.Sunday, November 4, 2007 ' 1:25 PM Y
BOO!!
Round 2: Violence vs. Gore
Check out this interesting “Tom & Jerry” episode I found on YouTube.
Do this experiment if you are game. It’s pretty interesting. Watch this episode twice. (Advisory: Do it only if you have the time)
The two videos feature the same episode.
Tom & Jerry - Jerry's Cousin (Sound Dubbing)
Tom & Jerry - Jerry's Cousin (Original)
How did you find this episode?
Personally, I found it really interesting… It’s obviously an episode of “Tom & Jerry”. Yet, with the sound dubbing that’s done (with lots of vulgarities), it feels kind of awkward (even uneasy?) to know that it’s coming from “Tom & Jerry”.
The point here is to note that the scenes are still originally “Tom & Jerry”. But why do we feel that the episode is suddenly so violent. Is it just the vulgarities?
Think again.
The scenes are noticeably violent as well. Why haven’t we noticed that before? I find it really interesting that generally, we accept “Tom & Jerry” as a family-friendly cartoon where children and adults alike can sit down, watch it together in the living room, and have a good laugh over it.
These are obviously very violent cartoons that we are watching. Why is it acceptable then? What is this telling?
Some questions that we can think about the whole notion of cartoons. How do we define cartoons anyway? What is considered acceptable or not acceptable?
1. Is violence in Tom & Jerry acceptable because it is a cartoon? Why is it then that we cannot accept "Happy Tree Friends"?
2. Is violence in Tom & Jerry acceptable because the characters do not speak a regular language, so no vulgarities? Isn’t this the case for "Happy Tree Friends" as well?
3. Is violence in Tom & Jerry acceptable because there is no blood spilled in there? So this is the difference that separates "Happy Tree Friends"?
§ Just like in good old cartoons where the characters never die no matter what mishaps they face?
§ Is that even reality? In reality, there are obvious consequences. Are we then afraid to face consequences? Is that an anxiety that we face?
§ Does that explain why we cannot accept "Happy Tree Friends”? Because the show is very graphic with blood and guts pouring out at every possible occasion and no character is spared?
One fan, Matt Kramer, 17, of Los Angeles, defended "Happy Tree Friends" -- or HTF, in Internet shorthand -- in an e-mail: "Tom and Jerry was incredibly violent," he wrote, but "Tom the cat simply had a pancake face when hit with a skillet, his skull didn't crack like medical science tells us it should. With HTF, every little thing leads to their ultimate death, thus showing consequence."
In fact, "Happy Tree Friends” shows why it is perhaps not the best idea to have a campfire in your wooden tree house, or hang your head out of the window of the school bus, and plays the modern counterpart to the old-style fairy tales of the Brothers Grimm, which showed naughty children just what happened if they wandered too deep into the forest.
I came across this interesting reading from a book entitled On media violence by Potter, W. James.
What caught my attention was that in the book, he mentioned that social scientists continually find cartoons to be the most violent of all television genres.
Cartoons do present very high rates of shootings, stabbings, bombings, and the like. These are violent actions… the cartoon “Tom & Jerry” contains so much violence that if you took away the violence you would be left with nothing. But the public discounts these actions when they appear in a fantasy or humorous context, such as a cartoon. The public reasons that when “Tom & Jerry” are stabbed or blown up, they are not really hurt, so there is no harm there is no violence.
“Tom & Jerry” would be considered very violent by content analysis and not violent by the public. The difference in definitions is traceable to the focus of concern. The public wants formulaic action – that is, safe, sanitized violence (no graphicness, low harm) that does not threaten them (not shocking, low reality), and in which the good guys are strong and prevail (high revenge, high justification). When members of the public see this formula in action, they see no violence and no need to complain.How do you relate to this? I hope this leaves you thinking…
Labels: cultural anxieties, Faustina, Genres, Jerry's Cousin, Media, motifs, personal opinion
