Proposal 2

Research topic: Stereotypes

Background:

Living in the city is a big commitment and comes with a big price as well. Being KLites we are pressured to look prim and proper in another words dazzled in all designer brands. This happen to me once while i was walking into a store at a very posh place only to find out that nobody took the acknowledge of my existence as though i was invisible. But what i realize was they tended very well to those datins and datuks who walk in. So i can back the next day all dressed up in whatever expensive i could find in my closet and went back to the same store, to my surprise i was treated like royalty! I had a sense that this was all a marketing strategy to approach those who can buy their products rather than a girl dressed in shirt, jeans and flip-flops.

Problem identification:

What is the impact of someone passing judgments base on how they look?

Aim and objectives:

Do people still pass judgments of status when someone dresses a certain way? people from which status level actually pass judgments like this?

Motivation:

The reaction that i get from past experience.

Ideation and concept:

Interview on a group of people to get to know abit more about themselves and finalize selected ones to be a part of my project.

Review, Analysis and precedence studies:

The Cultural Frame is about the values of the culture in which the work of art was created. Culture can be understood as ideas that are held by different groups of people. Through this frame we look at how artists are influenced by ideas of nationality, religion, gender, class, art movements, fashion and politics. Don’t just think about culture as a person’s background –  think about aboutculture as a group of people who share the same values or beliefs. If we view an artwork from a cultural point of view, we are looking at the shared values, attitudes or ideas behind the artwork –

http://hoststudyguide7.wordpress.com/category/uncategorized/

Racial/ Cultural  Stereotyping

“Stereotype: A fixed, commonly held notion or image of a person or group, based on an oversimplification of some observed or imagined trait of behavior or appearance.”

Societal stereotypes of Women within the two most ancient civilizations of the world, the Middle East and Asian (Chinese) cultures, have long been glorified, mystified, and many times fetishized within the eyes of the West, frequently viewed through a negative lens as cultures of the oppressed. Often times, these views neglect the core of the dominant women herself, behind the façade of the simple surface of the skin, or in the cloud of media and historical predications that draw upon the growing feminist opportunities within both societies. This design proposal raises questions that challenges, enlightens, and probes deeper into the developing theories of women within these ancient societies of the world—looking past the visuals and past the auxiliary layers of the veil (societal / physical).

Utilizing visual-stills and aural-recordings, the installation will exhibit a pool of carefully sampled female individuals from both (Middle-Eastern and Chinese) societies of who volunteers their photographs and experiences to be recorded as part of this exhibition. The design proposal is to provide the visitor to the installation the sole opportunity to view a still-image which portrays one of many interviewed female ‘stereotypes’, while along the side of the photograph, be able to individually listen to their views of themselves, their experiences, their backgrounds, and their perspectives of their world around them.

This installation will fully engaged on many levels the visual and aural indifferences which foster to be better understand the international stereotypes of both Middle Eastern and Asian (Chinese) cultures. Embedded within the cultural comparisons will be carefully documented and transcribed interviews of three different generations from each culture. Each audio documentation will be between 15-20 minutes long, interviewed in the native languages (Chinese/Arabic) and translated into English. The photographic representation will be of a full frontal shot of the interviewed female characters, and be represented in a neutral background.

The installation will explore transverse a level of photographic and audio Installation Art, and past the generic stereotype that diminishes the value of human understanding, and to broaden a mutual cultural tolerance into the international and globalised world. – http://www.tumblr.com/tagged/wendy-w-fok

 

 

Looks Discrimination

Lookism is a term used to refer to the positive stereotypes, prejudice, and preferential treatment given to physically attractive people, or more generally to people whose appearance matches cultural preferences. Physical attractiveness is associated with good things, such as beautiful princesses, and physically unattractiveness is associated with negative things, such as wicked witches. Based on physical appearance, many people make automatic judgments of others that influence how they respond to those people.

Research on the “What is beautiful is good” stereotype shows that, overall, those who are physically attractive benefit from their good looks. Researchers found that physically attractive individuals are perceived more positively and that physical attractiveness has a strong influence on judgements of a person’s competence.] In return, physically attractive people benefit from these stereotypical beliefs. Research shows that on average, physically attractive individuals have more friends, better social skills, and more active sex lives. However, attractiveness does not have any effect on the level of happiness experienced by the individual. –

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lookism

Discriminating against people based on physical attractiveness is thoughtless and shallow, but the ugly truth is attractive people earn more and are treated better than their plainer counterparts. They even get credit for positive characteristics they don’t deserve.

In 1994, Drs. Jeff Biddle and Daniel Hamermesh analyzed surveys conducted by government agencies in Canada and the United States. The surveys asked questions regarding income, occupation, and background, and then applied ratings for interviewee attractiveness (1-homely, 2- below average, 3-average, 4-above average, 5-handsome/beautiful).

The study showed that working men rated “homely” or “below average” in attractiveness earned 9% percent less than average. But men who rated “above average” or “handsome” earned 5% more than the average. Women were also rewarded and penalized for their looks, but at a gentler rate. The most attractive women earned only 4 % more than average, while the least attractive women earned only 5% less than average. Biddle and Hamermesh concluded that “there is a significant penalty for bad looks among men.”

Additionally, research pioneered by Dion, Berscheid and Walster on attractiveness identified a “Halo Effect” that follows attractive people. In this study, participants were asked to rate photographs of three individuals, on a scale of low, medium or high attractiveness. Then subjects were asked to rank other, totally unrelated aspects of the people in the photos. Based on nothing more than photographs, subjects said the more attractive individuals had better personalities, better jobs, were better spouses, were more socially and professionally happy, and married earlier. In fact, the only category where attractive people didn’t come out on top was the question of who would make better parents.

According to Dr. Mona Phillips at Spelman College in Atlanta, “…people assume that if someone is attractive, then they have other good qualities. It’s a clustering of good attributes that are assumed based on one’s appearance. For example, ‘attractive’ people are smarter and the people who are ‘unattractive’ by society’s standards are dumb. Therefore a clustering of their personal attributes gets connected to physical ‘attractiveness’ or ‘unattractiveness.” –

http://listverse.com/2011/09/24/top-10-subtler-forms-of-discrimination/

 

Class Discrimination

Classism is prejudice or discrimination on the basis of social class. It includes individual attitudes and behaviors, systems of policies and practices that are set up to benefit the upper classes at the expense of the lower classes. It can also include attitudes and behavior of prejudice and discrimination by members of the lower class to members of the higher class.

The term classism can refer to personal prejudice against ‘lower’ classes as well as to institutional classism, just as the term racism can refer either strictly to personal bigotry or to institutional racism. The former has been defined as “the ways in which conscious or unconscious classism is manifest in the various institutions of our society.” Economics, education, health outcomes, fashion, capitalism and music are inherently designed to favor people who have more money/wealth over those who do not have money or wealth. –

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Class_discrimination

 

Design approach:

Interactive installation – Flip board of images of a group of people where audience have to guess who they are, what is they occupation.

Hanging installation – hanging portrait of ordinary people with flip side containing quote from them of what they do in life; occupation, kids, age, where they live.

Installation, application – an image each person dress according to their cultural and beliefs emits sound/ voice once of what they think society see them as.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: