What Is Social Class? Social Class is a status hierarchy in which individuals and groups are classified on the basis of esteem and prestige acquired mainly through economic success and accumulation of wealth. Social class may also refer to any particular level in such a hierarchy. Four common social classes informally recognized in many societies are: (1) Upper class, (2) Middle class, (3) Working class, and (4) Lower class. There are stereotypes associated with each of these classes in our society. If you conduct a simple Google Images search for each term you will see many of these. Upper Class Stereotypes Wealthy (money), 'posh accent', educated at private schools, tradition is important, demanding, 'hooray Henry', champagne, fox-hunting, out of touch, etc
Middle Class Stereotypes Suburban living, home owners, 2.4 children (perfect family unit), play golf, professional jobs - suits, nice car, good job, etc
Working Class Stereotypes 'Salt of the earth', hard-working, not as well educated, 'common' accent, manual labour or poorer paid job, only wear smart clothes for special occasions, strong family values, single parent family, never been to university, etc
Lower Class Stereotypes Poor, rude, dangerous, not educated, involved in criminal activity, 'scrounging', rely on benefits, teenage pregnancy, alcohol, swearing, 'chav', no respect for authority, etc.
Social Status Status is different to class. Social Status is a person's standing or importance in relation to other people within a society. It is possible to be from a working class background but to have a high social status through hard work. An example of this would be Sir Alan Sugar. Click here to find out a bit more about how he moved from a boy from a working class background to a businessman with high social status.
If your extract asks you to discuss the ways in which representations of class and status are constructed in the extract, you should be thinking about the following things when watching the clip:
Can I identify what class/status characters are?
Are people from different classes or of different statuses shown as having different interests, personalities, attitudes, behaviours? If so, how?
Is their class/status represented as being important in their life?
Are people from particular classes/statuses represented as being better, more powerful, than others?
Are people from particular classes/ statuses represented as being abnormal /weaker/ more pathetic than others?
How do other characters in the clip treat the characters from different classes or of different statuses?
What is the message the clip is trying to portray about class/status?
I would now like you to produce a response to the question below using the extract from 'The Street' which you watched in class. This would have to be completed in approximately 45 minutes in the exam but you may take more time than this. You may watch the extract as many times as you wish. Completed essays must be emailed to me by 8:30am onWednesday 18th January. Remember to look back at the mark scheme to help you to understand what is being looked for. Please complete the essay in Microsoft Word with a font size of 12. My email address is philiphenton@kba.uk Discuss the ways in which the extract constructs the representation of sexuality using the following:
Use of the camera (framing, angle, movement, composition)
Editing
Sound
Mise-en-scene
Exemplar Response
There are several representations of sexuality that are constructed in this extract.
The opening scene represents a stereotypically male workplace environment where audiences may not immediately expect to see themes of male homosexuality explored. The director deliberately constructs a series of representations through sound and mise-en-scene that, using Levi-Strauss’ theory of binary oppositions, would be in conflict with the next scene, shot entirely in a gay bar. In a building site hut we see exaggerated male stereotypes including hard hats, a gruff foreman paying wages in cash to the builders with a cigarette hanging out of his mouth and men with tattoos talking in working class northern accents. The camera pans from right to left to reveal the two central characters and the foreman framed in medium close up.
As the other builders walk out of frame two men are left in two shot with diegetic dialogue and facial expressions suggesting a friendship or an understanding. Charlie asks in low level mutters what the other man is doing later with narrative enigmas suggesting to an audience he is lacking confidence. This is reinforced by his body language as he looks down at the floor. The other younger man seems more confident which is revealed by his body language, pitch and tone of voice and dialogue as he invites Charlie for a pint but “on my terms”. This again suggests a prior friendship. Their sexuality is immediately anchored by the camera, which cuts to the next scene, a vibrant gay club that they are both attending. Before this abrupt transition we hear stereotypical non-diegetic high-energy gay club music. This music becomes diegetic as the shot cuts to the bar/club but is non-diegetic briefly to act as a sound bridge to enable audiences to fully understand both men are there.
The mise-en-scene of the gay bar swiftly establishes the preferred sexuality of the partygoers as the high energy music continues. We see low angle long shots and also extreme close ups of young semi naked male bodies dancing lit using low key lighting and flashing neon with close ups of men dancing together who are embracing and kissing. Fast paced editing is used to show the upbeat tempo of the club but also to intercut with the two protagonists as they meet at the bar. The younger man appears at the bar in close up. Again his body language more confident while a close up of Charlie sees him walking nervously through the crowd (anchored by his facial expression) with the camera cutting to the direction of his gaze as he looks around anxiously. The preferred reading of this particular scene is that the younger man is more comfortable with his sexuality while Charlie is not.
A high angle establishing shot shows the whole bar and dance floor while the rhythm of the editing parallels the diegetic music as Charlie begins to relax into his environment. Montage editing shows a series of shots of feet in low angle dancing, close ups of drinking pints, close ups of gyrating groin areas dancing and two shots of Charlie and the young man embracing. As Charlie moves away from the bar he is framed in slow motionemphasising his isolation surrounded by a large intense crowd of people. As the camera cuts to the club foyer area Charlie walks into the frame from right to left in long shot and moves into a toilet stall. Here he is shown about to urinate in high angle; the camera anglereinforces the vulnerable situation he is in as he begins to come to terms with his sexuality but also represents the vicious homophobic attack that takes place. A fast paced series of cuts using hand held camera shows extreme close ups of the attacker’s hands and head but also a close up of Charlie’s head as he is pushed against the toilet wall. Sound combines with the editing to reinforce the shock of the attack as we hear a violent thud but also homophobic dialogue from the attacker/thief. An extreme close up depicts the theft.
Slow motion is used again as Charlie returns to the bar blood dripping from a head wound. He is framed as vulnerable and as the victim of a homophobic attack as his friend shouts for the bar staff to call the police. Charlie’s lack of confidence with his own sexuality is suggested by his repeated requests for no police to be involved perhaps because he is either ashamed of his sexuality or that he has a family. The end of this particular scene has a number of negotiated readings but on the coach in the next scene he does question why he was singled out as the victim. This has implied connotations that the attack is linked in some way to his acceptance of his sexuality. The club scene cuts to a point of view shot from inside a coach looking out at greenery while travelling along a road and then pulls back to long shotinside the coach to reveal the passengers inside. In two shot (in medium close up) the two men are seen sitting together. The younger man tries to reassure and help Charlie who continues to question the previous night’s events. Charlie reinforces his traditional male stereotype by stating: “I’m a demolition man, I swing sledgehammers” while he refers to some of the men in the club as “tarts” creating a binary opposition between two different physical representations of masculinity.
(50 marks)
Explanation/analysis/argument: Excellent understanding of the way that technical aspects are used to construct a representation. Clear, logical deconstruction of text linking directly to the question but also exploring some media theory.
Use of examples: Sophisticated range of examples, with appropriate sequences analysed to reveal a representation. All areas of study have been exclusively covered as part of an intelligent, holistic examination of text.
Use of terminology: Sophisticated use of media language and technical terminology.
Complex issues expressed clearly and fluently, sentences and paragraphs consistently relevant and well structured with few, if any errors of grammar, spelling and punctuation.
The following information is taken from the RevisionWorld website which can be accessed by CLICKING HERE.
This is a Sociology revision page but there is lots of useful stuff here about gender, age, etc as well as ethnicity.
"Many sociologists believe that media representations of ethnic minority groups are problematic because they contribute to the reinforcement of negative racist stereotypes. Media representations of ethnic minorities may be undermining the concept of a tolerant multicultural society and perpetuating social divisions based on colour, ethnicity and religion.
Evidence suggests that, despite some progress, ethnic minorities are generally under-represented or are represented in stereotyped and negative ways across a range of media content. In particular, newspapers and television news have a tendency to present ethnic minorities as a problem or to associate Black people with physical rather than intellectual activities and to neglect, and even ignore, racism and the inequalities that result from it.
Stereotypical representations
Akinti (2003) argues that television coverage of ethnic minorities over focuses on
crime, AIDS in Africa and Black children’s under-achievement in schools, whilst
ignoring the culture and interests of a huge Black audience and their rich
contribution to British society. Akinti claims that news about Black communities
always seems to be ‘bad news’. Van Dijk’s (1991) content analysis of tens of
thousands of news items across the world over several decades confirms that
news representations of Black people can be categorised into several types of
stereotypically negative news.
Ethnic minorities as criminals – Black crime is the most frequent issue found in media news coverage of ethnic minorities. Van Dijk found that Black people, particularly African-Caribbeans, tend to be portrayed as criminals, especially in the tabloid press and more recently as members of organised gangs that push drugs and violently defend urban territories.
Ethnic minorities and moral panics – Watson (2008) notes that moral panics often result from media stereotyping of Black people as potentially criminal. This effect was first brought to sociological attention by Hall’s classic study of a 1970s moral panic that was constructed around the folk devil of the ‘Black mugger’. Further moral panics have developed around rap music, e.g. in 2003, ‘gangsta rap’ lyrics came under attack for contributing to an increase in gun crime.
Ethnic minorities as a threat – ethnic minorities are often portrayed as a threat to the majority White culture. It is suggested by some media that immigrants and asylum seekers are only interested in living in Britain because they wish to take fraudulent advantage of Britain’s ‘generous’ welfare state. Poole (2000), pre 9/11, argued that Islam has always been demonised and distorted by the Western media. It has traditionally been portrayed as a threat to Western interests. Representations of Islam have been predominantly negative and Muslims have been stereotyped as backward, extremist, fundamentalist and misogynist.
Ethnic minorities as dependent – news stories about less developed countries tend to focus on a ‘coup-war-famine-starvation syndrome’. Often such stories imply that the causes of the problems experienced by developing countries are self-inflicted – that they are the result of stupidity, tribal conflict, too many babies, laziness, corruption and unstable political regimes. External causes such as colonialism, tied aid, transnational exploitation and the unfair terms of world trade are rarely discussed by the British media.
Ethnic minorities as abnormal – the cultural practices of ethnic minorities are often called into question and labelled as deviant or abnormal. Many Asian people believe that the media treatment of arranged marriages was often inaccurate and did not reflect the way that the system had changed over time. Ameli et al. (2007) note that media discussion around the issue of the wearing of the hijab and the veil is also problematic, often suggesting that it is somehow an inferior form of dress compared with Western female dress codes and that it is unnecessary and problematic. It is often portrayed as a patriarchal and oppressive form of control that exemplifies the misogyny of Islam and symbolises the alleged subordinate position of women in Islam.
Ethnic minorities as unimportant – Van Dijk notes that some sections of the media imply that the lives of White people are somehow more important than the lives of non-White people. News items about disasters in developing countries are often restricted to a few lines or words unless there are also White or British victims. Moreover, Sir Ian Blair, the former Metropolitan police commissioner, claimed that institutionalised racism was present in the British media in the way they reported death from violent crime. He noted that Black and Asian victims of violent death did not get the same attention as White victims. However, the murder of the Black teenager Stephen Lawrence by White racists in 1993 received high-profile coverage, both on television and in the press.
Ethnic minorities as invisible – in 2005, a BBC News Online survey noted that Black and Asian people were represented as newscasters and television journalists, but the range of roles that ethnic minority actors play in television drama is very limited and often reflects low status, e.g. Africans may play cleaners or Asians may play shopkeepers. Ethnic minority audiences were also very hostile towards tokenism – the idea that programmes contain characters from ethnic minority groups purely because they ‘should’. Ethnic minority audiences complain that Black and Asian people are rarely shown as ordinary citizens who just happen to be Black or Asian."
The 3 extracts below are all good examples for analysis.
Ethnicity has only been used once as the focus for representation in the exam so should be treated as a HIGH possibility of the focus for this year's exam.
Task 1. Copy and paste this task and the responses across to your blog. 2. Use the highlighter to identify terminology that is used for each code as below:
Use of the camera
Editing
Sound
Mise-en-scene
3. Refer to the mark scheme for the exam which can be found BY CLICKING HERE and rank the essays from 1-4 with 1 being what you consider to be the best.
Student A
The representation of disability in the clip shows fascinating contrasts between characters with a disability and those without.
The character of Ben has the mental disability Down Syndrome. His character portrays a stereotypical image of someone with a mental disability as he is shown throughout the extract as dependent on others, especially his brother David. During the final scene on the bus, the non-diegetic sound of David’s voice says that they have never been more than half a mile apart. This shows that David is always there for Ben and he doesn’t really leave his side. This reinforces the stereotype of disabled people, the fact that they can’t do things on their own and that they need someone to rely on for everything. During the scene in the kitchen, Ben shouts “I need a poo”. This is seen as a funny comedic line which is stereotypical as people with a mental disability are seen as inferior and peculiar compared to an able human.
The character of David is portrayed as a stereotypical teenager. His views on his disabled brother Ben are fairly extreme. For example, the opening line of the extract is “Last summer I decided to kill my brother”. This shows that David isn’t very close to his brother. It’s non diegetic as it’s David’s thoughts speaking. They show the room in a bird’s eye view so the contrast between both halves of the room can be clearly seen. David’s half of the room, dull boring and colourless. Whereas Ben’s side is colourful and vibrant almost childlike. This continues the stereotype of Ben and his disability. During the kitchen scene, David tells Ben a story about how pigs are killed to make bacon. Shot reverse shotis used to show the look on David’s face when he tells the story, then it switches to Ben’s innocent face. This shows the audience how David is trying to wind up his disabled brother.
This extract shows very stereotypical representations of disabled and able people.
Student B
The representation of physical ability and disability presents to us as the audience different aspect on how physical disability and ability affects the characters in everyday life.
The audience is first greeted with a high angle shot looking down into Ben and David’s room and immediately we can see a split between both sides. One side is colourful and the other is dull showing the audience that they are binary opposites of each other. The camera pans round David’s face to show his facial expression which is pure hatred towards Ben which is backed up by his dialogue “I decided to kill my brother”. Stereotypically Ben is shown with cartoonish bed sheets and children’s toys suggesting he is incapable of doing things you’d associate with his age group. We also get a close up of bens face as David is doing a voice over to clearly elaborate on the face Ben has Down syndrome. Montages of evolutionary pictures are shown matching David’s voice over talking about evolution a chemical. This is shown to show ben is a burden on David and that his voice is stereotypically used as humour and less of a serious issue since ben calls him “A potato with eye tentacles”. This phrase also could have a duel meaning suggesting that Ben is as incapable as a vegetable, a word people use to be demeaning towards people with a disability and therefore he can’t participate normally in daily life which is another stereotype. The way David treats ben can almost be described as sinister as he constantly saying derogatory things to Ben like how he yells at him for the Weetabix and explains in graphic detail how pigs are killed.
Ben’s mother and father treat him almost completely opposite to have David treats him. When Ben and David are having a dispute in the kitchen about the Weetabix the camera shot focuses on bens mother as she says “now that wasn’t very nice ben now was it” almost as it she was talking to a child. The shows that she is almost pitiful of ben and maybe feels bad for the way he turned out so she is more overprotective which is stereotypically how a abled bodied person would react in that scenario. Ben’s father acts slightly different as in he talks about ben like he isn’t even in the room. This is shown when Ben says “I need a poo” is a stereotypically humorous style and his dad tells David to go with him as he doesn’t want him to “make a mess like last time” whilst ben is still in the room. This shows that the father is ashamed as ben as to cope with the disappointment ignore the fact he exists. The phase the father said is also more evidence to show that Ben cannot do things normal people can do in daily life adding to the stereotype of a disabled person.
Student C
The non-diegetic sound in the film was a voice over from David (main character) and his thoughts about his younger brother Ben who has Down syndrome and considered a burden by David.in the beginning of the film we see a montage editing of evolution. David thinks that when mankind evolve disabled people have not yet managed to evolved David is deliberately unkind to Ben. There is tension between the two binary oppositions. In the kitchen scene where David and Ben are eating breakfast, shot reverse shot, close up and ark are used for effect during their conversation. Shot reverse shot is used when either David or Ben is talking. A close up shot of Ben is taken when he and his brother are arguing over the Weetabix and as he is fantasising about killing his brother. Flashbacks are also used when David is thinking about him and his families previous holidays. An extreme close up is taken later showing Ben in a more sympathetic light. This makes the audience feel sympathetic towards Ben. Towards the end diegetic sound of dialogue in the background when Ben is left alone find his own way back home, the slow and sad music is then lowered to gain more sympathy for Ben from the audience. David refers to Ben as an abnormal kid when he says “normal kids”. Throw editing, inter close up from David to Ben is used to show the expressions of the two characters. David’s face reflects pure hatred and anger towards his brother whereas Bens face portrays innocence as he sleeps peaceful in his bed. This interpretation is also reflexes of the structure and colour scheme of their room. Ben and David share rooms, birds eye view angle shows you a clear image of their room. On the left side of the room everything is colourful and bright. This could a reflection of Ben’s autistic mind and how he likes things to be. On the other hand, there is David’s side of the room. This half is very dull and gloomy; this also could represent David’s thoughts about his life. Ben is a stereotypical representation of a disabled person. This mother treats him as if he as a baby -or a small child- and talks down to him. In some ways David is a representation of teenager; he likes to go out with his friends and likes to go to parties. He also dresses like a regular teenager. However, you could argue that David is not a regular teenager. This is because he has to always look after his younger brother, making sure that he doesn’t get in trouble or gets lost or gets hurt.
Student D
Coming Down the Mountain opens with a birds-eye shot of the boys’ bedroom to emphasise the binary opposition with a split down the middle of the room; although this is explored in greater detail in terms of mise-en-scene, having the shot looking down on the boys immediately presents the viewer with an outsider’s view of their relationship, without a character’s viewpoint altering anything. We are shown immediately that there is an emotional rift between the two boys where the physical one might not be so evident, due to their dissimilar interests and the physical distance in their placements in the shot. This particular shot is also interesting in the sense that we are exposed to Ben’s face as he sleeps on his back, which is quite a vulnerable position to be in, and also exposes the physical aspect of his disability. David, however, as the representation of an able-bodied person, is upright, guarded, and therefore we can only see the top of his head. Here, we see helplessness in the disabled representation, whereas the able are more capable of reserving themselves and being in control of their actions. During David’s narration, there is a close up on Ben when he speaks about, “a potato with eye sockets”, which immediately shows that he is referring to his brother in such a way. Essentially, Ben is being described as a vegetable with eyes. This isn’t just a physical comparison, but also mental; he is presenting people with Downs syndrome as being oblivious, inhuman, and incapable. Comedic relief aside, he is telling the audience that his brother and people like him are so dependent on others that they cannot function by themselves, and are more akin to food than they are people. Frequent close up shots on David show hateful expressions in his face to contrast with Ben’s oblivious looks, which gives us insight from both perspectives. Ben is shown to be naïve, as he doesn’t notice that his brother doesn’t like him, or at least does nothing to retaliate; David, on the other hand, is hateful, unsympathetic to Ben’s vulnerability, and has no desire to help him. Here, we are shown a representation of disabled people as a burden, one whose impact leaves collateral damage in the lives of people around him. During the kitchen scene, the camera shows many extreme close ups on Ben’s face, which is uncomfortable for some viewers due to his physical disability. Ben is given a regular close up – perhaps this is to emphasise to the viewer how discomforting and affronting Ben’s presence is in David’s life. Alternatively, it could be a physical representation of the extreme attention the family seems to give to Ben, while David is relegated to the sidelines, and seen as immature for protesting against the favouritism. There are subtle differences in camera angles in the final scene, in which David leaves Ben to go home by himself. The camera is always slightly above Ben, dwarfing him. As a viewer, we are looking down on him, creating vulnerability compared to David, who the camera is slightly below eye level with – he looks taller, more powerful, and in control. Again, we are given a clear image of David’s superiority in the relationship as an able-bodied person. Ben, who depends on him, and is afraid to travel home by himself, is forced to submissively agree to the more able, and therefore more powerful, David.
The montage edit of prehistoric man and creatures in the beginning gives the impression that able-bodied people are the natural products of evolution, whereas the disabled are abnormal, as if they are nature’s flukes. Cuts between shots from Ben to David (and vice versa) show a severe contrast between two boys. For example, in the opening, a frowning, upright, thoughtful David cuts to a sleeping, innocent, childlike Ben – David is the one that plans to kill his brother, being intelligent enough to do so, whereas Ben, the disabled brother, has no power to stop the violence that is to be inflicted on him. It happens again in scene one, in which Ben stares dumbly at his Weetabix before he eats it, only to cut to David frowning in distaste and disgust, his face scrunched – this communicates that disability is strange and disgusting, and they are opposite to able-bodied people in every way. The increase in pace in the tense moment of David trying to snatch the Weetabix ends on a prolonged shot of Ben being shielded by Dad. It is noticeable here how David’s shots at the breakfast table tend to feature him alone, whereas the whole family are on Ben’s side of the kitchen, perhaps emphasising the family split.
David narrates throughout the extract to give an insight into David’s perspective on Ben. Here, we see the divide in the representation of able and disabled people. For instance, David’s description of “normal kids” in opposition to “kids like Ben” divides the two into separate groups. There is also the admission of, “I had to get some space” after David leaves Ben to go home by himself. Again, we are shown that the disabled character is suffocating the abled one, and becoming the very bane of his life, to the point that he will put him in danger just to have some relief. The jolly, diegetic music from radio after the opening immediately sets a domestic scene of a family in the kitchen together, listening to a radio, suggesting that there is a sense of normality to this family. However, the lyrics, “wouldn’t it be nice if we were older” seem to parallel with David’s feelings that, if he weren’t a teenager under the command of his parents, he’d have freedom from the burden of Ben. When David is telling lies about killing pigs, there is a muffled, diegetic police siren sound as the story comes to a climax. As well as linking into David’s illegal plot to kill his brother and his troublemaker representation, it creates a starker contrast to Ben’s innocence, which is further shown by the non-diegetic music drowning out the ambience when he is on bus later in the extract. Perhaps this suggests his disconnection with the world around him because of his disability, and how he struggles to keep up with or blend into society because of it.
In terms of mise-en-scene, the panning shot around David’s half of the bedroom reveals a poster of the rock band Bring Me the Horizon. Immediately, we are influenced by stereotypes to interpret that David is a problem child, as the sort of teenagers that listen to such music are often seen as parent-hating delinquents. On the contrary, Ben’s messy and colourful room can be perceived as childish, therefore suggesting a lack in mental development that makes him inferior to the able. In the aforementioned scene, Ben is wearing a patterned shirt for pyjamas, which makes him seem emotionally younger than David. The latter seems to have been sleeping without a shirt, perhaps portraying him as more mature and masculine than his boyish sibling. The actors’ skill also plays a part; Mum coddles Ben, and speaks to him patronisingly, as if to a baby. This representation reflects a mother’s need to show her children love, but also shows how the disabled can be mollycoddled too much, and treated as inferior just because they aren’t like ‘normal’ people. Her insistence on calling David selfish for wanting Ben to share the Weetabix furthers this representation, showing that she will spoil Ben to ‘make up for’ his disability, and will punish David for acting out against the unequal treatment. Even the way she bids Ben goodbye and kisses him on her way out of the house, but completely ignores David, emphasises how she treats her disabled child as fragile, but doesn’t have as much care for the emotions of her able son. Dad doesn’t seem to have as much of a bias, but refers to Ben as if he isn’t in the room, as if he’s subhuman and can’t understand people talking about him. Once again, the disabled are seen as lesser beings that cannot be communicated with in the same way as the able. The costume in final scene is cleverly chosen to symbolise different traits about the boys. Ben wears a white hoodie, the colour of purity and innocence. This continues to portray him as the golden child that can do no wrong, and weakens him in comparison to David. The latter wears all dark colours, and appears more rugged. Due to his ability, which Ben doesn’t have, he is seen as the less innocent of the two, and is literally perceived as the black sheep of the family due to his awareness that treating Ben the way his parents do is pointless and unfair.
Student D (use of terminology, relating it back to the extract and elaborating fully on points)
