shocking and makes sense now! Its funny how they must have originally created that name to shock and grab the attention of a large audience. Unfortunalty they would always be held back by this invisible band that we can refer to as the Canadian nationality. But that is not really my point, I just wanted to point out how their name is not so shocking anymore and really just understood. I am sure that when you first read my title, you most likely thought of the band…not sure what other options you went through first…haha…anyways…Their name is no longer shocking because we are now somewhat de-sensitized to this type of humour.      

So as I am sitting there way up in section HH, second last row, I had a great view of not only the performance but of the entire crowd. It was so interesting to watch which groups I would say roughly 3500 hundred people there, they were all still concerned about how others were behaving and did not want to act differently. A boy sitting next to me (don’t worry I won’t mention your name Mark) was just having a blast! He was dancing in his seat, acting out all of the words to the songs but he would not stand up. I am thinking to myself he personally would most likely have more fun if he was standing up rocking out, but he wouldn’t and it was because nobody else was. He would only have been noticed by the 25 immediate people surrounding us but still that was not enough to get him up out of his seat.     

 Along these same lines, I tried to picture what the show would have been like if it had just been me and my 3 friends at the show. Something tells me that it would not have been the same!

For starters BNL would not have been interested in performing for 4 University students and not only due to the fact that they would make less then 160$, which would be in no way profitable, but there would be no motive for them. Our reactions, dancing, clapping and whistling would not be gratifing enough for them to really put on a good show. 

Second of all I don’t the 4 of us would have had much fun in a huge empty hockey arena watching a show that is meant for a crowd of at least 5000 people. I think that in a way watching other people clap and whistle encourages us to do the same and in a way justifies our behaviour aswell. And back to my friend who wishes to remain anonymous, would he have wanted to rock out with just us 3 around him? I doubt that he would have been as interested or as provoked to dance if there was no one around pretending to ignore his somewhat strange behaviour in comparison to the social norms at that specific time.  

PS> Any guesses as to what BNL did on the day of festivus??

 

TV over Internet February 7, 2007

Filed under: Sociology 3390 — firefly18 @ 2:59 pm

Personally, I am not the hugest fan of the internet! For me there were more cons than pros for communicating on the internet with friends or strangers. Yet at the same time I realize that it is something that I can’t really live in this society with out ever touching. Although I would just like to mention that I recently met someone who does NOT have the internet at home!! Strange how that is so shocking! But the only time that he ever uses it is when he is on campus to check his e-mail and do whatever. So as much as I dislike the internet and as much as it bothers me on some level that I can’t quite grasp, I see that in a way I have been conditioned to it. It got me to thinking, the same thing would have happened when cell phones came out. There would have been people who said “I have never needed a cell phone before why would I need to get one now” So in a way it is a matter of conditioning….which is also a little bit strange to think about anyways.

            Now I will appear as a hypocrite by saying that I love to play Game Cube and watch TV every now and again…because they too would have been strange to someone else and maybe even me (well Game Cube only) when they first came out. It just seems that the TV feels a little more natural to me in comparison to the internet. However, I do realize that its because when I was growing TV was just a reality, it was around before me and already apart of my parents lifestyle and what not. The internet, however, I guess would have made its appearance when I was in grade 2 and I was not allowed to go on without my parents watching. But I think that, that sensitivity has been lost, now young kids are allowed to go on when they are not under direct supervision. Which bothers me just a little bit, I think that parents should be more responsible when it comes to what their kids are seeing on the internet and the same thing goes for the TV. If I have learnt anything from the media as of yet, its that we can’t trust institutions and the media to decide what is safe for anyone to see, we need to be play as our own filtering system.