Scrub’s takes place in Scared Heart hospital, where it follows J.D an intern at the hospital and it shows his perception of the daily routine at Sacred Heart. Sacred Heart follows the standard hegemonic representations of masculinity and femininity. Culture has established this notion that doctors and surgeons are typically male. The sitcom Scrubs follows the hegemonic themes of having pretty much all male doctors and almost all female nurses. Where it strays and moves into counter cultural ideology is in the development of its characters.
J.D. and Carla are two characters that often times bend the gender norms in there actions and in personalities. J.D at times is shown having qualities that would be considered by society as feminine. He is a male that is unsure of himself, needs to feel appreciated and he is driven to feel emotionally accepted. One way he expresses this is that he loves to hug people. Carla on the other hand is a female who breaks the norms by being rather dominating, extremely vocal, and likes to get straight down to business. These two characters break social norms, but can fall under Newmans definition of gender. “Gender on the other hand designates the physicological, social and cultural aspects of masculinity and femininity.” (Newman 53)
In the episode My Big Bird, J.D. demonstrates a quality of emotional neediness that by societal standards can be perceived as feminine. J.D. is horribly distraught over the fact that he treated a patient and he did not receive a thank you from the patient. He is so upset by this he feels the need to go to the patient’s house for an explanation. The culture in American society perceives men as emotionally callous and insensitive. This episode especially shows J.D. as being part of American counter culture.
J.D. demonstrates the typical male quality demonstrated by the show as he is fooled by Carla and Elliot into thinking that they are talking about shoes. The show uses this hegemonic ideal that men are bored by any discussion involving shoes. In defining that all men are bored by show conversations the show is giving the male sex a definition of being bored by shoe conversations. This alters from Newmans view of male and female sex definitions. He defines “Sex is typically used to refer to the biological markers of maleness and femaleness.” (Newman 53) Once J.D. thinks that they are discussing shoes he stops paying any attention to their conversation. The ladies assume that J.D. and Turk will stop listening giving them freedom to talk Elliot’s involvement with a patient’s father right. They stand right in front of J.D. and Turk talking openly knowing that he will not listen. However, once the guys hear something that catches their attention, the ladies immediately say strappy sandals and the guys turns off again. The show clearly makes fun of this male ideal.
In conclusion, this episode of Scrubs shows the hegemonic relationship between men and women. It also effectively shows the changing relationships and how both men and women can have both masculine and feminine characteristics. While the show is extremely entertaining and exaggerates these points, it also makes some valid points about society today. The characters in Scrubs are entertaining because they strike a chord of reality.
Newman, David. M. “Identities and Inequalities: Exploring the Intersections of Race, Class, Gender, and Sexuality.”
Jason-
ReplyDeleteYou've chosen a good show and a good set of characters to analyze. However, you're definitely going to need to dig a little deeper with your analysis. There is an abundantly apparent need for your use of the terms utilized in the assignment's requirements. Don't shy away from using the language of the course when it's so relevant to the analysis you're conducting. Trying to avoid use of patriarchy/counterhegemony/hegemony is bound to leave you with vague or innacurate representations of these constructs when you write about them.
The issues listed below are ones to work on in future assignments:
Format your quotes so that they facilitate your analysis. This format is also the correct one for the paper in terms of the writing structure/mechanics (content of paper and mechanics are related issues/components of any form of writing). Remember the following:
A quote needs to be integrated into a sentence with an introduction to the quote (even the shortest bit of intro material will suffice here).
Examples:
Kellner contends, “Academic scholarship in cultural studies has evolved and is not your mother’s cultural studies” (3).
According to Kellner, “Gender representations in advertisements illustrate this culture as a hegemony of conflict” (Crane 33).
Notice the period is after the parenthetical citation. Also, if your sentence includes the name of the author whose work is the basis for the quoted material, then only page number(s) are necessary. If the sentence doesn’t include the name (see example 2) then put the author’s last name before the page number inside the parenthesis).
Quotes can’t exist like little islands inside the paragraphs of your paper, as sentences on their own, without you providing the context for the quote. Use the quotes as a form of backup- you have a thesis and the thesis argues that there is a conflict in the representation of masculinities and femininities in the episode of this show. You make very clear points about the show in the blog post; however, you really just need to clear up the format for the assignment (just like it would be for any other paper) so that you're making points about the show, then using the quotes from sources (such as Newman) to back up your point on a point-by-point basis. It gets a bit hard to follow when the quotes from the text are scattered in the paragraphs among your points. You make good points...so keep them in one paragraph. Use the following paragraph to cite the source as your "expert backup" and contextualize the quote from the reading as well as how you see it illustrating the point you made in the paragraph before.
Hegemony
-Use of the term “Hegemony”
Hegemony Basics:
IT IS a conceptual tool to understand norms, dominant values, and ideals (among other concepts)
but
IT’S NOT a noun with personified abilities to act completely on its own as though it was isolated from the individuals, groups, histories, etc that have collectively shaped its (re)construction
Counter
-Counter-Hegemony
Alternatively, hegemonic representations don’t typically have uniform counter-hegemonic representations. Therefore, surmising the opposing representation of the hegemonic would represent itself in a particular manner is not going to help you analyze your subject matter.
If your example includes an area you’ve identified as counter-hegemonic, that scenario is fine and isn’t what I described above. You can still argue the point of an example of counter-hegemonic representations when the specific example exists; however, this counter-hegemonic depiction should be examined in the context of an author’s point about power/hegemony/norms/etc. Try to look at the relevant issues in the context of a example you’ve articulated is evidence of transgressing a norm (counter-hegemony) and see how that very same example may also be understood (using the readings to support this understanding) as a simultaneous reinforcement of a norm. When this scenario with both counter-hegemony and hegemony (very common scenario) appears in your paper, I’m looking for the depth in your analysis of the example that doesn’t simply articulate the existence of competing normative depictions.
Instead, try to formulate the links between the seemingly contradictory analyses of the same example. Further your analysis by articulating your understanding of the power of the norms and categories that are involved.
-Jessie
The 2 things Jason did well was the descirption of the show, since I am not familiar with it, and the characters he chose to analyze.
ReplyDeleteThe 2 things Jason can work on is his argument and the format of his blog. His argument was clear, however he could have critically analyzed it a bit more. As for his format, he could have separated the qoutes from the paagraphs and added more context to his argument.