Magic Wardrobes, Clandestine Train Platforms, and Open Doors

Storytelling: Its Beauty and Necessity

In this inspirationally delightful Ted Talk, Mac Barnett, who writes children's books, discusses the power of storytelling, the importance of imagination, and their ability to harness the truth amidst a melange of lies. In particular, Barnett explores the power of fiction in the lives of children and its capacity to foster creativity and imagination within these children. It is his belief that stories, books, novels, and tales are wide open doors to whole other worlds of non-reality. A belief with which I completely agree. Stories are the vehicles with which we travel through time, space, and reality to discover ourselves and the world which surrounds us. This is why, as Barnett states, "[kids] deserve the best stories we can give them."

Through this discussion, Barnett attempts to convince the audience of the importance of giving children fiction. He does so first by establishing his credibility. He begins the talk with an interesting anecdote derived from his adolescence, when during his summers off from college he was a camp counselor for four to six year olds. During break time, the children he supervised gathered around beneath the shade of a tree and he began telling them stories. In one such story, Barnett convinced the children that he was a spy for the Queen of England. In another story, he told a little girl that when she threw her uneaten fruit from lunch into the bushes, melons would grow amongst the ivy. Barnett is also a writer of children's books, which he uses to establish his reliability and devotion to this concept. 

And yet, the ethos does not stop there. Barnett quotes Pablo Picasso, "We all know that art is not truth. Art is a lie that makes us realize truth or at least the truth that is given us to understand. The artist must know the manner whereby to convince others of the truthfulness of his lies." He uses this quote, this ethos, to explore the area between lies and truth, an area that he calls wonder, wonder which is defined by Coleridge as "the willing suspension of disbelief or poetic faith." In addition,

Barnett's first job beyond college was with a non-profit publishing company in San Francisco called McSweeney's. Beyond McSweeney's, Barnett opened and managed another company dedicated to teaching children how to read, write, and explore a boundless, borderless land of creativity. Therefore, he knows the power of fiction in the lives of children, and has devoted his life to teaching creativity. 

All of the above examples of ethos are confounded with drops of pathos because of their pertinence with children; however, Barnett's last example is flooded with pathos and only a little bit confounded with ethos. To do this, Barnett first considers metafiction. Metafiction breaks down the fourth wall. It is when the stories begin to tell the stories. The authors of metafiction attempt to install reality into fiction in this way. However, Barnett does the opposite. In any way he can, he tries to bring more of the fiction into reality. One prominent example of this includes a blue whale. Barnett's first published

book is called Billy Twitters and his Blue Whale Problem. In this book, Billy receives a blue whale as a pet, but as a punishment, and now struggles with taking care of this whale. Within the jacket of the book is an advertisement for a 30-day, risk-free trial for a blue whale. And when children order their very own whale they receive a phone number and can call their whale. Barnett plays a few messages between a child named Nico and his whale, Randolph. Barnett uses these adorable voicemails in order to appeal to the audience emotionally and to emphasize Randolph's importance in Nico's life. Barnett gave Nico Randolph, and in doing so, a best friend. 

So, why did I choose this talk? In all honesty, I can relate to every storytelling talk that Ted produces. I love books and I love stories because I truly believe in their priceless power. And yet, I chose Mac Barnett's discussion because I specifically agree with his idea: a good book is absolutely an open door. There is so much more to be discovered through fiction than there is in nonfiction. I understand that it is important to understand the past and the people in it, but it is fiction that looks towards the future. We live in reality every single day, so what is the point of sitting down with a good, nonfiction book that only further recounts reality? No. A good, fictional, fantastical book is our escape from the drag that is reality, and the creative freedom an author has is limitless. Anything is possible within fiction. I learned this when I was a kid, and now, with that belief in my back pocket, I am prepared to try anything, to be anything. Fiction is not a pointless illusion. It is an extraordinary adventure.

I HIGHLY recommend this talk. It was amazing! 

Double Indemnity and Women in the 40s

5. How is Barbara Stanwyck’s character portrayed in this film? What type of angles is she shot in? What type of lighting surrounds her? Is she a good, likeable, moral person? How does she interact with and treat Fred MacMurray’s character? What does this tell you about the way that women were viewed in the 1940s?


Phyllis Dietrichson is the deceitful, diabolical Lady Macbeth of the 1940s. In the film Double Indemnity, Barbara Stanwyck plays Phyllis Dietrichson, a young woman married to a stuck up, unappreciative man. One day she meets Walter Neff, played by Fred MacMurray, who is an aspirational insurance salesman looking to convince the Dietrichsons to purchase automobile insurance. Innocent negotiations ensue between Phyllis and Walter, but the discussion quickly takes a sinister and flirtatious turn. Before you know it, a plot to murder Mr. Dietrichson and to collect indemnity compensation is born.

Barbara Stanwyck's character is portrayed, at first, as an innocently unsatisfied wife that is tired of her husband's complaining. Phyllis and Walter are romantically drawn to each other immediately. The first time she steps down the stairs to meet Walter, the camera dramatically and suggestively focuses on her legs. Before coming down to meet Walter, Phyllis greets him from upstairs wearing only a towel. At this point in the film, Phyllis is not necessarily likeable, as she is obviously flirting with Walter despite being married, but she is also not quite maniacal just yet. She originally treats Walter with enticing suspicion and curiosity as the seeds of her transgressions are being planted. Through this manipulation, it can be seen that women in the 1940s were viewed as untrustworthy, conniving creatures that should be kept under watchful guard.

      

Towards the end of the film, after Walter and Phyllis have murdered Mr. Dietrichson and they have attempted to get away with it, Walter goes to visit Phyllis at her home late at night. He admits to her that he has set her and another man up to take the punishment for his crime. She, in turn, admits that she doesn't love him, has never loved anyone, and only used him to kill her husband so that she could run with all the money. In this scene, Walter enters and finds her relaxed and nonchalantly smoking in an armchair even though they risk discovery. This can be interpreted as women being portrayed in the 40s as heartless, indifferent people with no concern for anyones safety but their own. This view is then fortified when Phyllis shoots Walter. So, Phyllis is not a moral or likeable character and this is so that the mistrust of women in the 40s is demonstrated.