Tuesday, January 17, 2012
Reflecting on Two Spirits
Before class on Thursday, I would like to reflect on the film Two Spirits, especially in contrast to The Laramie Project. First, share with the rest of us what you think this documentary’s main purpose and argument is. How is it different from The Laramie Project? Second, what do you think are the film’s primary rhetorical appeals? How does it support its main claim and what makes these rhetorical proofs persuasive? How do these strategies differ from those used in The Laramie Project? Aim for about 250 words for your response, and post it here as a comment to this post.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
To me, Two Spirits spoke of the beauty and importance of a life lead between genders and the beauty in your life that comes from being true to yourself. By beauty I mean two things—the undying love you have for yourself (not narcissism, rather love for life itself), and the shining attributes of individuality and natural harmony. You cannot be inwardly beautiful without loving yourself, and you cannot love yourself if you are not true to yourself. This may seem obvious, but many people tend to disregard this fact in a hypocritical fashion when they speak against homosexuality.
ReplyDeleteThese ideas are where Two Spirits and The Laramie Project effectively split in their purpose and argument. While the Laramie Project preached a wide message of acceptance and love over tolerance and hate, Two Spirits is much more personal. It focuses specifically on the battle that two-spirited people face in living in our world, and in those cases, the bravery it takes to be yourself.
Two Spirits also differs from The Laramie Project in its use of rhetorical appeals. While the latter is formed entirely from interviews with community members, the former is made up of interviews with Fred Martinez’s mother and several of Fred’s fellow Navajo “Two-Spirits”. This approach allows the audience to understand and get to know Fred Martinez on a much deeper and personal level; The Laramie Project neglects to even show a picture of Matthew, seeking to base its persuasiveness off of the over-arching conflict of ideas rather than the character of Matthew Shepard. While both appeals work, I believe that the connection the audience feels with Fred Martinez through the old photos and heart-felt interviews with his mother sets up the re-enacted scenes of Fred’s murder to have an extremely intense emotional appeal; by being more personable, it is more persuasive.
The film Two Spirits tells a story similar to that of Matthew Shepard: a kind young man who was beaten to death because of his homosexuality. Through this story and the interviews of those who were close to him, Two Spirits makes the argument that people must learn to be more accepting of homosexuality. To support its argument, the film primarily makes use of pathos. The interviews with Fred’s mother tell stories of his childhood and of how happy he was as a young boy. These happy images and stories are later contrasted with the brutality of the reenactment of Fred’s murder and the description of the state of his dead body. Showing such brutality to the audience, who at this point had grown to know Fred as a happy and lovable young man, emphasizes the tragedy of the murder and appeals strongly to the audience’s emotions. This scene is followed by his mother describing her sorrow and crying in front of the camera, making the emotional appeal even stronger.
ReplyDeleteThe Laramie Project makes a similar argument, but goes about making it in a different manner. The focus of Two Spirits is on Fred himself, while The Laramie Project is about the town and the larger idea of homophobia and intolerance. Kaufman makes the focus clear in his film by not even showing so much as an image of Matthew Shepard, relying on the reactions of the people of Laramie to make his point. He even makes a point of explaining the lives of Henderson and McKinney, humanizing them and making it clear that they were average people up until the murder. Two Spirits, on the other hand, does not say much about the murderer other than portraying him as a hateful meth dealer. Nothing is said about his life, his family, or his friends, emphasizing the inhumane nature of his crime. Both films are quite effective in persuading their audiences that people need to learn to become more accepting of homosexuality.
The films Two Spirits tell the story of Fred Martinez, a young man who was murdered due to his gender and sexual identity. Although both Two Spirits and The Laramie Project look at hate crimes based on sexual orientation, they do so in order to create very different messages. While The Laramie Project focuses on the town of Laramie in the aftermath of Matthew Shepard’s murder, Two Spirits focuses more on the societal place of a person who lives outside the gender binary. The argument of this film is ,consequently,that those living outside the gender binary are in a compromised and dangerous place within mainstream American society, but have a place in several Native American Cultures. This argument is created though several different facets. Logos is evident in the interviews done with several individuals who have experienced the Native American culture and lifestyle. By explaining the history of two- spirited individuals, the film supports its argument with facts and experience about the nature of the fully accepted two-spirited individual in the Native American culture. The films pathos exists in the emotional nature of the interviews done with the people who knew Fred Martinez personally. The interviews having the most impact on the pathos are those with his mother. As she is presented as she is presented as a woman who always accepted FC for exactly who se was, and now she is deeply morning for the child that she lost, the audience is persuaded to feel similar emotions. The audience is persuaded to see FC as lovable, and kind, and gentle. HIr Murder, therefore, is an emotional loss for all those watching the film.
ReplyDeleteWhile both The Laramie Project and the Two Spirits documentary focused upon the issue of hate crimes, the latter addresses the issue across cultural barriers. Native Americans have different and more complex gender systems than our culture. Homosexuality isn’t seen as a sign of perversion like it typically is in our culture, but rather it is seen as natural. The purpose of this documentary is to encourage people to respect the different values and beliefs in cultures of which they are unfamiliar with. In addition, I think it attempts to persuade us to reconsider how we regard homosexuality. We should learn from the Native Americans and see that every human being has a purpose. The documentary argues that homosexuality is just another aspect of someone’s identity that is entirely natural. Compared to the Laramie Project, Two Spirits focuses on the actual victim and tragedy more personally. By focusing more upon Fred in the documentary, than Matthew in the film, I think the audience felt more emotionally invested in Fred. By reenacting the crime and showing pictures of blood, the documentary is appealing to the pathos of the audience. The sadness of Fred Martinez’s mother, and the anger of the woman in the LGBT community from New York, appealed to the audience’s emotions. In a way, I think that this documentary had more ethos than that of The Laramie Project. Since the people weren’t actors, but rather people directly involved with the issues at hand, they had more authority as rhetors. As many were members of the tribes themselves, they were highly informed about how Native Americans regarded homosexuality.
ReplyDeleteThe documentary film Two Spirits gives the argument that mainstream US culture has a lot to learn from the Native American culture. The film’s depiction of how members of the LGBT community are viewed by traditional Native Americans as gifts is a beautiful message that more people need to be willing to hear. In comparison to The Laramie Project a film that also tells the story of a person being murdered because they were gay, is quite different in how it communicates the need for people to be accepting and loving of members of the LGBT community. The Laramie Project shares the message from the members of a population that has not all the way accepted gay people, while on the other hand Two Spirits shares the same message but from people who are members of a population that has honored gay people for hundreds of years. In order to effectively communicate what they have to say the makers of Two Spirits utilize ethos. Almost all of the people interviewed are members of the LGBT and Navajo communities and the people of the straight community had a very strong connection with Fred Martinez the boy (and girl) who was murdered, for example his (or her) mother. The strong ethos of the people who they interviewed makes discounting their argument incredibly difficult, just based upon the life the speakers were born into. I also noticed how Two Spirits utilizes logos much more than The Laramie Project. Like I mentioned before, the Navajo people who were interviewed have a history hundreds of years deep that honor people of Two Spirits. Basing their argument around something that is so concrete and sharing a tragic story makes the filmmakers argument complete and effective. Looking back at The Laramie Project they use the fact that many people can relate to the mainstream US culture to make a more pathos based argument.
ReplyDeleteTwo Spirits is a documentary that is not just about accepting people’s differences, but celebrating who you are, whether you’re female, male, transgender, homosexual or bisexual. It focuses on the Navajo culture because that culture celebrates individuality, and even has names for feminine men and masculine women, people who feel that they have the two spirits within their body. Showing western civilization how this ancient culture has been loving of all differences in people opens up our eyes to see that people have been this way for all of time, and it’s natural. Two Spirits focuses more on culture and individuality and less on the actual hate crime committed compared to The Laramie Project. The Laramie Project is more about the theatre company going into Laramie and trying to figure out what happened to cause Matthew’s death, whereas Two Spirits is more about transgender and homosexuals in general, and is more personal in that it shows photos of Fred, his murder reenacted, and interviews from the people who knew him best. The documentary is more one-sided however, because unlike the Laramie Project, Two Spirits doesn’t interview or talk to anyone against transgender or homosexuals, just the people in the community who were like Fred and his mother who loved him for who he was.
ReplyDeleteSimilarly to The Laramie Project, Two Spirits appeals significantly to pathos. The film appeals to the audience’s emotions by talking about Fred and using photos and interviews to give the audience a sense of this beautiful person, and then reenacting his death, which feels like a loss to the audience because we feel we’ve gotten to know him. Two Spirits also uses extrinsic proofs in that it talks a lot about Navajo culture and shows images from the past. This shows the audience that transgender people have been around for a long time, and shares their ideology that being different it an attribute worth celebrating. Ultimately, Two Spirits is about not only accepting the individual, but accepting that there are different cultures that hold many different beliefs.
The main purpose of the documentary Two Spirits was to share the story of Fred Martinez, a Navajo who was born a boy, but wanted to live life as a women. In addition the documentary made an appeal to raise awareness about different cultural gender roles, and about the ever present hate crimes against people who are homosexual or transgender. Even though Two Spirits and The Laramie Project focus both on similar themes of hate crimes against homosexuals, but they approach it differently. Two Spirits explained the murder of Fred Martinez and kept him abundantly present throughout the film, even reenacting the scene of his murder for a more powerful appeal to pathos. Another rhetorical appeal that the film made was an appeal to ethos, because it displayed great knowledge of the Navajo people, and explained who they were and how their culture worked. For example, they explained the way the Navajo viewed gender roles with the four different types of genders that were prevalent in society. By clearly showing that they had done their research the documentary felt accurate and trustworthy. Even though The Laramie Project portrayed an important message, it did so through actors and edited interviews, whereas the documentary showed real people, and real reactions. In addition the documentary style of filming showed the people who were interviewed, which was different than the actors’ portrayals in The Laramie Project. This seems to add a more “realistic” effect to the movie, making the audience feel closer to the themes of the film.
ReplyDeleteWhen comparing the two movies I found that although they strongly appeal to pathos I felt that the used it for two different reason. The Laramie Project wa s more centered at targeting the social justice side of hate crimes and it illustrates how hate crimes affect the whole community while Two Spirits was more centered on educating about a culture that many people aren’t aware of. The idea that in some Indian societies gender isn’t necessarily based on ones physical sex is surprising especially to a more European influenced society. I felt that through our the film there was a coupling between logos and pathos. This is strongly seen with the history of the Navajo and how they believed in 3 different genders. The pathos comes in with the mother especially when she talks about how she gets sad around a certain time because that’s usually the time she would hear her son running up the stairs after school and saying “hey mom.” They really did stick out to me. I also felt as though the film heavily depended on the personal narratives. I know there are interviews in The Laramie Project as well but they are direct. They’re not interviews of other homosexuals who have been victims of hate crimes whereas in Two Spirits there are numerous interviews with Navajo people who are homosexuals. The fact that the interviews are from people like the young Navajo Indian who was beaten to death, makes film purpose of comparing views of homosexuality within the tribal system versus in European society, stronger.
ReplyDeleteThe films Two Spirits and The Laramie Project both address cases of hate crimes. These films were created to show the nature of hate crimes in small communities. The Laramie Project focuses on the effects that the crime had on the community where it occurred, by using actors to reenact interviews with various community members. The film shows how hate crimes and are the result of a community’s ideals, and how those ideals can rip apart a community. Two spirits focuses on the differences in social constructs of two different cultures. By focusing less on Fred as an individual, and more on how Navajo culture has historically treated homosexuality and transgender individuals, Two Spirits is meant to contrast what would now be considered progressive ideals that had existed for hundreds of years in native culture. Both films have a strong emphasis on how the social standards of a town are what create the types of environments that lead to hate. The Laramie Project focuses on the town of Laramie, and individuals who were directly related to the case or Matthew directly. Two Spirits interviews members and historians in the Navajo community, who can give information on how people like Fred have been treated by their culture throughout history. Two Spirits contrasts this view with the way that the LGBT community is now treated in western culture. These movies both use accounts to make statements on the nature of hate crimes, and how these crimes are the direct result of our societal values.
ReplyDeleteTwo Spirits and The Laramie Project may deal with similar subject matter, but the purpose and way in which this purpose is achieved are extremely different. Two Spirits attempted to portray a specific case, Fred’s life, in a way that made the audience wish he could have lived longer. They also attempted to portray the other people who had a very similar background, in that they grew up in a place where being of “two spirits” was more acceptable than in the truly American realm. Contrarily, The Laramie Project attempted to show one case in a way that represented all people who suffer from hate crimes, not only Wyoming gays, or something similar. The film Two Spirits also accomplished their motives differently by appealing largely to pathos through showing Fred as a boy and making him seem likable and respectable. Particularly by showing that he overcame a suicide attempt and ended for the better, they allowed the audience to see Fred as someone worth honor. This allows the argument to be more persuasive because then the audience has a stronger reaction of injustice when he is lost. The Laramie Project, although relying on pathos in some places, was also heavily dependent upon ethos and in some cases logos. The two films also chose to portray the victims very differently in that in Two Spirits Fred is the main character who is to be identified with, but in The Laramie Project it is almost as if Matthew is only the start, and even though he is the subject he does not feel like the protagonist in the piece.
ReplyDeleteTwo Spirits was a film that retold the story of a young boy’s murder, reportedly because of the fact that he was gay. As I was watching, I felt like the main purpose of this film was to honor Fred’s memory by showing how being gay was natural and introduce outsiders to Native American’s views on homosexuality. To accomplish this, they used pathos, telling the heartbreaking tail of the promising life Fred was bound to have if he had lived. They also reenacted the scene of his death, which evoked extreme emotions of disbelief and disgust that another human being could take such brutal actions against another human, particularly one so young and seemingly innocent. The film also spoke of acceptance of one’s self, showing clips of interviews with Native American homosexuals speaking of how their life changed for the better as soon as they realized that they should accept themselves for who they are.
ReplyDeleteThough Two Spirits and The Laramie Project spoke similar messages told similar stories, the two films split ways there. Two Spirits spent a lot of time focusing on gay rights and the fact that it was ok and acceptable to be gay. While The Laramie Project implied this, they spoke much more about loving others regardless of their differences. The Laramie Project spoke more to the social justice issue, why killing one simply because they’re different from you is wrong rather than focusing on why being gay is ok. I thought that in the broad world of social justice, The Laramie Project did a much better job of presenting an argument about social justice that could be applied to a broader category than the subject specifically discussed in the film. Looking back after seeing the two films, I felt like Two Spirits had a focused cause, acceptance of gays and lesbians, while The Laramie Project talked about the LGBT movement, but also addressed broader social justice issues, making it more relevant in many situations than Two Spirits.
I think that the main point of two spirits was to create an argument for the existence and acceptance of very unique lifestyles. This was attempted through the use of two pieces of evidence. The first was on the common practice of navajo tribes to readily accept and incorporate members of both genders who felt they aligned with the opposite gender into their community. They wouldn't hesitate to allow men to take on feminine roles and women to do things such as hunt if they chose to. Then the movie cites the western european concept of gender and sexuality as being very narrow-sighted and not a complete understanding of the possibilities of what people can be. The film proves this point by showing how intolerance for gay people led to the murder of the navajo boy. This film differs from the laramie project because it shows a past community of native americans who not only tolerated, but welcomed what is considered "gay" people into their community and loved them for what they were. The Laramie Project just saw a community who for the most part was not welcoming to gays and how a hate crime event poorly affected many members of the town.
ReplyDeleteTwo spirits gains its ethos through the use of many perspectives from native americans who were two spirit people and who could provide the audience an insight into what that designation truly conotated. It used true interviews as opposed to ones recreated by actors to put the audience into the story and to empathize and listen to actual people.
The short film Two Spirits was intended to inform people about the history of tradition in native american cultures and how one of these traditions completely contradicts modern western thought. The idea of a "two spirit" is something of a sacred or revered tradition. The people of many native american tribes had a different word for them. These people often embodied important roles in society such as shaman or other spiritual leader. By building a strong ethos using multiple, current examples of individuals who may have identified themselves or been identified as being gay, are classified as two spirits by native american culture. The role and description of historical two spirits is explained by native american scholars, further strengthening the ethos of the argument. The argument then appeals to pathos when it discusses the brutal murder of a young boy in Colorado. This descriptive account of hate towards a sacred part of native american life, the two spirits, goes to the main argument of how western christian thought completely contradicts the beliefs of native Americans.
ReplyDeleteThis was different from the Laramie project because instead of interviewing and recreated the incident, the interviews were the film in a documentary. This makes the ethos of the claim slightly stronger than the Laramie project because being able to see first hand the interviews rather than somebody recreating and portraying it is more effective.
The film Two Spirits portrays a similar message to The Laramie Project however; it goes about it in a different way. I believe that the message in this movie is that homosexuality is a natural part of life, as natural as heterosexuality, and both must be treated equally. Both films use a case of a hate crime as the basis for their argument, however the rhetorical tools seen in both films are used in differing ways. In Two Spirits, Native American customs are used to show that homosexuality is natural. The title of the movie itself alludes to the main theme of the movie which is that all throughout history, Native Americans have used the term ‘two spirit’ to characterize someone who is homosexual. In the Native culture, two spirits are treated just like anyone else and they play an integral role in society. The film uses this as strong evidence to support their claim. Another difference in the use of rhetoric between the two films is the concept of presence and absence. In The Laramie Project, Matthew is never shown on screen in order to strengthen the fact that he is really gone. In Two Spirits, many pictures of Fred Martinez are shown in order to incite identification within the audience. The audience is supposed to see what Fred was like in life in order to identify with him and his family and to realize what is missing. Another differing use of rhetoric is the fact that Two Spirits uses real interviews with real people that actually knew him, rather than use actors to reenact like in The Laramie Project. It is hard to say which was more effective, however I think that they were equally effective in serving different purposes. The Laramie Project used actors in order to represent the big picture of hate crime that it could happen to anyone in any town. I think that Two Spirits is supposed to profile this incident in particular in order to show the devastating effects that a hate crime can have on a group of people. Both of these films were very persuasive in achieving their goals and they are both necessary in order to understand this problem.
ReplyDeleteIt seems to me that the two films pretty much portray the same argument, using the same exact techniques. Yes, Two Spirits was done in a completely different style when compared to the Laramie Project, but both styles relied heavily on pathos. In the Laramie Project pathos was used in almost every scene that dealt with the argument of the film. The same goes for Two Spirits. This comes through especially in the scenes where the mother was speaking. Her tone and the way she sort of whispered her feelings convinced the audience that she did not deserve this loss. Pathos was further enhanced when the mother began to cry about the death of her son. Of course, the film didn't purely use pathos. The whole spiel about the Navajo tradition of “two-spirits” aimed to argue using logos, although to me it was a very unconvincing argument. First of all, how can one part of your spirit deal purely with your outside appearance? If anything, it seemed to me like Fred had one feminine spirit. Still, it's not really my place to argue against an ancient Navajo tradition. Secondly though, I feel as if it aims to separate Fred's homosexuality from that of other homosexuals, simply because he was labeled as a nadleeh. This narrows the range of people that are involved in the hate crime. Instead of it being a hate crime against the homosexual community, it seemed like it was a hate crime against the nadleeh community, which is much smaller. This was further exemplified by the fact that they only interviewed Native American homosexuals. That being said, the pathos was still quite effective, and therefore the movie made a very convincing argument.
ReplyDeleteI really enjoyed the contrasting ideas of these two films as they appear to tell the same story but actually push for two incredibly different things. in the Laramie Project the authors are attempting to persuade the audience towards the idea of tolerance, meaning that people didn't really have to accept Matt for who he was. Rather they just needed to tolerate him and leave him be. Two Spirits takes a very different approach as it urges acceptance. Throughout the story the native americans tell of the actual power of the two spirits and how their presence should be celebrated as they are people who are able to live with themselves and who they are. With these two different intents the films had to take two very different rhetorical approaches. The Laramie Project focused a lot more intently on pathos as they tried to use the inherent emotion in the story to tell the tale and convince the people to change their opinions. In contrast Two Spirits used plenty of pathos but even more ethos. They focused on interviewing both those that knew Fred as well as those that were knowledgable about Navajo history and teachings. By using the wisdom and inherent respect that comes with these knowledgable figures the film succeeded in using ethos to force the audience to listen to these people and thus be persuaded by them. This enhanced amount of persuasive power is what the film really needed in order to gain the critical mass to persuade the audience to not only tolerate the LGBT community but also to accept it. Both films where successful in using their individual styles to persuade the audience and depending on who you are one may be more persuasive than the other. The Laramie Project focuses very intently on those that are driven by the emotion of a story and don't want to hear facts. Two Spirits is persuasive to those that want a little more information but also a strong serving emotion thanks to the scenes with Fred's mother as well as the graphic depiction of his death.
ReplyDeleteThe film “Two Spirits” pushed for a message of acceptance, where as “The Laramie Project” called for tolerance. The effective balance of most rhetorical proofs as we have studied these past few weeks led “The Laramie Project” to being a more rhetorically valuable film. Though both films seem to call on a similar message, the “Two Spirits” film, was presented in a muchless effective manner for a wider audience. For example, “The Laramie Project” effectively delivered its message to people of all religions, beliefs and levels of open-mindedness. On the other hand, “Two Spirits” seemed to only effectively appeal to those of Navaho traditions, or those with widely open minds on accepting its message in total. This withdrew from its rhetoric value as a film. Personally, I greatly disliked the film “Two Spirits,” though I cannot pinpoint why. It effectively pulled on my pathos in some areas like the description of the boy’s death and his mother’s story. However, the Navaho descriptions and extra-long sections on “two-spirits” people seemed excessive and withdrew largely from the film’s rhetorical value. I liked the neutral approach that “The Laramie Project” examined everything, even homosexuality. I left it up to the audience to find/ accept its message for tolerance. “Two Spirits,” on the other hand, felt as though the producers were throwing their beliefs into the audience’s face. It had too strong of a pathos and ethos mixed into one. The Navaho tradition, playing to ethos, would have been strong enough alone to rhetorically persuade the audience; however when you add the excessive amount of pathos with the Navaho “two spirit” people and the mother’s account, the rhetorical overload actually detracts from the overall appeal to the audience.
ReplyDelete