Rebuttal: Child Actor Role Models

Rebuttal to Kimchi's opening statement:
Child actors should be seen as role models to both people their age and to the younger audiences that look up to them.  People change, over time, but as actors, it is part of their job to play good role models to all of their audiences.  You can't just tell a child that someone they admire cannot be a role model, because they won't listen to you, if they admire someone, unless they find out something they dislike about them, they will continue to look up to them as role models.  If a child actor takes some inappropriate action, children are likely to do something similar, or consider what they are doing as fine, and may do something similar when they grow older.  If someone their age likes them a lot, then they might do the same to increase their self esteem, or to make themselves feel cooler.

Miley Cyrus's behavior and style drastically changed for a while, but for a while, it seems, she has gone back to the innocent(ish) Miley Cyrus that we all first knew.  True, there are many things out there that spark controversy about her, but since she is an actor, she should be considered a role model to all her audiences, and be required to watch her actions, to make sure that the actions she takes are proper and make her a good role model.  When people see the pictures Miley Cyrus with Avan Jogia on her birthday, she created a poor role model to her audiences, and gave them the message that it is perfectly fine to hook up with someone on a birthday, wearing a skimpy outfit at a club, and getting "hot and heavy."

What exactly is wrong with an actor playing a role that is younger than their actual age?  When people watch the show, they don't always compare how well the actor is playing the role in relation to how old they actually are.  People watch it to see how convincing their acting is, and for the drama and story line in the movie or TV show.

When child actors are role models to their audience, their audiences are younger, and have much more energy to make a change if they want to.  Disney channel had all their major stars of their shows and movies participate in Friends for Change (info here).  Friends for Change has done a lot to help the planet with the help of their fans, who view them as role models.  Because they are role models, and people follow their actions, when they see actors tell them to do something, like take a particular action to help make a change for the better health of the planet, they are more likely to do it, and it makes it possible for "hundreds of Disney VoluntEARS [to] Team Up to Scour the shorelines and Clean Up" county beaches.

Child actors should be role models to all audiences, because if they are good role models, in encourages their fans to do better things, that have more positive results, than if they weren't role models, and they would not be as likely to have positive results.

Strategical Speaking.

In The Animal Farm, by George Orwell, he writes about a farm over-running the humans working at the farm, and surviving on their own.  They set up their own government, and the pigs are supposedly the most intelligent, so they run the farm for the most part.  Napoleon and Snowball both had an equal amount of power at the beginning of the book, but both had two very different approaches to different things.  Snowball’s approach to convincing the animals if his point is most interesting, especially considering what happened to him later in the book.  Squealer is the younger pig that plays a role as the messenger between Napoleon’s ideas and actions, and he explains to the other “lower” farm animals why the things Napoleon does and choices he makes is all for the better, and although they doubt him at first, after he finishes talking, they are convinced.

Snowball is constantly in disagreement with Napoleon, and they are constantly arguing about different matters, from what to plant in a field, to what to do with their organization system with the food and other matters.  Orwell describes Snowball as “a more vivacious pig than Napoleon, quicker in speech, and more inventive, but was not considered to have the same depth of character” (p.35).  Snowball is much more energetic than Napoleon, and speaks clearly and to the point, and is more creative and invents things, but his personality is not as difficult to undermine and understand; it’s pretty simple and clear, and easy to understand.  One of Napoleon and Snowball’s biggest arguments was over the windmill, and whether they should build it or not.  Napoleon claimed the point that it was nonsense, while Snowball is much more dramatic in response.  He immediately sprang to his feet, and “broke into a passionate appeal in favour of the windmill...Snowball’s eloquence had carried them away.  In glowing sentences he painted a picture of Animal Farm as it might be when sordid labour was lifted from the animals’ backs” (p.64).  Snowball’s way of convincing the animals to support him by voting in favor of making the windmill, was to describe in detail the things that could happen, and the kind of life they would live if the windmill was built.  He was very emotional about the windmill, and grabbed the farm animal’s attention, and made them want a the life that he was describing.  

Squealer sees everything in ways very similar to Napoleon.  He supports all of Napoleon’s ideas, and has his own unique way of communicating with the “lower” animals and to convince them that what Napoleon is doing is right.  Squealer is “a small fat pig...with very round cheeks, twinkling eyes, nimble movements, and a shrill voice.  He was a brilliant , and when he was arguing some difficult point he had a way of skipping from side to side and whisking his tail which was somehow very persuasive” (p.36).  Squealer is one of the smaller pigs, full of energy, and very good at convincing the “lower” animals.  Squealer, being younger, gives a seemingly innocent appearance to the other animals on the farm, and has an odd way of convincing the animals of anything, and they claim that Squealer could argue and turn black into white.  Whenever Squealer argues a point, he skips from side to side, and whisks his tail, which somehow convinces the animals to support whatever Squealer is arguing for.  Many times, the animals become doubtful, and start to believe that the things the pigs are doing is not for their benefit, but because they are trying to take advantage of them, since the pigs are smarter.  When settling the issue of the milk disappearing, Squealer was sent out to talk to the other animals.  After telling them what happened and the reason why the pigs took the milk, the animals were still not fully convinced, so he emphasized the purpose of why they took the milk by saying, “Do you know what would happen if we pigs failed in our duty?  Jones would come back!  yes, Jones would come back!  Surely, comrades, surely there is no one among you who wants to see Jones come back?” (p.52).  He knows that the animals don’t want Jones to come back, so as an excuse for why the pigs took the milk for themselves, he says that their main goal to just keep Jones away from the farm.  Whenever he tries to convince the “lower” animals that the pig’s main and true purpose at heart is to keep Jones and his men away from the farm, and to keep the animals free from human hands and unfair power.  

Should child actors be expected to be role models? I say YES.

Child actors in shows marketed for young audiences should be expected to serve as role models for their young audiences.  Some people claim that child actors should have the right to make mistakes and to do whatever they want and not be judged so harshly by society by it, but the mistakes that they make are still seen by their younger audiences, and oftentimes, they don't understand that they are making a mistake, but that they are doing it since they are "cool" or something.  When a Disney star like David Henrie for example goes out drinking when he is 19, even if it is in Puerto Rico, where the legal drinking age is 18, younger audiences don't understand that concept.  They don't look up the legal drinking age in Puerto Rico.  They just take it as a 19 year old American actor is drinking, and that it is perfectly fine to drink alcohol.  


Even though Lindsay Lohan isn't portrayed as a Disney actor as much anymore, she first launched her career in the Disney movie, the Parent Trap.  Lohan has been in many scandals recently, including multiple DUIs and drug charges.  She was sentenced to 90 days in jail in July, 2010, 30 days for her first DUI arrest, another 30 days for her second arrest, and 30 more days for reckless driving, but in the end, she only had to serve 13 days in jail before being released and sent directly to drug rehabilitation.  Teenagers or younger audiences may absorb these events in a different manner than people who understand the situation differently will.  Younger audiences might think that driving under the influence, using drugs (like cocaine, which Lohan uses), or reckless driving is perfectly fine, because even if they do it and get arrested for it, they won't get into much trouble, since they may think that they won't need to serve the full sentence like Lohan did.  


Child actors are often seen as role models to younger audiences, and if they are constantly exposed to the actors they look up to doing things that aren't viewed as "proper" to society, they won't understand that, since they are often too young to decipher between the wrong and the right.  Child actors should act as role models to their audiences, and act in a way that won't harm others if imitated or followed.


Resources:
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/comments_blog/2010/07/free-lindsay-lohan-ordered-to-jail-but-for-how-long-.html
http://backseatcuddler.com/2009/03/05/latest-disney-star-scandal-booze-skanks/ (I read a lot of the comments for opinions and some ideas.)

Political Power --> Corruption?

In my opinion, political power often corrupts the people who attain it.  Even though Hitler may be an extreme example, Hitler became corrupted after he gained so much power and began to go kill many Jews and other races, because he was trying to find the people he finds most ideal: the people with blonde hair and blue eyes, or at least agreed with what he was trying to do.  I think that George Orwell would respond to this question similarly; I believe that he thinks that political power tends to corrupt the people who attain it too.  In the book, The Animal Farm, on page 37, he writes, "The animals hated Moses because he told tales and did no work, but some of them believed in Sugarcandy Mountain, and the pigs had to argue very hard to persuade them that there was no such place." Moses, the crow, has much power (in a way), since the humans favor him above the other animals, and he is well fed and gets special treatment.  He is somewhat corrupt, because he tells lies to the animals and makes it difficult for the pigs to convince the animals that there is an actual purpose in rebelling, and that they're rebellion won't be completely pointless, because their descendants will be able to live in a different world without the humans, and that the rebellion may come sooner than they think, and they will need to be prepared if that is the case.  On page 38, Orwell writes, "his men were idle and dishonest, the fields were full of weeds, the buildings wanted rooting, the hedges were neglected, and the animals were underfed...he and his four men were in the stone-shed with whips in their hands, lashing out in all directions."  The people had power, and became corrupt and careless, drinking, and not doing their duties and taking care of the animals and feeding them, and when the animals get and start to rebel, they punish they with whips.

Food. YUM.

I hate writer's block, so I'm just going to write about something that I, like I bet many other people really enjoy.  Food. With some of a narrative in it.

The sound of my alarm - a song blasting from my iPod headphones - wakes me up.  I stretch, yawn, and rub my eyes, then get up to find something I can make to eat.  I walk to the fridge and shiver in the cold.  I miss the comfort of my bed.  I grab the milk and pour it into a cup.  The milk splashes into the cup, but I quickly put milk carton upright before the milk spills over.  I return the milk to its spot on the the fridge door, and put the cup into the microwave.  "Beep.  Beep.  Beep." One.  One.  Five.  One minute and fifteen seconds.  I run to complete my morning routine before running back to the kitchen to take the milk out.  I scan the kitchen for something else to eat.  Cereal, no.  Not enough time.  Graham crackers?  Nope, too sugary.  Noodles? Not enough time to cook or eat either.  I glance at the clock.  The bright green light tells me "7:18."  Crap! Late again.  I take a few large gulps of milk, wipe my mouth, grab a bag or Ritz, and run out of the house, stumble to put my shoes one, then grab my bike as I run out and start biking to school.  I brace myself for the long morning ahead, and eagerly wait for lunch.

Every Monday, Tiffany and I walk to Togo's to buy the daily special: the pastrami sandwich.  We order our sandwiches the same way every week: "Two pastrami sandwiches, on Parmesan bread, with everything but onions."  The Togo's sandwich has lettuce, mustard, tomatoes, pepperonicini, and pastrami.  The mustard is somewhat bitter, but it adds to the Togo's sandwich taste that I love.  It adds just just the right amount of bitterness to balance out the taste of the sweet tomato, the bland but cold lettuce, the spicy pepperonicini, and the pastrami.  Occasionally, I get the meal with a bag of jalapeño chips and a wild cherry pepsi. YUM. :D

CRANK. the book.

After looking through several blogs when there weren't as many this afternoon, I saw a blog post by Nawara on her winter break, and decided to read it.  She started to talk about Crank, so I couldn't help, but to respond to it.

I read Crank and Glass, by Ellen Hopkins. These books are very well structured and written. I recommend the Crank series to everyone in the whole world. It is so good-- I cannot stress it enough. I literally could not stop reading it. Although I had to use the bathroom a few times, I just held it in because I wanted to know what was going to happen next. Every page became more tempting to know the next.

Before break, Nawara and I started talking about books after she saw me reading Fallout by Ellen Hopkins.  It is the third book in her series, with Crank and Glass as the first two books.  I showed her a few pages from the book, and told her to read it.  She thought it was kind of strange, but interesting how the book was written.  The book looks big, but it isn't that long, because the books written in somewhat of a poem format.  Whenever anyone looks inside the book, they always ask me if its written in poems, and even though it looks like its a poem, its basically just a story with regular sentences just like any other book, but instead of the sentence being complete and written to completely fill a line up, Ellen Hopkins breaks apart her sentences to create images at times, or some pattern.  It takes a while to get used to, but it's not confusing or anything like that.

The book talks about a girl, Kristina, and what happens to her life after she visits her father and gets a taste of crank with him.  Her life seems better at first, but then it starts to go downhill after she loses her grasp and gets high too much, and she loses control of her life and her body too.  It's really dramatic, and like Nawara says, once you start to read about her life and find it interesting, the book is sooooooo hard to put down.  When I read the book, I would normally read it during times I was busy and had a ton of stuff to do still, but I needed to know what happened to Katrina.  I would continuously tell myself, "One more section, then that's it," but still, I kept on reading, until thirty or fifty pages later, I'd actually put down the book because I had things to finish or I had to go sleep because it was so late (after midnight :).  I highly suggest this book, it is an amazing book, and Ellen Hopkins has become one of my favorite authors.

Psst!!! Nawara! Read Impulse asap. (all you other people too :D) its sooooooo gooood. My favorite book by her so far.

So Many Choices for College!

From class, Sutherland had us read seven pieces that answered the question: "Will you have a better life if you graduate from an elite school?"  Some of the pieces claimed that by going to an elite school, the salary of the student would be higher than one who went to a non-elite college, while others claim just the opposite.

The piece that most convinced me of its point was the piece, "Graduate School Matters More" by David W. Breneman.  This piece was particularly convincing, since it considered and talked about most of the more important aspects of colleges and universities, like attention for students, whether they put more attention and effort to undergrad students or to research and graduate education.  The piece also discusses how a person can consider what university or college to go to based on whether they are planning to attend a graduate or professional school after the undergraduate degree.  Depending on the undergraduate school a student chooses, some schools give them a better chance of getting into the graduate or professional school of their choice.  Breneman realizes how people all have different personalities and ways of learning, and explains how it is better for a student to perform very well in a not as distinguished and well known than in a school where they are lost and confused in "a highly selective institution."  He talks about finance as well, which helped to convince me of his point, which is to just choose a school that fits your personality, and you feel like you'd be able to learn in, rather than one where it would be hard to be successful in.

The piece that confused me the most and answered the question the most poorly in my opinion, was titled, "The Specialization Trade-Off" and is written by James Shulman.  To me, this was the worst piece because Shulman didn't even answer the question.  He focuses on sports, and sport scholarships for athletes at elite colleges, but for someone like me who isn't the least bit interested in getting a sports scholarship, or in getting into an elite school with mediocre grades, but instead with really good sports skills, it doesn't appeal to me, and I can't connect to it.  After reading Shulman's answer to the question, it just made me question whether it's really worth it or not to get into an elite college, because there will be students who aren't at the college for the good education to get a good business job or whatever, but to play sports.  So I'm now concerned about how good the education at an elite college with a strong focus on sports teams will be.