<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Chaston Kome &#8211; The Hilltop Monitor</title>
	<atom:link href="https://hilltopmonitor.jewell.edu/author/komec/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://hilltopmonitor.jewell.edu</link>
	<description>The Official Student Publication of William Jewell College</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 26 Jun 2023 15:46:14 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	

 
	<item>
		<title>Chaston Kome on Hayao Miyazaki’s feminism</title>
		<link>https://hilltopmonitor.jewell.edu/chaston-kome-on-hayao-miyazakis-feminism/</link>
					<comments>https://hilltopmonitor.jewell.edu/chaston-kome-on-hayao-miyazakis-feminism/#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Chaston Kome]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 08 May 2015 13:00:49 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Arts & Culture]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[chaston kome]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[feminism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[film]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[guest writer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hayao miyazaki]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[lifestyle]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[opinion]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://hilltopmonitor.jewell.edu/?p=3227</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Hayao Miyazaki, Academy Award winning director of critically acclaimed animated films such as &#8220;Spirited Away&#8221; and &#8220;Howl&#8217;s Moving Castle,&#8221; excels in storytelling and crafting believable,&#8230; ]]></description>
										<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p class="td-sub-title">Hayao Miyazaki, Academy Award winning director of critically acclaimed animated films such as &#8220;Spirited Away&#8221; and &#8220;Howl&#8217;s Moving Castle,&#8221; excels in storytelling and crafting believable, compelling female characters.</p>
<div class="td-post-text-content">
<p>Over the past few years, feminism has gained an increased role in the national consciousness, and with that, there has been more discussion of how women are portrayed in film and other media. Much of the discussion has involved highlighting the fact that women are often portrayed as objects of the male gaze and/or devoid of depth, often there simply to legitimize the sexuality of the male protagonist (think “Transformers”). An easily identifiable example of implicit sexism in movies is how protagonists are depicted to be deep in thought: men by exercising or running, women by taking all their clothes off and showering. On the other side of the coin, attempts to counter passive female roles with&nbsp;<a href="http://www.newstatesman.com/culture/2013/08/i-hate-strong-female-characters">strong female protagonists</a>&nbsp;-the truly awful “Colombiana<em>”&nbsp;</em>starring Zoe Saldana comes to mind- simply show the limits of American writers in depicting women in film as just “badass” and nothing more.</p>
<p>A filmmaker who has not struggled with depicting females in film is the lamentably retired Japanese animator Hayao Miyazaki. I believe the main reason he has been so successful in depicting female characters is that he is telling great stories, and great stories do not depend on sex. “Kiki’s Delivery Service<em>“</em>&nbsp;and the critically-acclaimed “Spirited Away<em>”&nbsp;</em>have young female protagonists who are used to tell stories about their experiences with the transition into adulthood. Kiki and Chihiro/Sen are not passive, doting, cloying characters waiting to be swept off their feet by a male hero, nor are they shallow, ass-kicking, gun-toting sociopaths. They are, at various times, in various situations: passive, aggressive, sensible, naïve, caring, careless, assertive, scared, heroic and ultimately human. And while most of Miyazaki’s stories contain a leading or supporting male character who may become an object of our female protagonists interest, Miyazaki’s heroes are not defined by their male co-stars. “Howl’s Moving Castle<em>“</em>&nbsp;involves the powerful, mysterious, eponymous male who becomes the object of Sophie’s attraction, but at that point, the power does not cede to Howl. Sophie has her own agenda, accomplishes most things on her own and, in the end, saves Howl. Yet again, the movie benefits not because it sells some sort of perspective or agenda (I’m looking at you, “Wall-E”), but because it tells a good, universally-relatable story and relies on a strong premise and relatable, believable characters to tell it. I have to admit I am writing from a specific perspective of enjoying art most when there are themes of environmentalism, pacifism and feminism, but not when these become hammer-on-the-nose or very hyped messages. What Miyazaki succeeds in is telling a beautiful story with a protagonist who is relatable&nbsp;<em>as a human</em>, and that American concerns of sexual desirability and male legitimization do not come into play.</p>
<p>The topic of this editorial&nbsp;arose after I had been discussing Miyazaki’s films and proceeded to ask myself, “Is Miyazaki a feminist?” That the answer was not obviously “Yes!” to me is a symptom of the poor state of American cinema when it comes to portraying effective female characters, in the sense that it has, for the most part, seemed to be outside the wheelhouse of most American studios. What I am arguing is that we should not be going out of our way to write meaningful female characters because meaningful female characters&nbsp;<em>should not be out of our way</em>. Back-patting ourselves for writing a female character with a modicum of nuance is insulting to women, making it seem as though complex, relatable female characters are highly impossible to include when telling a compelling story.</p>
<p>Until recently, it was thought that males would never read or watch stories with female heroes;”The Hunger Games<em>“</em>&nbsp;series undermined that assumption to a good extent. Miyazaki’s protagonists are humanly relatable, regardless of the viewer’s sex, as they struggle with feelings of powerlessness and uncertainty that come with being a young adult. Ideally, Miyazaki’s films are what the portrayal of women will look like in the future. Perhaps this is unfair to other writers and directors, like asking all artists to paint as beautifully as da Vinci. But as a member of the American audience, it certainly is not unjust and not too much to enjoy compelling female protagonists. I hope this can inspire others to re-examine how women are portrayed in most American movies and seek out stories by directors, such as the great Hayao Miyazaki, that tell amazing stories by humanizing their characters.</p>
</div>
<footer>
<div class="td-social-sharing">
<div class="td-tags-and-social-wrapper-box ">
<p>&nbsp;</p>
</div>
</div>
</footer>
]]></content:encoded>
					
					<wfw:commentRss>https://hilltopmonitor.jewell.edu/chaston-kome-on-hayao-miyazakis-feminism/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>Hilltop Voices: Chaston Kome</title>
		<link>https://hilltopmonitor.jewell.edu/hilltop-voices-chaston-kome/</link>
					<comments>https://hilltopmonitor.jewell.edu/hilltop-voices-chaston-kome/#respond</comments>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Chaston Kome]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 12 Sep 2014 15:00:05 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Features]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Jewell Spotlights]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[beyond the hill]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hilltop voices]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://hilltopmonitor.jewell.edu/?p=2958</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[There is nothing wrong with being proud of where you’re from. Pride in one’s roots, the histories that come from there, the unique cultural dispositions&#8230; ]]></description>
										<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There is nothing wrong with being proud of where you’re from. Pride in one’s roots, the histories that come from there, the unique cultural dispositions that emerge, these are things to enjoy. More often than not, I am very proud to consider myself a Midwesterner, so the last thing I would want to do is to delimit the manner and breadth of anyone’s pride. But there is an all too prevalent and accepted display that has no place in society, and, if anything, ought to be an object of shame and embarrassment: that the Confederate flag is still displayed publicly in the United States, from the front of the state capitol in Columbia, S.C. to houses here in Liberty, Mo. Nothing in this article is intended to be a diatribe against Southerners or the South. This article is, which I never imagined I would have to write in 2014, is a diatribe against slavery and against forgetting.</p>
<p>That the Confederate flag has been re-purposed as a symbol of Southern or rebel pride is historical amnesia at its worst. The Confederate flag is the banner of a confederacy of states that decided that the enslavement of fellow human beings was worth the bloody disintegration of a nation in civil war. A desire to explain the Civil War in terms of “states’ rights” is to try to change the subject from the great guilt that America should feel over its history of slavery. Ariel Castro received a sentence of 1,000 years without parole for the kidnapping and repeated rape of three girls. How guilty is the United States for 250 years of slavery, with a population of roughly 4 million slaves prior to the start of the Civil War? This is not a crime exclusive to the South; the whole United States bears the guilt.</p>
<p>Thomas Jefferson, in a letter discussing the statehood of Missouri, remarks in regard to slavery that “we have the wolf by the ear, we can neither hold him, nor safely let him go.” He may have been correct to question how “safely” the nation could abolish slavery, but that did not justify its continued existence. The degradation of human beings cannot and should not ever be tolerated for reasons of “safety,” social politeness or prudent deference. Commonplace acceptance of the display of the most recognizable symbol of an organization whose creation was based around enslavement, no matter the intent, is to forget the reprehensible crime for which our nation is guilty. I will not listen to answers to the contrary suggesting that “that is not what the Confederate Flag means anymore.” You cannot and should not whitewash history. You need to remember that the absolutely brilliant men who fought for independence and founded our country failed to conclude that slavery was a moral evil.</p>
<p>I’ve put off proving Godwin’s Law as long as possible; as a white male, I can only speculate that African-Americans in the United States seeing the Confederate flag today must feel something not unlike a Jew who sees the flag of Nazi Germany. In my studies abroad, I was saddened to learn that Europeans, not knowing our history, had repurposed the Confederate flag as a flag of rebellion. In the United States, we have no such excuse for ignorance; this is our sad history and “trying to move on” is the wrong approach.</p>
<p>I like to think that at somewhere as open-minded and forward thinking as Jewell, this article is a case of “preaching to the choir.”</p>
]]></content:encoded>
					
					<wfw:commentRss>https://hilltopmonitor.jewell.edu/hilltop-voices-chaston-kome/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
			<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
