Rudin, S. & Fox, R. (Producers), & Daldry, S. (Director), (2002). The Hours [Motion picture].
Available from Paramount Pictures (US) and Miramax Films (worldwide). 5555 Melrose Ave.,
Ste. 121 Hollywood, CA.
Based on the book by Michael Cunningham, the movie, The Hours, interweaved three individual storylines. The episodes which spanned over the course of a day in the lives of three women were framed in three different locations, and separated in time by approximately thirty and fifty years.
Episodes of the second and third stories evolved as Virginia Woolf (played by Nicole Kidman) penned the novel, Mrs. Dalloway, while going through throes of depression and mental illness. The time was 1923 and the place, Richmond, England. The second story, Laura Brown’s story, I thought, was the most important of the three because it connected the other two stories across time. It began in 1951 in Los Angeles where Laura, seemingly, “doted” over her husband (played by John C. Reilly) and their eight-year old son (played by Jack Rovello). The third story, Clarissa Vaughan’s story, took place in New York in 2001. Her days centered on taking care of her dear friend and ex-lover, Richard, a brilliant poet, who was dying from AIDS. The rest of her storyline seemed useless as there was no life to it except for the planning of the party to celebrate Richard’s literary success. In the end, it gained some momentum. The three stories were intricately woven. The episodes were connected through symbolism by the use of flowers, time of day, and by the antagonists’ actions; for example, stopping for a moment to mull.
In the beginning of the movie the producer employed the elements of music, photos, and water to set a dark tone. The crescendo of notes heightened dramatic expectations, the facial expressions of the women in the photos shifted from cheerful to depressing indicating the changing moods within the themes, and the water, which seemed to consume the opening frame, told its own story. Water gives life and takes life. In this case, it took Virginia’s life. The movie paralleled her real life demise in 1941 as she filled her pockets with stones and walked into the river where she drowned. Feelings of unhappiness and death were evident from the start of the movie to the end. There were no truly happy moments except for Clarissa’s excitement in bringing together the party for Richard (played by Ed Harris).
The movie progressed slowly as the producer juxtaposed scenes from each of the stories. For instance, as Virginia wrote the novel, Mrs. Dollaway, Laura Brown (played by Julianne Moore) read it, and Clarissa Vaughn (played by Meryl Streep) mirrored herself in the character of Mrs. Dollaway. As they unfurled, the storylines went back and forth capturing the “dead” emotions of the women. Woolf’s life was set in an emotionless marriage which compounded her illness. Laura was emotionally dying in her role as wife and mother, and Clarissa was trapped in what seemed to be a lack-luster existence. Although it was known that Virginia preferred women to men, it was confusing to fully understand from where these women’s sadness stemmed. Then, there were those moments of “lip-locking” that were forced upon Virginia’s sister and Laura’s neighbor. What was interesting about those scenes was the fact that the receiving women seemed not to be distressed by their aggressors’ actions. Were they all just women in bad marriages who needed external excitement or were they truly suffering because of their sexual orientation? From a heterosexual point-of-view, it could be interpreted as sadness – a lack of freedom to do what they wanted, because, in those days, women’s roles were that of wife and mother. From a lesbian point-of-view these women’s sadness could be identified with a feeling of being trapped in marriages that could not satisfy their sexual and emotional needs.
Another episode that spurred thought were the roles of the children. In Virginia’s world the children were nameless except, on that one occasion, when Laura’s neighbor (played by Toni Collette) came over to ask her to feed the dog while she was away in the hospital. A second occasion cropped up when Virginia’s sister was leaving to return home. Virginia, in saying goodbye, referred to her niece as “little girl”.
Daldry’s use of symbolism was magnificently executed as it linked events across time. This was demonstrated when Laura’s son built a house void of furniture, and then smashed the log cabin as a symbol of the empty, non-existent homely climate within which he lived. Another symbolism was tied in with the death and burial of the bird. Virginia lay next to it staring into its black eyes as if engrossing herself in the experience of death and peace. This symbolism could also have been interpreted in light of Virginia, Laura and Richard’s dead emotions and lack of will to continue living.
The movie gained some momentum when Richard threw himself out of his loft’s window. Clarissa was devastated. Richard’s mother, Laura Brown, entered Clarissa’s story in modern-day New York about fifty years later. The eight-year old boy’s role, finally, found its place in the story. Her explanation for leaving the marriage when Richard was just a boy closed a chapter in Clarissa’s life. Laura’s words were, “It was death, and I chose life.” She closed with, “…no one could understand so I will not be forgiven.” This statement, for me, confirmed her sexual orientation. In those earlier years it was not as easy “coming out” as it was for her son, Richard, in modern-day New York.
There were many instances in conversations that exploded with the concept of dying in one sense and finding life again in another. Almost everyone in the movie wanted to be free but was trapped in their circumstances. Richard’s former male partner remarked that, “The day I left him [Richard] I felt free for the first time.” Richard often said to Clarissa, “I am only staying alive to satisfy you.” Then one day he could hold on to “the hours” no more. The movie ended where it started with Woolf’s suicide. Everyone was set free.
The movie was well-performed. It brought together the three stories in a way that was easy to follow through symbolism and shifts in time. Nicole Kidman, Julianne Moore, and Meryl Streep were brilliant in their portrayals. I think The Hours is about women seeking an escape from what seems like a lifetime of entrapment. The Hours is a movie for both women and men. I say this because men who are interested in gaining a better understanding of women can identify with the agony and sadness that some women experience in marriage.
Monday, November 24, 2008
Tuesday, October 7, 2008
Low-SES dropouts
Dianne Sandiford
Edge 6101
Suh, S., Suh, J., & Houston I. (2007). Predictors of categorical at-risk high school dropouts.
Journal of Counseling and Development, 85, 196-203.
Introduction
In the article, Predictors of Categorical At-Risk High School Dropouts, the authors, Suh, Suh, and Houston, conducted a study to find out why students were choosing to drop out of high school instead of graduating. The purpose of the study was to “identify and compare” the different factors responsible for this particular behavior among each of three specific at-risk groups: students of low-socioeconomic status (SES), poor academic achievers, and students frequently suspended from school.
This research and others like it are important because “dropping out” is like an epidemic in the high school population. According to Suh, Suh, & Houston (2007), previous researchers have mulled over the reasoning behind students’ actions and, in so doing, some have focused on academics, behavioral, and attitudinal problems (as cited in Janosz, Blanc, Boulerice, & Tremblay, 2000). However, the authors of this study have viewed the problem through different lenses; they have studied “dropping out” from a different angle. They are going at it from the students’ background and environment. This particular study will fit into previous, present and future researches because it will add new insight to what is already there and put forth reasoning from another perspective for those who have greater vision.
Summary of Method
In their research, the authors used three approaches. First, they looked at the grade point average (GPA) of the suspended and the low-SES students. Second, they looked at different and common factors between the at-risk and not-at risk students. Lastly, they compared the different triggers that culminated in the behavior or mindset of students within each of the three groups. The authors examined about twenty variables to determine which one (s) were responsible. In addition, the authors were cognizant that the period surrounding age 15/grade 8 posed challenges and kept that in mind as they conducted their study. The variables chosen were representative of experiences within the family, in school, with self, and behavioral, and were independently measured. Results were consistent with the findings of other studies done.
Results
Results indicated that one, variables, when measured independently, showed that students at an early age or early in their educational development had entertained the notion of dropping out as an alternative for their lack of coping skills; two, variables were inter-related; and three, that a combination of any of these variables were responsible for student dropouts from any of the three at-risk groups. The foremost conclusion was the need for “multi-faceted” intervention. Findings were consistent with previous researches mentioned earlier in the article. Issues surrounding family, school, and self were major players in students’ decisions to drop out of school. As cited in Chavez, Belkin, Hornback, & Adams, 1991, “Variables that influence school dropout appear to come from various domains, such as, individual, family, and school” Suh, Suh, Houston 2007 (p. 196).
Conclusion
From all that was presented in the study, the findings seemed to justify what was previously presumed. More concentrated thought or vision by the authors towards the problem has urged them to suggest more in-depth interventions that would address the other variables plaguing low-SES at-risk students. For instance, low GPA, a variable of interest, was not the sole independent variable that caused the student’s educational downfall. Factors, such as lateness, absenteeism, threats, fights, behavioral and emotional problems, movement from school to school, optimism about the future, suspension, mother’s permissiveness, low SES and not having money to buy school supplies, level of educational attainment of mother or other family members, peers and their outlook on the need/lack of interest for education, and becoming sexually active too early, all could have contributed to the low grade point average (GPA). Sex was another predictor that the authors singled out. It was a by-product of other factors like behavioral and emotional problems, not being able to communicate with family and, thus, sharing personal problems and seeking advice from inexperienced school friends, lack of optimism about the future, and mother’s permissiveness. Extra reading on the topic brought me upon a couple other studies with similar results which I will briefly describe below. The first is a study in which students shared their thoughts, and the second, another study that was done from yet another but similar perspective.
Contributions
These other researches confirm similar findings. The article, Why Students Drop Out, by Amy M. Azzam, was a study by Civic Enterprises for Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. This was a study in which the dropouts shared their thoughts and feelings to the questions of why they chose to drop out of school. Azzam (2007) in her abstract stated the top five reasons given by the dropouts. They dropped out because they were bored, unable to catch up due to missed days, influenced by others who were not interested in school, felt rejected because no one cared enough to set rules to their lives, and failed academically.
The other study in the article, Differential Developmental Pathways of High School Dropouts and Graduates, by Hickman, Bartholomew, and Mathwig posed two research questions. They wanted to know if students who dropped out were wired differently to those who did not drop out, and if they did, at what developmental stage did it happen and how did it show itself. Like others studies they looked at GPA, absenteeism, family and demographics. Except for the second study’s extra findings, both studies paralleled themselves with that of the findings for the study by Suh, Suh, & Houston. From my own experience in teaching I have encountered situations where, because of low-SES, students are affected by variables that interfere with their academic performance and which, if not addressed in its early stages, would have resulted in their dropping out of school.
Summary
To an adult educator, these researches/studies are important because they provide information that could assist in understanding the mindset of the individuals they might encounter; and two, knowing how to construct a curriculum to meet their needs. Overall, the study was relevant to my particular field of study. The strength of the study was the manner in which it was carried out. The procedures were presented in a clear logical manner that could easily be followed. The weakness was in the presentation of the statistical data. It required someone versed in such matters to interpret and understand the data listed. Other than that, the research and findings seemed valid and the authors’ suggestions for delivering comprehensive interventions are worth heeding in order to put a halt to this alternative plan of students.
References
Azzam, A. M. (2007). Why students drop out. Educational Leadership, 64 (7), 91-93.
Retrieved September 29, 2008 from
http://web.ebscohost.com.avoserv.library.fordham.edu/ehost/
Hickman, G. P., Bartholomew, M., & Mathwig, J. (2008). Differential developmental pathways
of high school dropouts and graduates. The Journal of Educational Research 102 (1), 3-13.
Retrieved September 21, 2008 from
http://web.ebscohost.com.avoserv.library.fordham.edu/ehost/
Suh, S., Suh, J., & Houston I. (2007). Predictors of categorical at-risk high school dropouts.
Journal of Counseling and Development, 85, 196-203. Retrieved September 21, 2008 from
http://web.ebscohost.com.avoserv.library.fordham.edu/ehost/
Edge 6101
Suh, S., Suh, J., & Houston I. (2007). Predictors of categorical at-risk high school dropouts.
Journal of Counseling and Development, 85, 196-203.
Introduction
In the article, Predictors of Categorical At-Risk High School Dropouts, the authors, Suh, Suh, and Houston, conducted a study to find out why students were choosing to drop out of high school instead of graduating. The purpose of the study was to “identify and compare” the different factors responsible for this particular behavior among each of three specific at-risk groups: students of low-socioeconomic status (SES), poor academic achievers, and students frequently suspended from school.
This research and others like it are important because “dropping out” is like an epidemic in the high school population. According to Suh, Suh, & Houston (2007), previous researchers have mulled over the reasoning behind students’ actions and, in so doing, some have focused on academics, behavioral, and attitudinal problems (as cited in Janosz, Blanc, Boulerice, & Tremblay, 2000). However, the authors of this study have viewed the problem through different lenses; they have studied “dropping out” from a different angle. They are going at it from the students’ background and environment. This particular study will fit into previous, present and future researches because it will add new insight to what is already there and put forth reasoning from another perspective for those who have greater vision.
Summary of Method
In their research, the authors used three approaches. First, they looked at the grade point average (GPA) of the suspended and the low-SES students. Second, they looked at different and common factors between the at-risk and not-at risk students. Lastly, they compared the different triggers that culminated in the behavior or mindset of students within each of the three groups. The authors examined about twenty variables to determine which one (s) were responsible. In addition, the authors were cognizant that the period surrounding age 15/grade 8 posed challenges and kept that in mind as they conducted their study. The variables chosen were representative of experiences within the family, in school, with self, and behavioral, and were independently measured. Results were consistent with the findings of other studies done.
Results
Results indicated that one, variables, when measured independently, showed that students at an early age or early in their educational development had entertained the notion of dropping out as an alternative for their lack of coping skills; two, variables were inter-related; and three, that a combination of any of these variables were responsible for student dropouts from any of the three at-risk groups. The foremost conclusion was the need for “multi-faceted” intervention. Findings were consistent with previous researches mentioned earlier in the article. Issues surrounding family, school, and self were major players in students’ decisions to drop out of school. As cited in Chavez, Belkin, Hornback, & Adams, 1991, “Variables that influence school dropout appear to come from various domains, such as, individual, family, and school” Suh, Suh, Houston 2007 (p. 196).
Conclusion
From all that was presented in the study, the findings seemed to justify what was previously presumed. More concentrated thought or vision by the authors towards the problem has urged them to suggest more in-depth interventions that would address the other variables plaguing low-SES at-risk students. For instance, low GPA, a variable of interest, was not the sole independent variable that caused the student’s educational downfall. Factors, such as lateness, absenteeism, threats, fights, behavioral and emotional problems, movement from school to school, optimism about the future, suspension, mother’s permissiveness, low SES and not having money to buy school supplies, level of educational attainment of mother or other family members, peers and their outlook on the need/lack of interest for education, and becoming sexually active too early, all could have contributed to the low grade point average (GPA). Sex was another predictor that the authors singled out. It was a by-product of other factors like behavioral and emotional problems, not being able to communicate with family and, thus, sharing personal problems and seeking advice from inexperienced school friends, lack of optimism about the future, and mother’s permissiveness. Extra reading on the topic brought me upon a couple other studies with similar results which I will briefly describe below. The first is a study in which students shared their thoughts, and the second, another study that was done from yet another but similar perspective.
Contributions
These other researches confirm similar findings. The article, Why Students Drop Out, by Amy M. Azzam, was a study by Civic Enterprises for Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. This was a study in which the dropouts shared their thoughts and feelings to the questions of why they chose to drop out of school. Azzam (2007) in her abstract stated the top five reasons given by the dropouts. They dropped out because they were bored, unable to catch up due to missed days, influenced by others who were not interested in school, felt rejected because no one cared enough to set rules to their lives, and failed academically.
The other study in the article, Differential Developmental Pathways of High School Dropouts and Graduates, by Hickman, Bartholomew, and Mathwig posed two research questions. They wanted to know if students who dropped out were wired differently to those who did not drop out, and if they did, at what developmental stage did it happen and how did it show itself. Like others studies they looked at GPA, absenteeism, family and demographics. Except for the second study’s extra findings, both studies paralleled themselves with that of the findings for the study by Suh, Suh, & Houston. From my own experience in teaching I have encountered situations where, because of low-SES, students are affected by variables that interfere with their academic performance and which, if not addressed in its early stages, would have resulted in their dropping out of school.
Summary
To an adult educator, these researches/studies are important because they provide information that could assist in understanding the mindset of the individuals they might encounter; and two, knowing how to construct a curriculum to meet their needs. Overall, the study was relevant to my particular field of study. The strength of the study was the manner in which it was carried out. The procedures were presented in a clear logical manner that could easily be followed. The weakness was in the presentation of the statistical data. It required someone versed in such matters to interpret and understand the data listed. Other than that, the research and findings seemed valid and the authors’ suggestions for delivering comprehensive interventions are worth heeding in order to put a halt to this alternative plan of students.
References
Azzam, A. M. (2007). Why students drop out. Educational Leadership, 64 (7), 91-93.
Retrieved September 29, 2008 from
http://web.ebscohost.com.avoserv.library.fordham.edu/ehost/
Hickman, G. P., Bartholomew, M., & Mathwig, J. (2008). Differential developmental pathways
of high school dropouts and graduates. The Journal of Educational Research 102 (1), 3-13.
Retrieved September 21, 2008 from
http://web.ebscohost.com.avoserv.library.fordham.edu/ehost/
Suh, S., Suh, J., & Houston I. (2007). Predictors of categorical at-risk high school dropouts.
Journal of Counseling and Development, 85, 196-203. Retrieved September 21, 2008 from
http://web.ebscohost.com.avoserv.library.fordham.edu/ehost/
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)