I really enjoyed the 10th podcast by Dr. Bezio. Thinking about the way we tell stories and who plays a role in them, I appreciated her discussion of visibility and representation especially. I think in a world where we are constantly flooded with seemingly endless amounts of media, it’s oftentimes overwhelming to dig into the real, emotional effects it has on us as individuals. The idea of both being and feeling seen stands out. Representation, for me, seems to be contingent on this. Seeing that of yourself in others is a powerful feeling. It’s both reassuring and comforting to know that not only people like you exist, but are also celebrated. This is true for “Black Panther” which Dr. Bezio discussed in depth. The massive positive response by the public for the movie exemplifies not only the importance of representation, but also the ways in which powerful stories create powerful social impacts.

On a much broader scale, though, I think that social media has allowed for the exponential growth of visibility and connection with communities. Take platforms like Tik Tok, where anyone of any background can be instantly connected with people across the world regardless of whether or not they have a following. In spaces like this, creators and viewers are brought into conversation with each other in really powerful ways. Seeing someone who looks like you or shares common identities has become as easy as clicking a button and opening an app. Beyond settings like movie theaters, we have the ability to feel affirmed and accepted in seeing that of ourselves in others who aren’t famous or widely known. This is an experience I’m sure other people have felt too. The comfort of knowing you are not alone is highly underrated.

The story about Robin Hood’s beginnings was so interesting — I had never heard about how far it dates back. I think it is cool that something like Robin Hood can be adapted throughout 8 centuries to still make sense and retain its popularity and importance for the general public, or the “common” people. However, it also reveals how themes of class difference, elitism, and wealth inequality persist throughout history. The discussion of Robin Hood and its connection to the time period that it is adapted for reminded me of our conversation about history last week. It is impossible to separate history from its context because those things inform it. Furthermore, history is a story, and every story has its storytellers. Robin Hood has a history, but it also tells a history of pop culture.

Although Robin Hood for the most part seemed to have passed along “common” people as it adapted over time, the entertainment industry has a stronghold over popular culture. It is scary to think about how entertainment is marketed for specific audiences to instill a desired emotion. Additionally, the entertainment industry contributes to confirmation bias, or our tendencies to view content that fits into our pre-existing views. However, like we talked about previously in class, exposure to other ideas and other people is the most important way to reduce bias. The entertainment industry subconsciously aids our biases by targeting entertainment toward specific populations and neglecting others.

As I was listening to Dr. Bezio’s tenth podcast, I kept thinking about how she discussed the idea of “storytelling” as determining “high” versus “low” culture. It made me think about all the stories I heard that later turned out to be false or misleading. For example, the Disney movie Pocahontas: marketed as a kids movie, this film was about the unlikely bond between a Native American woman and a colonizer with a heart of gold. It showed that everyone can be good and love always wins, right? Wrong. Absolutely, totally, completely wrong. Although they used the same historical names (big no-no, Disney) there was no such thing as a happy bond of love between the colonizer John Smith and the Indigenous woman Pocahontas. This movie gives such a misleading image about colonizers and the first English people that arrived in America; it tries to “repaint” the image of white people to make it seem like they were much better than they actually were, and it tried to “other” Native Americans.

The point of all this is to say that, depending on who is making the stories and telling the stories, things start to get a bit tangled up, and this leads to a lot of problems later in life that include the “isms” (racism, sexism, classism, etc). In Disney’s Pocahontas’ case, it misleads children at an impressionable age that colonizers weren’t all so bad and the aggression against them on behalf of the Native Americans wasn’t entirely founded. It certainly misled me. I think Disney in particular has a bad track record of creating these romanticized versions of historical events, Pocahontas being one of the worst offenders. Davey Crocket is another one of Disney’s romanticized “wild western” cowboys out on the trail to defeat the native “savages.” In my high school history class, we did a whole unit on how these popular Davey Crocket episodes lead to extreme prejudice and dislike for the Native population because of the portrayal of Native tribes in the episodes as ruthless murderers. Again, this is no case reality or truth, but the fact that it became formatted in this “storytelling” narrative built a stereotype in itself.

I like how Dr. Bezio defined leadership as coming up with mutual goals through story-telling using narratives of history, and how this ties to popular culture. Pop culture is more than entertainment, it shows patterns in the values of society, past and present (and future). 

It’s interesting to think that the pop culture we consume today, much of which is considered “low culture,” could be so influential in the future. I always assumed that people like Shakespeare and his works were just as influential during their lives as they are now, but obviously that is not the case. I think about this in comparison to the famous example of how an artist’s paintings are more valuable after their death. I have thought about that in terms of artists throughout history, but never in terms of artists now. For example, when rap/music artists die, such as Mac Miller, XXXTentacion, and JuiceWorld, their listens/streams tend to increase significantly. 

Also, as a major MCU nerd, I was so excited to see Black Panther. When I saw the movie in theaters, it was immediately my favorite Marvel movie, but I had no idea how culturally significant this film would become. As the first film starring a black superhero, it was amazing to see the celebration of black heritage and identity and to see the cultural movement that this film sparked feels like we are making history.  Being in this leadership class and being able to analyze pop culture like this is really fascinating. Instead of thinking about T’Challa’s character of just an awesome Marvel hero, we can see him as a cultural icon that inspired a shift in world culture. It is good to see that Chadwick Boseman left such a beautiful legacy.

Today’s podcast focused on leadership and pop culture, specifically how the two are interconnected. Culture is technically separated into two brackets: high and low. High culture is what we consider intellectual–art, the symphony, poetry. Low culture is considered  popular culture, like the music we currently listen to (hip hop, pop) and the movies we watch. Regardless, of the terminology all high culture was once low culture, as told in the podcast–Shakespeare, in his time, was considered a vulgar playwright, who presented his work to the masses. Today, Shakespeare is grouped as a member of high culture as an astounding playwright, but in his era he embodied the day’s pop culture. In essence, all pop culture is a form of storytelling which is at the core of leadership. Robin Hood, a caricature of the Middle Ages prompted real change and uproar within his community, inspiring workers to revolt against their landlords due to their awful living conditions and wages. Robin Hood embodies the power pop culture can have on a community. Presently, much of pop culture is not so much  found in books, but rather in movies. Because movies are such an integral aspect of our society, they work to normalize behavior, making representation along gender and racial lines extremely important. For example, Black Panther has the highest gross of a single hero movie in Marvel, garnering huge success around the country and inspiring social movements. “Wakanda Forever” became a regular chant seen at Black Lives Matter marches, illustrating the vast effects a movie can have on a population. Pop culture is at the essence of our everyday behavior; therefore, we must focus on a culture that represents and listens to all members of society.

In talking about the way we define high culture and low culture and putting popular culture in the low category, I was left wondering who makes those definitions. Everyone responds and reacts differently to aspects of culture, and it should be for the individual to decide whether something is important or not. The one thing that seems pretty universal in defining the importance of pieces of culture is the aspect of time. Works of art that transcend time periods, like To Kill A Mockingbird and 1984, are important and influential because they shed light on a part of the human condition. Dr. Bezio talks about the importance of pop culture and the way it shapes minds and has more influence than facts, so what would make that not high culture?

She also talks about the way storytelling is at the core of leadership. The stories we tell, whether true or false, matter and have the ability to make change. The entertainment and popular culture show us what is important to us and what our society looks like, and it is this entertainment, deemed as low culture, that have the biggest impact. The podcast talks about Robinhood and its ability to transcend time, and it talks about the false stories created throughout history that have created revolts and upset people who then make change. This makes me think about social media and the way trends become popular and change the way people do things. In today’s world, one person has the ability to create a movement by reaching millions of people in a matter of seconds, and this is the difference between the way pop culture is today versus the way it was in the past. There is more pop culture now than there was in the past, and this is telling about the way our culture changes frequently and the way individuals are constantly moving on to the next exciting thing. For better or for worse, we all have the ability to make a change or start a movement. And we know what is important to people of other cultures because we are all so interconnected. The stories we tell have always mattered, but today there are more stories being told to more people, and this makes culture bigger than it ever has been, and potentially more important and influential.

In listening to this week’s podcast, I think the most interesting part to me was the idea of how ideas and forms of pop culture spread. For example, in discussing the tale of Robin Hood, Dr. Bezio explained how the story began with the “common” people under the reign of King John, and how this story, with some changes and adaptations, has continued to be told into the modern-day, for the themes of the story, even in different settings, hold strong. With this, stories, like Robin Hood, can spread through both writing and word of mouth, such as through songs that are easy to memorize and spread. It is this ability to spread to different peoples at different times in different settings that interested me most in this discussion. Specifically, I think it would be interesting to look at the spreading of stories, essentially the spreading of pop culture, in the current age of social media. With social media, ideas from across the globe can be shared with individuals of any other country, religion, race, etc in a matter of seconds.

In the past, the spreading of stories and pop culture, even if it was widespread, took time, for ideas were spread through word of mouth, and through writings, which even then were often limited to certain peoples and classes of peoples. In the current age, however, technology has made it possible for people from vastly different areas, both domestically and internationally, to share ideas, and spread stories and experiences. Thus, I think it would be interesting to look at the spread of pop culture and the stories from which it develops and look at the development of these stories in the new age of technology and social media. I somewhat do this in my own research project, for I am looking at Donald Trump’s rhetoric, and the impact of technology and social media on the ability to spread ideas, and the consequences of this increased ability and access to spreading ideas. Overall, I think that, like in my research project, it would be interesting to look at the ability and access of pop culture to now spread with the aid of technology and social media.

Harvey’s article is interesting because he emphasizes leadership as a process rather than the expression of characteristics. When tasked with defining leadership, we often jump to characteristics that we associate with leaders (charisma, decisiveness, strategic thinking, etc). The “seven fundamental questions” method (Harvey 205) is better because it shows how the context of a situation and the makeup of a group are what actually dictate a leaders decisions, more-so than the traits of the leader themself.

On page 204, Harvey briefly discusses potential “substitutes for leadership”, and why they do not reliably occur. Among the substitutes is “heroism”, or the idea that a self-reliant and independent person can take agency and sort of do everything by themself on behalf of the group. Harvey points out that heroism only occurs in extraordinary circumstances, but that stories throughout history seem to be littered with heroic protagonists. This got me thinking about Dr. Bezio’s podcast, and the idea that popular culture (and any stories that we tell each other, really) have a profound impact on the way that we think. Why the disconnect, then, between the way that leaders really act, and the way that the idealized leader is portrayed in all of our stories? Perhaps the answer has to do with the lessons that a story is trying to teach. By exaggerating the role and individual influence of the leader, we encourage people to act. Or maybe it has more to do with the simplicity of assigning credit to one person. It’s easier to conceptualize the link between a person’s intrinsic properties and their actions than it is to account for the constant feedback cycle between a leader, their followers, and their environment.

I think that pop culture is so defining for how we understand our world. It has always been important in history and the people during that time, but I think that it is becoming more and more relevant. Yes, back then these popular trends and culture had a major impact back then as well, as understood by the Shakespeare example. But, I think that it is becoming more connecting through social media and the ability to spread ideas, pop culture, across the world.  This culture is now spread less through stories but through images, videos, sounds, and stories. It is hard to imagine that we are not fully involved in pop culture 24/7 because of our phones. Most of us spend hours on our phones, scrolling through social media, and soaking up everything that we are being shown. Whether we are aware of it or not, the things we see stick with us. It shapes our beliefs, political views, and understanding of those around us. For example, I don’t think phrases like “what are thoseeee” or “sheeeesh” would have spread very widely if it wasn’t for social media. And as silly as they are, they have and many people will recognize them and connect to it. I also thought Dr. Bezio’s point of not dismissing pop culture as just entertainment is really important. The aforementioned phrases are probably not the best examples, but I do believe a lot of what we consider pop culture is actively working to shape and define our world, connecting us to each other. We normalize things by using media and I think that there will be even more representation to come, helping us normalize even more than just the classic white man. Black Panther is the perfect example of how pop culture is truly connecting when it reflects many people and shared ideas, evolving into more than just a Marvel movie, but into a movement itself (RIP Chadwick Boseman, this one still makes me sad). Overall, while I know pop culture is not a new idea and a lot of how we understand the world today was shaped by pop culture, I think that it is becoming increasingly relevant with the boom in technology that we are facing.

In the spirit of Bezio’s podcast and essay, I want to use a recent example of pop culture, rather than other examples of high culture, as a prime example of how the portrayal of leadership in modern society has changed. I just recently started to watch an Amazon Prime show called The Wilds released in 2020. The story follows 8 girls who are unknowingly, and without consenting, participating in a controversial social experiment. They have been through a staged plane crash and are now stranded on a deserted island trying to survive and wait for search and rescue. A very small team of researchers are monitoring their every move– the girls just do not know this. The characters are a diverse representation of races, ethnicities, sexualities, religions, socioeconomic statuses, and regions within the US. I think this representation speaks to the movement happening at the cinematic level as discussed in the podcast from Hidden Figures to Black Panther. So far, I have gathered that the point of the social experiment in short is to prove that women are better leaders, although admittedly in a very unethical (and illegal) form of experimentation. But the show is so relevant to the content of this class. 

First, the girls amongst themselves begin to develop distinct roles. Dot, one of the girls,  becomes the first leader due to her background knowledge in survival shows that helps the group know exactly what to do to try to survive what they think is a completely deserted and hopeless island.  Harvey states that the general definition of leadership is that “leaders confront and solve problems associated with group survival and well-being” (201). The Wilds allows for a context that matches this definition at the most basic understanding: basic human survival. Dot becomes the leader because she can get water, food, and shelter for the group. She also stands out as a leader because of her ability to manage the group. The group dynamics are widely explored because of the “research” being done on the experiment, so we see how the girls work amongst each other and the disputes and relationships they have over their time on the island. Dot recognizes that there can be no “us” and “them” like Harvey suggests as a poor leadership tactic (206). She knows that even as girls have arguments and fundamental differences, the main objective of survival has to be at the front of their minds. Dot and the other girls at times also represent Harvey’s discussion about how leaders tend to look further ahead while followers preoccupy themselves about the here and now. Dot immediately recognizes that they need to ration their food and drink supplies, while some of the girls don’t ration their own personal stash well and put that burden on the group. Dot recognizes that the girls need to build a shelter to protect themselves from their new and mostly unknown elements, whereas the other girls are exhausted and too dehydrated to want to think about putting in hard labor of constructing shelter. These leader and group dynamics play out so clearly in this show. 

In the podcast, Bezio discusses that our pop culture should represent the world we want, but her example of The Hunger Games not being the literal way we want our world to be fits with The Wilds as well. We definitely don’t want to be able to run unethical experiments on people that do not know they are being experimented on. We as a society have been there and done that. But this show does call into question the beauty of diversity and women in power. Men in this show are most usually the people making bad decisions, causing trauma to these girls, or messing up in general. The underlying message of women empowerment in this show is one that could only exist in this decade of time. It is a clear representation of how we tell stories and who those stories are about has changed in recent pop culture.