Nationalism Essay -- Patriotism Pride Essays

Nationalism I'm sure everyone remembers the Gulf War a few years ago. This war lasted for several months and drew everyone to the television and to newspapers to find out what was happening now to all the Americans over seas. Many people found their loved ones leaving. They were in the military and were called to defend their country. This is a sign of nationalism in itself, however, something that was closer to home for me was a tiny yellow ribbon. These yellow ribbons were seen everywhere. They were placed on tree trunks, on peoples front doors, pinned on to peoples clothing, and displayed on peoples cars. These yellow ribbons were a sign to let those people in the Gulf know they were loved and missed and that we were praying for their safe return. This is nationalism. We had all those people over in the Gulf in our thoughts even those we did not know. Nationalism or patriotism can be defined as a sense of belonging or a sense of pride to one's nation among a group of people. Nationalism includes feeling of loyalty to their nation, pride and a desire for independence. Nationalism can be experienced under a state which is a political unit that has essential elements such as people, land, government or independence or among a nation which is people sharing a common identity such as the Palestinians and the old Soviet Union. Nationalism has many different aspects to it, common bonds, and different symbols to represent it. Nationalism has not always existed. Years ago loyalty was to a tribe or ruler. Since then, the idea of loyalty has switched and the focus is now on a broader picture. There are four common bonds to nationalism. The first common bond is common territory. You tend to feel a close bond with people fr... ...and Ghana. The British went into India, the gem of Asia, and dominated their markets. The British took from the Indians and sold their goods for more money. The last consequence of nationalism are Wars of National Liberation. These wars have gone on for many years, and have caused many people to loose their lives for their country. The bonds of nationalism may, in fact, "bond" us together as a nation. The symbols of nationalism may allow us to occasionally think of nationalism. We may be able to think of the consequences, but we may not feel that these consequences are very important or ever occur. The fact is that all of these consequences, symbols, and bonds, reflect who we are as people. People die to defend other people of their nation. They fight to keep us safe and united. We need to keep things such as yellow ribbons and think about what we are all about.

Nationalism Essay -- Patriotism Pride Essays

Nationalism I'm sure everyone remembers the Gulf War a few years ago. This war lasted for several months and drew everyone to the television and to newspapers to find out what was happening now to all the Americans over seas. Many people found their loved ones leaving. They were in the military and were called to defend their country. This is a sign of nationalism in itself, however, something that was closer to home for me was a tiny yellow ribbon. These yellow ribbons were seen everywhere. They were placed on tree trunks, on peoples front doors, pinned on to peoples clothing, and displayed on peoples cars. These yellow ribbons were a sign to let those people in the Gulf know they were loved and missed and that we were praying for their safe return. This is nationalism. We had all those people over in the Gulf in our thoughts even those we did not know. Nationalism or patriotism can be defined as a sense of belonging or a sense of pride to one's nation among a group of people. Nationalism includes feeling of loyalty to their nation, pride and a desire for independence. Nationalism can be experienced under a state which is a political unit that has essential elements such as people, land, government or independence or among a nation which is people sharing a common identity such as the Palestinians and the old Soviet Union. Nationalism has many different aspects to it, common bonds, and different symbols to represent it. Nationalism has not always existed. Years ago loyalty was to a tribe or ruler. Since then, the idea of loyalty has switched and the focus is now on a broader picture. There are four common bonds to nationalism. The first common bond is common territory. You tend to feel a close bond with people fr... ...and Ghana. The British went into India, the gem of Asia, and dominated their markets. The British took from the Indians and sold their goods for more money. The last consequence of nationalism are Wars of National Liberation. These wars have gone on for many years, and have caused many people to loose their lives for their country. The bonds of nationalism may, in fact, "bond" us together as a nation. The symbols of nationalism may allow us to occasionally think of nationalism. We may be able to think of the consequences, but we may not feel that these consequences are very important or ever occur. The fact is that all of these consequences, symbols, and bonds, reflect who we are as people. People die to defend other people of their nation. They fight to keep us safe and united. We need to keep things such as yellow ribbons and think about what we are all about.

Nationalism Essay -- Patriotism Pride Essays

Nationalism I'm sure everyone remembers the Gulf War a few years ago. This war lasted for several months and drew everyone to the television and to newspapers to find out what was happening now to all the Americans over seas. Many people found their loved ones leaving. They were in the military and were called to defend their country. This is a sign of nationalism in itself, however, something that was closer to home for me was a tiny yellow ribbon. These yellow ribbons were seen everywhere. They were placed on tree trunks, on peoples front doors, pinned on to peoples clothing, and displayed on peoples cars. These yellow ribbons were a sign to let those people in the Gulf know they were loved and missed and that we were praying for their safe return. This is nationalism. We had all those people over in the Gulf in our thoughts even those we did not know. Nationalism or patriotism can be defined as a sense of belonging or a sense of pride to one's nation among a group of people. Nationalism includes feeling of loyalty to their nation, pride and a desire for independence. Nationalism can be experienced under a state which is a political unit that has essential elements such as people, land, government or independence or among a nation which is people sharing a common identity such as the Palestinians and the old Soviet Union. Nationalism has many different aspects to it, common bonds, and different symbols to represent it. Nationalism has not always existed. Years ago loyalty was to a tribe or ruler. Since then, the idea of loyalty has switched and the focus is now on a broader picture. There are four common bonds to nationalism. The first common bond is common territory. You tend to feel a close bond with people fr... ...and Ghana. The British went into India, the gem of Asia, and dominated their markets. The British took from the Indians and sold their goods for more money. The last consequence of nationalism are Wars of National Liberation. These wars have gone on for many years, and have caused many people to loose their lives for their country. The bonds of nationalism may, in fact, "bond" us together as a nation. The symbols of nationalism may allow us to occasionally think of nationalism. We may be able to think of the consequences, but we may not feel that these consequences are very important or ever occur. The fact is that all of these consequences, symbols, and bonds, reflect who we are as people. People die to defend other people of their nation. They fight to keep us safe and united. We need to keep things such as yellow ribbons and think about what we are all about.

The King and His Role in Ancient Egypt

Janelle Richardson Professor Ogden Goelet Ancient Egyptian Religion First Paper 4/8/13 The King and his role During the times of the Ancient Egyptians there were many beliefs that the Egyptians stood by, one of which being the ideal of polytheism. The Egyptians live in a spiritual free reign. Although they tend to follow the beliefs of the community that they lived in and around, they were for the most part free to worship and practice whatever they may with whatever God they felt right.Another belief the Egyptians held onto was the belief in kingship and order, â€Å"Maat†. The construct of Kingship during the times of the Ancient Egyptians was crucial to the unification of the Egyptian people. Through his associations with the Gods he was expected to keep the order or rather ma’at of the land, which was inhabited by the Egyptian people. The king was responsible for keeping the peace and amongst the people and the land both figuratively and literally. The king was task ed with protecting the people from potential attacks from foreign lands.But perhaps most importantly the King served as the median between the people and the Gods. They were therefore expected to make offerings to Gods that would suffice to their needs as deities, pleasing them and placing the king and thus his kingdom, his land and his people in good favor with the Gods. This was crucial because this meant that the Gods have blessed the land that the Egyptians harvest on assuring lasted nourishment, the king had to feed his people, and if he alone managed to please the Gods on behalf of him and his people he was able to accomplish just that.But we can’t forget the idea that when the people are happy the king is secure. All of the positive exchanges between the Gods and king were important in securing a pharaoh’s kingship and ultimately giving them the opportunity to create and secure a dynasty for a longer period of time. This is an important idea when discussing the topic of the development of Religion in State. Equal to the construct of kingship, religion and ritual were a vital part of the Egyptian culture, thus a vital part in their unity, especially during times of tribal strife and war.Also key in the formation of religion is the Egyptian’s obsession over death, which could leave a dark air about the culture as whole, but the idea of an after-life, life after death was brought to the Egyptians through the image of Gods. The Egyptians created a world of polytheistic ideals and rituals that reflected their beliefs â€Å"Egyptians believed dated back to the time when gods ruled on earth, and by the â€Å"law† laid down by the King, their son and earthly representative. † (Cerny 35).So being that the relationship that the Egyptian people had with the Gods and their importance in the limiting of chaos in their world the ideal of the King’s divinity was key for the survival of society and perhaps the sanity of society as well. â€Å"Egypt was the first large â€Å"nation state,† with a culture virtually restricted to that state, and thus was very self-contained†¦ in which kingship was an unquestioned presupposition of social order—indeed order was hardly conceivable without it. † (Baines, 2).The King’s responsibilities stretched as far as the prevention of the collapse of their Egyptian state. Of course it was important to every Egyptian to be responsible for themselves and do their duties unto the land as the Gods may have it and they praised and celebrated and communed because of these rituals and these practices. But in these times, even if an Egyptian works as hard as he can consistently to please the Gods on his own if the king falls short of his duty as the Divine middleman, the Egyptian’s harvest may not bloom crops sufficient enough to feed themselves of their families.The King as a Divine Creature Although out of the archives and data that has bee n collected over the past decades about Ancient Egyptian, the evidence that shows the King as being an actual divine being of the Gods, usually an incarnation of a particular God or sometimes a mosh of multiple Gods the King was scene by the people as divine and a direct creation of the Gods, therefore the only person with the ability to be in communication with the God. The sun-god we are told elsewhere had appointed hum ‘to be shepherd of this land, to keep the people alive†¦in theory he was the officiant in every temple in the land†¦and every religious ceremony and ritual was in a sense a royal ritual. † (Fairman 1958, 76). The Egyptians also believed the Kings, if they weren’t to fail and disgrace themselves in the eyes of the Gods, received a different treatment after death.The afterlife of a king wasn’t thought to be the same as one of an Egyptian civilian, rather the Egyptian people believed that after the death of the kings cross over to t he worlds of the divine, some believe that they become Osiris in the afterlife. The king This idea is seen in many of the art pieces made by the Egyptians that referenced kings after their deaths and their relationship to the Gods, or in a lot of cases a particular God (For example: The God Horus).Whole tombs at the highest level of grandiosity and tribute were made for kings after their deaths. Many rituals were had for the kings before and after their passing including the kings initial coronation which involve d the ‘selection of the new Sacred Falcon, which was effected by Horus by means of an oracle†¦special hymns were sung, one greeting the New Year†¦ and the second being concerned with ensuring the protection of the Sacred Falcon’ (Fairman 1958, 80).It was believed that the spirit of Horus enters the king at the coronation and guides the king along the path of maat. Then when the king died his spirit was merged with Osiris ‘from where he could gui de his successors’. The King was key in the lives of the Egyptians. The King had a foot in both worlds, the secular and the spiritual, or rather the sacred, which were treated as one in the same thing by the Egyptians, at all times. The King was the religious leader and the law book simultaneously.The Kings was seen as a representation/manifestation of God in a flesh and completely mortal carcass that served the God King for as long as they are to rule until their time to go and take part in their after-life begins â€Å"The king, it is true, interprets the evidence, translating radiation and motion in terms of religious meaning, answering them by cultic action and speaking to a God who expresses himself in a strictly ‘heliomorphic’ way† (Assman 1989, 68). Even the Pharaohs ritual vestments were designed to show his power.The symbols of the gods were the king’s tools of office. The crook, to reward the innocent, the flail, to punish the guilty, show ing his authority to rule the two-lands, and the Ureaus Cobra or Eye of Ra seeing all that the Pharaoh did, good or evil. (Humphries). The Kings was responsible for keeping order or Ma’at , the rule of order over the chaos that the Egyptians thought was waiting to sheath the world, at any moment without the guidance of the Gods and the usefulness of the King.The focus was on balance, the people; the Egyptians themselves were inclined to honor the God’s along with the King by living a life of obedience and balance so that they can rest assured that all will be well, they have pleased the Gods and they shall not be punished for any wrong doing. The king’s notional strength came from the support of the gods and as long as this was maintained no ill could befall the country.There is little denying that the Egyptians didn’t believe that their kings weren’t in part Gods themselves as represented by most of their art and writings. But this system that the Egyptians became so accustomed to held the potential to cause problems for the king. The key to life lived in balance is Maat but once this was lost, however, the kingdom was thrown into turmoil until a new strong king, who had the support of the gods, took the throne. The Kings and the Egyptians found out that the Gods aren’t always pleased.The Integration of the Church and State and the Problems that it caused the King The Pharaoh was seen as the emissary of the gods and life was good as long as the religious rites were performed and maat was maintained, but what happened when maat wasn’t contained? What problems arose for the king then, when something hasn’t lined up with divine order? Though I stress the importance of the king in Ancient Egypt, we can’t forget that not everything always went so smoothly for the Egyptians and those who ruled over them.Perhaps one of the most obvious drawbacks to being a king endowed with such divine responsibility is if and when the Gods were not perceived to be happy whether specifically at the king’s actions or the actions of his people, the state of the king’s position in his kingdom comes into question and under fire. These occurrences however, might have helped balance out the Egyptians belief of the God like ways of being for the king. The King is mortal and fallible, after all, the king is still human.This ideal is showcased in a lot of the literary texts of the New Kingdom, â€Å"Many different types of human frailties and weaknesses characterize all the figures in†¦The Contendings of Horus and Seth† (Wente 1972c, 108-126 [translation]; and Lichtheim 1976, 214-223 [translation]), â€Å"The gods were anthropomorphized from an early period in ancient Egypt’s history (Hornung 1982a, 105-107), and their portrayal both in figures and in text clearly is humanized. They have family problems. They bicker. They display moods (Silverman 1995, 53-54).In other words they’re human, just as they were and were witnessed to be in life outside of their association with the Gods. Conclusion Was the king divine? It’s obvious now that the Egyptians without a doubt believed in the divinity of their king, some might even say that that belief was necessary for the survival of the Egyptians I would say that by definition and according to what most of society today thinks of to be ‘divine’, the answer is yes and no, the king wasn’t actually divine in the sense that he possessed magical powers that directly affected those around him and his people, or in the sense that the king was actually just God.But in accordance to what I believe as a member or today’s society and from what I know of the Ancient Egyptians and their beliefs, I think that the king was divine, but I believe that by the same nature of the king being divine, so was every other Egyptian that lived during the time. Now this is simply my opinion and lin es up directly with my personal beliefs in God, but in a less personal explanation, the presence and usefulness of the King in relationship to the Egyptian people and the order of the Egyptian world, served as a very sturdy backbone in the Egyptian society.Footnotes: The silence of the god who expresses himself visually is balanced by the ‘voice’ of the king which plays such an important part in the inscriptions. The king is the ‘speaking god’, spreading truth (Maat) upon earth as the Aten Spreads light and life. Sources and Bibliography Assmann, J. , â€Å"The Name Formula,† in The Search for God in Ancient Egypt, D. Lorton, trans. (Ithaca, NY 2001) 83-110. Bell, Dr. Lanny. â€Å"Montclair State University. †Ã‚  Divine Kingship in Ancient Egypt -Mythology and Iconography. N. p. n. d. Web. 08 Apr. 2013. . Cited for information on Horus Cerny, J. ,, â€Å"Egyptian Oracles,† Chap. 6 in R. A. Parker, A Saite Oracle Papyrus from Thebes (Pro vidence 1962) 35-48 Dunn, Jimmy. â€Å"King Ramesses I, Founder of the 19th Dynasty. †Ã‚  King Ramesses I, Founder of the 19th Dynasty. Tour Egypt, n. d. Web. 08 Apr. 2013. . Fairman, H. W. â€Å"The Kingship Rituals of Egypt,† in Myth, Ritual and King ship: Essays on Theory and Practice of Kingship, S. H. Hooke (Oxford 1958) 74-104 Hornung, E. , â€Å"The Pharaoh,† Chap. 10 in S. Donadoni, ed. , The Egyptians (Chicago and London 1997) 283-314. Hornung, E. , â€Å"History as Celebration,† Chap. 8 in Idea into Image (New York 1992) 147-164. Humphries, Ken. â€Å"Egypt: Was Pharaoh Divine. †Ã‚  Egypt: Was Pharaoh Divine. N. p. , n. d. Web. 08 Apr. 2013. Used as a study source Silverman, D. P. , â€Å"The Nature of Egyptian Kingship,† in Chap. 2 in D.O’Connor and D. P. Silverman, eds. , Ancient Egyptian Kingship. Probleme der Agyptologie 9 (Leiden 1995) 49-92. Lichtheim, M. â€Å"Stela of Sehetep-ib-re,† Ancient Egyptian Literatur e I (Berkeley 1975) 125-129. Teeter, Emily. â€Å"Festivals. †Ã‚  Religion and Ritual in Ancient Egypt. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2011. 56-75. Print. Wente, Edward F. , and Robert A. Oden. Response to Robert A. Oden's â€Å"‘The Contendings of Horus and Seth' (Chester Beatty Papyrus No. 1): A Structural Interpretation†Ã‚  Chicago: University of Chicago, 1979. 105-07. Print.

Hollywood Genre Film - Film Studies Dissertations - Free Essay Example

Sample details Pages: 12 Words: 3660 Downloads: 10 Date added: 2017/06/26 Category Statistics Essay Did you like this example? The topic of Hollywood and genre is multifaceted, dealing with definitions, characteristics and the social cultural roles genre performs. Steve Neales Genre And Hollywood (2000), and Rick Altmans Film/Genre (1999) take on board these a genders both offering a different theoretical approach to the topic, which I will analyze then voice my own conclusion on my findings. Both show that genre is an important, productive way of thinking about Hollywoods film history, and its audience. Each book presents new research, new thinking on genre that will be investigated and applied to its appropriate film style. Don’t waste time! Our writers will create an original "Hollywood Genre Film Film Studies Dissertations" essay for you Create order Questions are raised from these existing accounts: that definitions of genre are restrictive and narrow, that traditional genres are inaccurate and that cultural theories are often over generalized. The arguments on the subject will be looked into detail, presenting my own opinions on these accounts. As genre is a complex subject, with many contexts, I will be breaking the subject up, firstly looking at definitions of genre, and general concepts applying them into individual genres. I will be looking at theories on genre by a number of people all different in there opinion. With the knowledge and understanding of genre, I will look into film noir, a critical category within the Hollywood film industry. Genre has occupied an important part in the study of cinema for years. Genre is French word, meaning kind or type. The term sub-genre is also used to refer to specific traditions within a genre ( as in gothic horror, slapstick comedy and so on). When genre is discussed or defined it is usally focused on commercial mainstream films, Hollywood films in particular. Barry Keith Grant states that genres are exclusively identified with commercial cinema: Genre movies are those commercial feature films which through repetition and venation, tell familiar stories with familiar characters in familiar situations Books and articles were being published in the 1940s and 1950s, in Europe and the USA, talking about individual Hollywood genres, establishing its self more, becoming an academic formal discipline in film studies. Theorists, critics and teachers of film at this time wanted to engage in the appearance of genre and genres inparticular with popular Hollywood cinema, offering a critical approach with a desire to displace or compliment films. Hollywood films had always been discussed by reviwers and critics, usally hostile to to the films Hollywood produced, arguing they aimed at mass market, conservative,commercially produced films lacking in realism, over loaded in fantasy. During the early 1970s a generation of critics began to value elements of popluar American culture, re-assesing its value. Here the auteur theory began, more simply known as auteurism. Based around three basic premises, firstly that cinema is a personal and individual expression. The second is that individual could be the director, a figure equivalent to an artist in painting. Lastly was that cinematography authorship wasnt to be found in just Hollywood cinema. An auteur is a director whos work is characterized by distinctive elements and traits in there films, stamping each piece of work with there own personality. The criticism is that films are just the personal expression of the director. Interpreting each film in the context of the film makers style makes the director responsible for the major creative descisions. The concept of the auteur theory is a crucial development in film theory, moving away from literary analyses of films narrative content to aspects of art and style specific in film. Many questions are raised on genre as a term, with little agreement on what it exactly means, if it can be clearly defined. Genre criticism firstly began from the notion that there are many kinds of literature, with different contexts. Aristotle tried to separate his poetry , from what we call lieterature into categories such as epic, lyric, tradgedy and so on. Distinguieshing each piece of works properties, working out particular properties of each distinctive kind trying to establish their relative importance, applying these into categories. Aristotles ideas were taken up during the Renaissance placed into a set of rules so that each style, were prescribed for each kind. This codeification evolved in the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, literature was being divided more into categories, each with there own subject matter. Such a doctorial approach became frowned upon. In the late 1930s a Chigargo based school of critisicm known as the neo-Aristiteians, spoke out against this new criticism, which repudiated a historical approach to literature, believing literature exists by itself without contemporary or historical refrence. An attempt was made to rescue literature from isolation, resureting the theory of genres. Now that genre has become much more of a phenomenon, expanding hugly in Hollywood encompassing the cartoon, the B movie, the gangster film and many others. Now that genre has become multi dimensional the building of generic corpuses and audience expectations need to be addressed. Verisimilitude is a theory addressing the point of what justifies a genre, its systems of plausabilty, motivation, and justifications of belief. It is these systems of expectation which the spectator brings to the cinema, in which to interact with the film its self while viewing, providing the spectator with means of recognition and understanding. Verisimilitude helps render individual films of there generic corpuses, working out the significance of what is taking place on screen, why characters are dressed the way they are, why they are acting in a certain stlye. For example if a character bursts into song, the viwer will recognize that this particular film is a musical. Its plot is liable to follow certain directions rather then others, so these systems of expectation involve a knowledge of Verisimilitude which the viewer takes with them to the cinema. Todrov explains different regimes of Verisimilitude, with notions of propriety, of what is probable in a film therefore appropriate. In a musical bursting into song is appropriate therefore probable, there for believable in a musical, but not in a sci-fi or horror film. Murder is possible in westerns, gangster, and thrillers but unlikely in romantic comedy. Singing is obligatory in a musical, likely to be seen within its narrative, the spectator interacts with this being able to acknowledge its genre. Todrov explains how there are two types of Verisimilitude. Generic Verisimilitude and cultural Verisimilitude. Work is said to have Verisimilitude in relation to two chief kinds of norms. The first we call the rules of genre: for a work to be said to have Verisimilitude, it must conform to these rules. These rules Todrov refers to stem back to the idea of regimes within genres, with notions of probability. Todrovs second type of Verisimilitude has a more social context. But there exisits another Verisimilitudethat the Verisimilar is not a relation between discourse and its referent, but between discourse and what readers believe is true. Defined Hollywood genres arguably involve transgressions of social cultural Verisimilitude, for the entertainment and aesthetic pleasure. Individual genres have a balance between both social cultural and generic Verisimilitude, some genres appealing more to the generic context. War films mark this appeal by using discourses, maps, memories, and so on. Horror films operate much less to this authenticity, for example the discourses they cite, like the book of revelations in the Omen, is obviously fictional. Inbetween these two cases lie science fiction, films such as Them, draw an authentic status of science and technology to motivate an otherwise non-Verisimilitude event. A relevnt theory is that of Todrovs work on The Fantastic existing of different regimes of Verisimilitude. Two categories lie in the fantastic, The Marvelous and The Uncanny. Events are understood in the marvelous as supernatural, where the uncanny is understood in terms of laws of the natural world, involving a hesitation between the two for the viewer In a world that which is indeed our world, a world without devils or vampires, there occurs an event which cannot be explained by the laws of this same familiar world. The person who experiences the event must opt for two possible solutions: Either he is the victim of an illustion of the senses, of a product of the imagination Or else the event has indeed taken place, an integeral part of reality, controlled by Laws unknown to us. The Fantastic is the uncertainty between the two, the hesitation experienced by the viewer who can only relate to the laws of nature confronting the uncanny, an apparently supernatural event. Noel Carroll applies a similar theory, in two plot structures characteristic in horror films. The first he calls the Discovery plot, consisting of four stages, onset, discovery, confirmation and confrontation. Discovery involves the failure of responsibility and capacity for belief of those in authority, while confirmation is the realignment of their event. This structure articulates a play across themes and positions of responsibility, a play between knowing and not knowing. This plot is the most serviceable narrative armature in the horror film. For example in The Exorcist, the demons presence is established by the girls abnormal behavior, which is then discovered by an individual or group, in this case the poseesed girls mother. For some reason this discovery of this threat is not acknowledged by the police, an authorertive power, as they would not believe in such a erratic tale. Its plot moves away from discovery into confirmation, where the discoverers must convince some one else of the existence and danger of this demon, becoming an elaborate part of the film creating the suspense. While the girls possessed state worsens the mother has to seek other means of help to a higher authority, the time lost during this the demon becomes for powerful. After the hesitation stage of confirmation, it converts to confrontation. The demon is in contact with mankind, as the vicar finally meets the possesed girl. It is this tension between the discoveries (mother noticing abnormal changes in daughter) and the confirmation to convince someone who will believe in the monster or demon (mother seeking help for her possesed daughter) that creates a tension, leaving the audience knowing and not knowing. A second plot is the Overreacher plot, which involves superstition and scientific knowledge. Carrol says this plays an important role to the plot structure 37 . Frankenstein is an example to this approachwhere the discovery plots often sightedness of science, the overreacher plot critizies sciences will to knowledge. The over reachers plot has four basic movements, the first comprises the preparation for the experiament, including philisophacal approach, or a debate about the experiaments motivation. The overreacher himself can become quite megalomaniacal. Such a theory can only be applied to a horror film, as Carroll states the specifics that the plot must have shortsightedness of science, where the overreacher becomes melodramatic. Frankenstein, and Jekyll and Hyde embody the overreacher, bringing an experiment to life comprehends a debate and motivation Carroll mentions, with this melodramatic behavior from the scientist performing the act. The experiment itself goes wrong, resulting in devastation, only now does the overreacher realize the error in justifying there experiment. It is the death and destruction the monster brings to innocent people, which brings the overreacher to his senses repeling him to destroy his creation. Both theories lean heavily on suspense, which is a key ingreediant in the narrative of a horror genre Narrative suspense can occur in most, if not all, of the plot movementsan incident in the onset movement might involve an innocent victim being suspense fully stalked, or our discoverers purseued by the monster. These theories are emboidied in the Horror genre, this repetition of narrative links in with each film, sets the genre away from others. With similar narrative and structure the viewer can relate and then categorize this, knowing that the film they are viewing is a horror film. It is these aesthetic theories that make a genre, the expressionism and communication that define it. As the idea of repetition is inherited in genres, these were thought of as clichs, that the structures are one dimensional, becoming stereo typed. Most critics shared this idea. Shazts contests that Hollywood films involve similar one-dimesional characters acting out a predictable story pattern 208 gh. This pattern becomes familiar with an audience, as each genre contains its own narrative traits such as setting, characters, and plots. A theory by Cawelti called stereotype vitalization shows how characters traits can add to audienes recognition to a genre. Stereotyped characters are commonly found for example in westerns, the audience can expect to see brawls, crooked villains and the cowboy heroine. With such sterotypes within characters it heightens the audiences acknowledgment, as they recognize previous examples with these characters. It is argued however that these stereotypes must be regenerated But a good writer must renew these sterotypes by adding new elements, by showing us some new unexpected facet, or by relating them to other stereotypes in a particular fashionmaintaining an interest for later generations and other cultures. Without adding to a stereotype, films would become too familiar and predictable. Stereotyped vitalization contains two elements. The first is that of a stereotyped character which embodies another contradict cal stereotypical trait. For example Sherlock Holmes stereotyped traits are of a rational, logical, man of reason. On the other hand he is also a romantic poet, drug taker, and a musician. Such opposite sterotyped traits is what makes Holmes a striking literary character, this renewal on a character adds a new element referring back to Catweitis idea of adapting on just one stereotype, bringing more to a film. Another example is that of Gary Cooper, a great western star recognized for his violence , and skill to be quick on the draw, despite being a shy man. A second form of stereotyped vitalization is the stereotyped figure becoming complex and frail, such complexity in a character can however damage a narrative. This is a very delicate matter, for if a character becomes too complex it may cast a shattering and disruptive light on the other elements of the formula. This predictability and pattern within the film allows the viwer to distinguish traits between different genres. Neale argues that we must first understand what is meant by a story pattern, and predictability. In a broad sense Neale states that the story pattern refers to the main shape of a story, that violent climaxes of war films are generically requisite therefore predictable, all common plots recognized by a viwer. However Neale states that climaxes to films in there own genre can vary considerably. War films and western films permit death or defeat as well as victory and survival 211 gh. The same can be said for romantic films, where it could end happily or unhappily, so the narrative is not completely predictable. Each genre can then follow its own narrative which contains its own stereotypes so the viwer can comprehend the genre, yet at the same time as Cawelti stated, by adding elements to the sterotype (character,narrative) the viwer can still relate to the film. This makes each film within its own genre more interesting and diverse. All genre films are distinguished by sharing the same subject matter, a samurai film for example involves swords, science fiction embraces technology, or a gangster film with violence and corruption.These films are defined by similar plots and patterns. For example the plot pattern of an investergation that concludes the early mistery, solved at the climax of the film is common in detective films. Neale however points out that although we can separate each genre, it is only by its basic terms ( a detective story is about an investergation). Hybrid films combine two elements of the same genre into one. For example a combination of horror and science fiction in Alien, or a detective tale with science fiction in Bladerunner. Neale states that classification means genres share multiple relations, not all defined by the traits. If traits can be combined in a genre, what classifies a genre? This combination or cross breeding all relates back to repetition and difference in a films genre, hybrid films however become complex, unable to be pinned down to one single defined genre. It seems most genres are hallmarked by this idea of repetition, films sharing similar attributes. Hans Robert Jauss believes genres are best under stood as process. Repetition does dominate this process , but is also marked by difference, variation, and change. There are three levels in which a genre manifests itself. A level of expectation, level of generic corpus, and the rules and norm that administer both. A new film adds an existing generic corpus to a genre, as in Dracula where the character has to be characterized supernaturally or psychologically as is the case in the film Psycho. These are extended in a new genre film by adding new elements or transgressing an old one. John Carpenters Halloween played between psychological and supernatural elements both displayed within the monster. With this a genre is not simply being replayed but its generic corpus is expanded. It is films with the same generic corpus that base around expectation. Generic elements can be found in advertising. Where this develops so to does a films image, where a genre can expand and change as well. An original text is the viewers expectation familiar to him or her from earlier texts; these can be as shown, extended and varied. With each genre expanding on an original narrative it is as Neale states difficult to fully list the characteristics of each individual genre. Only can we define them in a broad sense, for example a war film that represents its wages in warfare, its main familiar trait, yet with each war film with its own separate narrative. Aesthectic characterictics are found in mass produced genres, Neale states that the term genre is not only used in film but in art and entertainment. Williams relates back to the roots of genre as a term, how it has evolved fistly Borrowed as a critical tool from literary studiesa concept in film studies raises some fairly tough questions. Genre films referring to a genre category substitute film narrative. Williams believes this to be the real genre, considering genres more as narrative film, documentary, or avant garde. It is these sub-genres that Williams believes to have more significant differences that we can distinguish. Ralph Cohen also relates heavily to the roots of the term genre, as it evolved in the nineteenth century, where popular mass produced fiction was making its first appearance. Hollywoods industry has played a huge role partly responsible for creating genres. Hollywood sets out to make profitable films to a mass market, where directors create different films each time as the audience would get bored seeing the same similar films, resulting in viewers not turning up to cinemas, leaving companies bust. Neale uses a nice analogy to illustrate this idea. A car company creates models to keep up with current trends, to keep there products in demand, yet each car has an idenity with one an other. Its principles apply to the film industry. Hollywood genres have the same ranges, producing films with similariteies but each with its own unique touch to keep its audience entertained They enable the industry to meet obligations of variety and difference inherent in this productto regulate demand Hollywoods studios focus on this idea of adding to a genre to keep up demand, to maximize there profit. Studios developed in the 1920s, where groups of studios began such as Universal Pictures, United Artists, and Columbia Pictures, all producing films. These were the main high profit studios, only later did smaller studios develop creating indepentant films. Backed with money the major studios were creating films for the spectible, with higher budgets to draw in there audience. Smaller companies however were not able to show there films, until 1948 where government legislation meant that the smaller studios could release there films into the cinema. With this, studios could market there films in a predictable way with expert staff, directors, producers, and starts. All this meant studios could create there own generic enterprise. With changing ideas and narrative to engage an audience, a genre keeps to its generic form aswel as incorpaerating new plots and style for the audience to enjoy. John Ellis agrees with the importance of the institutional aspects of genre. Ellis mentions the narrative image for each film is a strong hint to its genre, but also stronger when applied in advertising Television and radio often plays a huge part in the construction of such imagesbut also a key role is played by the industry its self. Films advertising to the public, in posters, or television show a clear image of its narrative. Reviews on films state its generic framework, even on posters, statements are shown the comedy of the year clearly telling the viewer the films genre. It is this that raises the publics expectations through means of media, a method Ellis calls inter-textual relay. As any business, it wants to draw its target audience in; the film industry is no different. By advertising a narrative and in some cases even telling us the genre it sells the film instantly. Without advertising the public would simply have to go on a film by word of mouth. Without advertising its audience would be confused, not knowing the films genre, there for unlikely to go to the cinema and pay to watch the film. Inter-textual relay circulates a number of generic labels, terms, and names. It is there existence that makes a genre, although Altman argues Hollywood has a limited role to play when mentioning categories and terms. The industrial/journalistic term thus finds a hypothesis about presence of meaningful activity, but does not necessarily contribute a definition or delimitation of the genre in question Agreeably advertising does not fully explain the narrative, but does tell us the fundamental framework, the basic premises that the audience analyses and can make there own assumption of its genre.