May 3-7, 2005
Thesis Presentations
721 Broadway
at Waverly Place
4th Floor
South Elevators
New York, NY 10003
For additional
information email
itp.inquiries@nyu.edu
or call 212.998.1880
| Whose Choice? | ||
|---|---|---|
| Author(s): | Anne Clark | |
| Instructor: | Barton, Jake Rushkoff, Douglas |
|
| Class: | Final Project Seminar Post Linear Narrative Lab |
|
| URL: | http://www.whosechoice.com | |
| Keywords: | documentary video politics religion abortion sex education mormons LDS political propaganda moral values 2004 Presidential Election Salt Lake City | |
| Whose choices define legislation? Should we rely on government, religion or ourselves to define “moral values”? “Whose Choice,” a documentary video, contrasts opinions regarding how the ideals of religion are manipulated by politicians to define “moral values” through issues such as abortion in Salt Lake City. | ||
| My interest in the debate surrounding choice springs from my family’s strong religious background. Most of my family are devout Mormons and live in Utah, where approximately 70% of the state belongs to the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (LDS). Religious beliefs greatly influence political policy and education in the area and abortion is often used as a way of creating a polarized community definition of “moral values” in elections, which can greatly influence how large groups of people vote and who gains political power. Abortion and sex are rarely discussed openly in the home, school, church or community. I hope that by promoting open discussion, thus breaking the culture of repressing personal opinion, which fosters political propaganda, I will expose my audience in New York to the cultural forces behind politics in highly religious areas of the US and allow them to question the values of their own community, helping foster more educated dialogue. | ||
| Personal Statement: | My interest in the debate surrounding the legislation of morality and the tactics politicians use to manipulate public opinion springs from my personal background. I was raised in a deeply religious Mormon home in Lincoln, Nebraska with family roots in Utah and pioneer ancestors who walked across the Mormon Trail. In my family, and generally in the Midwest and Rocky Mountain regions, religion is often used in defense of and motivation for political positions. The perspective is that religion is the dominant means of defining values for the individual and community and should therefore be used when defining rules or legislation for the community. However, this idea did not always translate so simply in my family since my father was a strict Republican, which is extremely common among Mormons and my mother was a strict Democrat, an extreme rarity among Mormons and they would often debate political issues based on the same religious doctrine. As a child I was aware that political issues pertaining to morality are often interpreted differently, even when rules defining moral issues are agreed upon. When the rules and assumptions regarding the community’s definition of values are not agreed upon there is even more room for interpretation. | |
| Context: | Christianity is the dominant religion in the US and a large number of Americans base their value systems on the tenets of it, therefore making religious laws a higher priority than any government law. However, in a country that honors the separation of church and state in its constitution, can moral rules based on religion become the basis for legislation? Can America legislate moral issues and if so, whose choices define this morality? My hypothesis is that under current conditions, in which moral values defined by religion are a major motivation behind voting behavior for a large percentage of the population, people will be persuaded by political arguments that rely on religious rhetoric and confirm existing community myths. Both Noam Chomsky in Media Control: The Spectacular Achievements of Propaganda and Jacques Ellul in Propaganda: The Formation of Men’s Attitudes, have developed political propaganda models, which describe this phenomenon. By maintaining the isolation of an individual and feeding them ideas that a propagandist attributes to the targeted individual’s community or milleau, the individual will accept the message and never realize that other individuals in their group may also think differently. According to both authors the best way to combat political propaganda is to openly discussing topics, which may most often be exploited by politicians in a trusted community or family setting. The act of creating a dialogue breaks individual isolation and may help in the formation of unique opinions rather than simply supporting the ideas politicians may use to polarize public opinion. | |
| Audience: | My intended audience is Americans who do not come from a religious background and live predominately in the west or east coasts. As well, an international audience interested in understanding the forces behind American policies could benefit from understanding the cultural and religious issues, which often define politics in this country. At the same time I do not want to ostracize a potential audience of those who are deeply religious and live or are from the Midwest or Rocky Mountain regions. The personal stories should ring true and feel authentic to an audience who may have experienced similar situations. The experience of viewing or interacting with the piece should help illustrate the conflict between the idealistic laws set forth by religion and the way politicians manipulate these laws to persuade the community into voting for legislation, which has not been thoroughly or openly debated. My piece should speak most strongly to people on opposing sides of the debate who believe there is a straightforward religious or rational answer to divisive social policies. The piece should help illustrate to skeptics the important role religion plays in the lives of many people in this country and the power this asserts on individual choice and freewill. On the other hand, it should portray the challenges posed when a force, which cannot be proven rationally or has not been discussed or questioned openly with all members of the community, becomes the basis of making decisions. Hopefully after viewing/interacting with the work the audience will better understand opposing viewpoints or at least appreciate the complexity of each sides of the argument, thus promoting an informed dialogue between groups with opposing views. Ideally the video will promote the audience to think about how their own political views are shaped by their particular community and convince them to embark in more open discussions with their friends and family, regardless of whether their beliefs diverge from each another. | |
| User Scenario: | The format of my project will be a fifteen-minute documentary video. Video’s ability to captivate an audience through intense use of visuals and sound will help me portray the conflicting personal narratives and opinions of the Salt Lake City community. Visually, the audience should be reminded that this video is the representation of my personal opinion. By including myself, or my voice over, in the discussions and narration, as well as leaving my personal mark on the film, through use of handwriting and illustrations, the film should feel that it is one person’s opinion. However, the use of several conflicting opinions related to one particular scene or symbol should remind the audience that they themselves are entitled to their own opinion and that the film is offering no clear cut answer for their consumption. Visual metaphors, which break the frame such as blurred edges and overlaid textures will be incorporated, reminding the audience that just as conflicting opinions are heard outside the frame in the form of voiceovers, they should feel free to express their own opinions after viewing the film.
The film will open with an introduction to Salt Lake City’s culture, including the fact that it was founded by Brigham Young and Mormon pioneers in the 1850s. Other prominent city symbols including the temple, capitol and statues of the Mormon pioneers will be introduced. The audience will meet the film’s narrator, Anne Clark, who was raised Mormon and currently lives in New York City, but who is visiting Salt Lake City and exploring whether her family and community’s definition of moral values is related to the abortion debate and whether this influences politics. The audience will also get to know Anne’s nephew, Drew Fuller, and at the end her father, Ralph Clark. Other participants include a variety of community members including Donald Jessee, a representative from the LDS Church Headquarters, Kerrie Galloway, Head of Planned Parenthood, Luciano Colonna, Head of The Harm Reduction Project and Martha Ball, a retired public school teacher and active member of the LDS church. Anne’s narration will help tie the diverse opinions together. Scene Break Down: A neighborhood skyline identified as New York City with a female in voiceover saying “this is my home.\" Another skyline identified as Salt Lake City and the same voice speaking, ‘and this is my family’s home in Salt Lake City, Utah.” The video zooms closer and focuses on two buildings, one a modern day high rise office building and the other a historic religious bilding, the voiceover says “in the center of the city is the Church of Jesus Chris of Latter Day Saints (more commonly known as Mormons or LDS) headquarters and the temple.” Archival footage and photographs of Salt Lake City, the same voice speaks in voiceover “My parents were born and raised in Salt Lake and were married at the temple. My great great grandparents originally came to Salt Lake in the 1850s with Brigham Young.” The images continue and handwriting identifies the images as the narrator’s parents on their wedding day and then shows historic photographs of Mormon pioneers identified as the narrator’s ancestors who moved to Salt Lake with Brigham Young in the 1850s. It becomes apparent that the photographs are part of a family tree, which then moves to show more modern looking pictures with a young girl at the top who is identified as the narrator. The female voice continues, “When I was 8 years old I was baptized as an official member of the Mormon church and got my CTR ring, which reminded me to Choose the Right.” Images of necklaces and rings with the emblem “CTR” are seen and then more archival footage of the temple is shown with the words “Choose the Right, BUT WHOSE CHOICE” while a hymn with these same lyrics plays in the background. A cross-stitching with words describing the “Young Women Values” is displayed while the voiceover continues and the narrator identifies her adult self as she looks at a statue of Joseph Smith, the founder of Mormonism, “I’m not 8 anymore, but I still try to choose the right, as naive as that might sound. It’s just that now I’m not as sure what that actually means.” A shot of the modern day Salt Lake temple framed by a statue of a mother and children dancing in a circle, the area is identified as Temple Square. Anne is seen walking around the area in front of the LDS Conference Center, next to the Temple, where General Conference takes place every year. Anne continues to speak in voiceover, “I’ve been away from my family and Mormonism for quite a few years now and sometimes it shocks me how different my definition of “choosing the right” is from my family’s. After the 2004 presidential election I called my dad and was shocked to hear his political views. That national divide everyone talked about suddenly became really personal for me. I couldn’t help but think that if it weren’t for a few hot button issues like gay marriage and abortion, my views wouldn’t be that different from my dad. After all, he is my dad. The more I thought about it, the more I wanted to see what particular issues really were causing this political divide. Saying that people in places like Utah care more about moral issues than people living in New York just seemed stupid to me, there had to be another explanation. I decided to go back to Salt Lake and talk to people in the community and my own family about how they felt about this.” Anne is then seen inside the Visitor’s Center at Temple Square watching a video of the current Mormon prophet, Gordon B. Hinckley. He is discussing the importance of “making good choices” and protecting the family. The scene changes to a typical neighborhood outside a local LDS church while another male voice says “in a nutshell we’re opposed to abortion, in any way except for maybe when the life of a mother is in jeopardy, but other than that we don’t see any reasons that there should be an abortion, that are moral.” The speaker is seen sitting with Anne on a couch in a family living room and is identified as Donald, a representative from the LDS Public Relations office, who works downtown at the LDS Church Headquarters. Anne is seen entering the Planned Parenthood building while a female voice speaks, “to all those people opposed to abortion I just want to say that we have a safety net, we have contraceptives and we need to work together to avoid the need for an abortion.” Anne speaks in voiceover while images of another a neighborhood outside an elementary school with young children and parents gathered outside are displayed, “so guess what, the pro-life religious people and the pro-choice family planning people both agree on wanting to avoid abortion. But how do you do that?” A teenage boy is seen crossing the street to a high school, while another female voice is heard saying that a pill or condom is easy to use. The boy is identified as Anne’s nephew Drew, who is standing in front of his high school saying that they didn’t really go in depth about condoms in his health class. Anne asks him where he learned about contraceptives and he says he “just picked it up” from sources such as commercials and magazines such as Sports Illustrated. The same elementary school yard is scene with parents and children outside. A female voice, Martha Ball, describes how parents are afraid to talk open to their kids about sex for fear that they will go out and experiment and they don’t want “to put ideas into their mind, which down the road might be harmful to them.” While she speaks about the ideal of maintaining virginity until marriage, a picture of the temple with the words “I’m going there someday” is shown along with a large number of other religious pictures of Jesus, temples and posters promoting “Family Values.” A sign outside Planned Parenthood is shown and then Anne is seen seated with an older woman at a table. She is identified as Kerrie, the Head of Planned Parenthood. As Kerrie discusses how “knowledge shouldn’t trump values” posters with lists of Mormon beliefs and the same Young Women values sign are shown. These images then switch to examples of Mormon videos about families. A new male voice describes how no one is talking about sex and we have an inability to communicate with each other while Drew and his High School are seen again, this time contextualized with a backdrop of the downtown and next to a church building. Anne again speaks in voiceover as images of another typical Salt Lake neighborhood are seen. “Everyone I spoke to talked about how no one wants to talk about sex openly, even though that seemed to be the only way to avoid the need for abortion.” The capitol is seen in the distance at the intersection of North Temple Street and is then seen closer. “In fact the only time abortion ever seemed to be acknowledged openly was when politicians talked about it? Why is a politician talking to me about abortion and not people I trust, like my family or friends?” Two male voices describe the necessity of legislating morality and saying that when people go to the polls they look for politicians who speak about moral issues. As they speak images of the Utah House of Representatives are shown. The same two female voices of Kerrie and Martha discuss instances of politicians in their community using what they call “dirty politics” in elections. Martha says that when “scare tactics” are used people will tend to agree with the conservative candidate who is discussing issues the community cares about and often these same politicians brand “liberals” as people who want every woman to go out and have sex and then have an abortion. As the women speak images of the capitol, the city skyline and a sign outside the temple describing Mormon political beliefs. Anne is heard in voiceover as a group of people visiting Temple Square and Mormon missionaries are seen walking around “abortion is emotional and if you want a way to motivate people emotionally into voting for you, then I guess that is one way to do it. But do people really believe the stuff politicians are telling them?” Again the archival photographs of Anne’s ancestors on the family chart are seen and end with the top pictures of her and her father. “I still had one person I really wanted to talk to, my dad. I wanted to know how he really feels about sex and abortion, I can assume I know, but I’ve never spoken to him about it directly so maybe I am making the same assumptions politicians make. I decided it was time to sit down and talk to him.” Anne and her father are seen sitting together on a living room couch and her father states, “the tough situation is that people are pregnant because they were promiscuous and have decided I’m just going to get rid of it and have an abortion.” Anne then counters that in her opinion it is more related to people not understanding all their choices or not knowing how to use birth control correctly. Her father then says he worries that people are not able to live with the consequences of their actions and should only be sexually active under “appropriate” conditions. The same family tree pictures of her and her father are seen and Anne speaks in voiceover. “OK, So my dad and I still disagree about a lot of this stuff. But at least now I know what he thinks and I’m not just assuming. I tried to think about it from his side, I mean when he found out my mom was pregnant with me it was…lets just say…a big surprise. He was almost 50 at the time and not ready for a 6th kid, so in his mind he took responsibility and had me when he could have decided that having another kid would just be too much of a burden.” As she speaks old pictures of her father holding her as a newborn baby together with her mother and four brothers are displayed. Anne is then seen again as an eight year old girl standing outside an LDS church.” Maybe abortion is just one of those things that has no right or wrong answer, but then it shouldn’t be the only way to define morality in elections. Talking openly with our family and friends is never a bad thing.” Anne is seen watching a Mormon history video. As the video shows archival images of the Salt Lake Temple, Brigham Young and the Mormon pioneers who settled the Salt Lake Valley in the 1840s, Anne is seen silhouetted against the television screen, while an old pioneer song praising Brigham Young is heard faintly in the background and then fades to black. | |
| Sources: | URLs
PBS Frontline’s “The Jesus Factor” http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/jesus/view/ Trembling Before G-d http://www.tremblingbeforeg-d.com/ Beliefnet: Online News Magazine with articles involving religion and politics http://www.beliefnet.com/ Religion & Ethics: Online News Magazine published by PBS http://www.pbs.org/wnet/religionandethics The Rise of Fundamentalism in 20th Century Western Christianity: Prof L.S. Kirkpatrick, Dissertation Module http://www.geocities.com/psalm37v37/fundamentalism2.htm Americans United for Separation of Church and State http://www.au.org BOOKS Defenders of God: The Fundamentalist Revolt Against the Modern Age Bruce B. Lawrence, 1989 Studies in Religious Fundamentalism Lionel Caplan, 1987 Fundamentalism: The Search for Meaning Malise Ruthven, 2004 What’s the Matter with Kansas? How Conservatives Won the Heart of America Thomas Frank, 2004 The Book of Jerry Falwell: Fundamentalist Language and Politics Susan Friend Harding, 2000 | |