With the popularity of social media allowing news and opinions to be shared quickly among many people, creators are more conscious about their depictions and possible interpretations of their work. This includes the producers of the culture industry. As the issues of gender equality and expression have grown in popularity, modern cultural productions have reflected a change in ideology. Carol Clover, when writing about gender in horror films, related that “what filmmakers seem to know better than film critics is that gender is less a wall than a permeable membrane.” (Clover 46) The idea of gender as a spectrum has now dominated in popular culture and is exemplified by the cartoon show, Steven Universe. Most of the characters in Steven Universe are female, but they each express their gender identity in a unique way. Although there are few male characters, they, too, are shown expressing their identity in more than one way.

While animated cartoons are similar to film in that the scenes shown on screen are controlled by the producers, cartoon drawing artists have more control over the view of the audience. Sam Abel, in his article, “The Rabbit in Drag: Camp and Gender Construction in the American Animated Cartoon,” recognizes this difference and asserts that “the commercial animated cartoon presents a particularly valuable case study of gender construction in American society” because, as a film genre, it physically and temporally frames reality, but it is also drawn by an artist who designs “a wholly created world which, of necessity, simplifies reality, both visually and psychologically.” (Abel 184-185) Abel then outlines the gender constructions in early cartoon series. The historical norm was to show a “predominance of male characters and heavily stereotyped female characters.” (Abel 187) Early MGM Studios’ productions only offered three versions of female gender expression: the domestic woman, the sex symbol, and the comic old woman. Warner Brothers privileged male characters and focused on their experience in cartoons. Although Abel shows that Bugs Bunny is able to transgress gender, he acknowledges that this shows that “only male characters have the power of transgression, and in wielding that power they appropriate both male and female identities.” (Abel 191) Steven Universe differs from Abel’s reflections on common gender constructions in cartoons; the show features a predominance of female characters and defies stereotypes. Each female character represents a different expression of the female gender. Also, the female characters are able to transgress gender norms and expectations as well as the males.

Steven Universe displays innovative, modern depictions of gender. Gaye Tuchman reflected on the depictions of women in popular media productions and stated that “the idea that a literature reflects its society is transformed into the statement that the media should reflect society and the charge that contemporary media do not properly reflect the position of women” (Tuchman 532-533)  However Tuchman later discusses the underrepresentation of women and their often stereotypical portrayal as capturing and demonstrating the lack of power that women experience every day. The main three-part argument she presents is “1) few women hold positions of power in media organizations and so, 2) the content of the media distorts women’s status in the social world. The media do not present women who are viable role models, and therefore: 3) the media’s deleterious role models, when internalized, prevent and impede female accomplishments. They also encourage both women and men to define women in terms of men (as sex objects) or in the context of the family (as wives and mothers)” (Tuchman 531) Again, Steven Universe is able to counter many of these claims.

Steven Universe premiered on November 4, 2013 as the first series on Cartoon Network to be created by a woman, Rebecca Sugar. It presents viable female role models, and the female characters are not defined “in terms of men or in the context of the family.” It represents modern defiance of normative heterosexuality and strict gender roles. The Cartoon Network show, Steven Universe, features many characters who transgress traditional gender roles and exemplify various forms of gender expression.  With an abundance of female characters, the show offers many options for expressing the female gender identity. However, it does not offer the same range of options for expression of the male gender identity.

In the fictional world of Steven Universe, gems represent themselves in a temporary physical form and fight each other based on differing ideologies. The Crystal Gems: Pearl, Garnet, Amethyst, and Rose Quartz rebelled against the other gems who wanted to use Earth for massive gem production, which would cause the Earth to become uninhabitable and unable to sustain life. Rose Quartz fell in love with a human man and bore a son, Steven. Rose then gave up her physical form so that her gem could inhabit Steven. And so, he has never met her, but he can use her magical gem powers to aid the Crystal Gems in their missions to protect the Earth from dangerous gem creatures who attack and disrupt human life.

All of the gems assume a female physical form. Differences in gender expression among the gems exemplify multiple options for viewers. Pearl is a resourceful, classy lady who can be strict in her teaching style. She most represents the traditional “domestic woman.” Amethyst is carefree, fun-loving, confident, and outgoing. She most fits the role of an adolescent girl who argues with her mother (a role which Pearl best fits) and craves independence. Garnet has the most characteristics that are considered traditionally masculine. She appears in control of her emotions and is the most physically strong. Her dominance and leadership role mark her as the most masculine crystal gem. She fills the role of a traditional father figure in the group.

Although the crystal gems and Steven could be thought of as a traditional family unit, the Crystal Gems are not forced to conform to usual familial/societal roles.  In the episode, “Fusion Cuisine,” Steven must decide which gem to present as his mother to his friend’s parents. His friend, Connie, told her parents that Steven has a “nuclear family,” or a traditional two-parent household. In trying to choose one gem, Steven states the roles of each gem in relation to the traditional role of mother. He tells Garnet, “you keep us safe by scaring off the bad guys – Just like a mom would… But you’re not the best conversationalist.” Garnet’s role as a protector can be considered either motherly or fatherly. Then Steven says “Amethyst, you would be a super fun mom!” but Amethyst begins picking her nose and playing with her snot so he asks “can moms be gross?” Lastly, Steven looks at Pearl and says, “You’re always worried about me, you teach me lots of stuff, you’re approachable, and, you’re, like, totally not gross! … But you can’t dinner.” Although the gems are capable of eating, they do not need to because they receive all of their nourishment from their gem. Amethyst likes to eat anyway, but Pearl finds the idea of eating disgusting. Therefore, unable to choose one gem, Steven convinces the gems to fuse into a six-armed giant creature, named Alexandrite, who could go to dinner as his mom. Steven’s refusal to choose one gem allows all the gems to continue to share the role of caregiver without being forced to conform to traditional familial roles.

Steven’s own expression of his gender identity is one that has not traditionally been offered for males. Steven is the only gem who is male, and this is likely because he is half-human. Steven is constantly surrounded by female caregiving figures and acts feminine. His favorite show is “Crying Breakfast Friends!” which consists of various breakfast items who are constantly crying. Crying has traditionally been seen as a sign of weakness, especially for a man. In contrast, Steven cries freely and even excitedly watches a cartoon show in which there is constant crying. He also watches a hospital drama show, “Under the Knife” with Connie. Steven’s willingness to watch soap operas and cry freely is a quality that has been traditionally seen as feminine. Also, Steven is not a physically fit character, which is unlike the traditional valuing of males as strong protectors. Steven is also inevitably close to his mother which makes him favor the color pink, a traditionally feminine color, because it is the color associated with her.

Steven himself must learn to accept his appearance. In the episode, “Steven’s Birthday,” Steven’s age is revealed (he turns fourteen) and he tries to alter his appearance. When his dad shows a photo album of Steven’s past birthday, viewers see that he has looked the same since age 8. Gems live forever and do not age, however, as a half-human, it remains unclear whether Steven will age. Gems can temporarily stretch their physical forms, and Steven discovers that he can too. He tries to stretch his body as if he had instantly grown several inches for the entire day, despite Amethyst’s warning, because he wants to pretend that he can age with Connie. He also deepened his voice to make it seem like he was experiencing puberty. However, Connie tells him that she does not care if he cannot age with her and this helps him return to his normal appearance. Steven learns that he does not need to change himself in order to be accepted. He does not need to make himself age or appear more masculine.

As a modern cartoon, Steven Universe reflects the changing dominant ideologies regarding gender construction. The characters defy traditional gender roles and offer multiple expressions of each gender identity. In the gem-ruled world of Steven Universe, some of the most important gems (of knowledge) offered are those regarding gender.

Works Cited

Abel, Sam. “The Rabbit in Drag: Camp and Gender Construction in the American Animated Cartoon.” The Journal of Popular Culture 29.3 (1995): 183-202. Web. 18 May 2016.

Clover, Carol J. “Her Body, Himself: Gender in the Slasher Film.” Men, Women, and Chain Saws. N.p.: n.p., 1992. 21-64. Print.

Sugar, Rebecca. Steven Universe. Cartoon Network. N.d. Television.

Tuchman, Gaye. “Women’s Depiction by the Mass Media.” Signs 4.3 (1979): 528-42. JSTOR. Web. 18 May 2016.

Richard Dyer’s essay, “Entertainment and Utopia,” discusses utopian moments in entertainment, focusing specifically on musicals. His essay details the human desire for a better world as it is reflected in joyous musical numbers. He argues that these moments occur universally within all forms of entertainment. So then, do even dystopian novels, which by definition contradict utopian values, still support Dyer’s assertion that utopian values are present in all forms of entertainment? A quote from Margaret Atwood states “within every dystopia, there’s a little utopia.” Evidence of the truthfulness of that statement can be found in the following quote from Veronica Roth, the author of the popular dystopian novel, Divergent. Roth said: “Divergent was my utopian world. I mean, that wasn’t the plan… as I began to build the world, I realized that it was my utopia.” She could recognize the utopian ideals of her own fictional world. However, her utopia may be described as dystopian, considering that the world is not as peaceful and perfect as it initially seems. For her essay entitled “The Hunger Games as Dystopian Fiction,” Rena Nyman defined: “In contrast to a utopia, an imagined perfect world, a dystopia (from Greek root dus, bad, and topos, place) is defined as an imagined world in which everything is bad.  Common themes include government surveillance, poor living standards, totalitarian regimes, brainwashing, concealing of information, class dichotomies (particularly with a clear distinction and repression of the mass by the elite), police brutality, and status crimes.” (Nyman) It is common for utopias to fall short of their ideals or conceal dark secrets that would throw the once utopian society into complete chaos, dissolving into a dystopia. Although the idea of a utopian society can be briefly imagined, this society could not sustain itself due to the unpredictable nature of life. As Professor Gregory Eck reflects, “Because… utopia is rooted in theory, it will not always work.  In fact, more is written about the failure and impossibility of utopia than of its success, probably because the ideal has never been reached.” (Eck) Although we desire a world free of conflict and pain, it will never actually be achieved. The innate faults in our own human nature make it impossible for us to collectively strive for the same goal, despite it being for universal peace.

In Divergent, society is divided into five factions, each centered on a different core value: Abnegation, Amity, Candor, Dauntless, and Erudite. Prior to the events that take place in the novel the factions have been able to live in peace for many years as each one plays its role in society; thus successfully creating a utopian aesthetic. The faction, Abnegation, values selflessness and constantly concerns themselves with serving others. Similarly, the Amity faction values kindness and peace as they focus on farming and community. On the other hand, Dauntless are the militant protectors of the society who value bravery and fearlessness. While Amity and Dauntless hold opposing beliefs about the use of violence, both factions are necessary in order to maintain the balance. Each one has a core value which dictates its members’ roles in society. The Candor faction values honesty in all circumstances, and Erudite values knowledge; its members enjoy scholarly pursuits, such as scientific research and medicine. In the roles that the factions take on, they demonstrate the need for balance in a utopian society. However, this balance eventually collapses resulting in the deformation of the once utopia society into a dystopian society. This shift is brought upon by a conflict between Erudite and Abnegation. This initial conflict uncovers dark secrets about each one’s past and sparks a revolution.

Another issue caused by the structure of this utopian society is the requirement that everyone must commit to a single faction for the rest of their lives. 16-year-olds must decide which faction to join; they can either remain with their family in the faction in which they grew up or they can leave their family forever to learn to live in a new faction. They first take an aptitude test which is supposed to reveal their core value and therefore the faction in which they belong. But the test is not always able to decisively place someone into any one faction. These “divergent” cases are considered rare and dangerous to the order of the society because of their inability to conform. However, it would be better to consolidate all the faction values into one community, rather than dividing them. In the film, Four, an initiate trainer for the Dauntless who develops a relationship with the protagonist, Tris, tells her “I don’t want to be just one thing. I can’t be. I want to be brave, and I want to be selfless, intelligent, and honest and kind.” Although this mentality contradicts the societal structure in the novel/movie, it aligns with the ideal of a “well-rounded” individual. Unfortunately, Divergents are hunted, instead of celebrated, for their diversity of thought, and ideology.

Also unfortunate is that the factions begin to enact changes which contradict their core values and ideals. The Dauntless manifesto says that they believe in “ordinary acts of bravery, in the courage that drives one person to stand up for another.” However, in practice, the Dauntless are redefining their definition of bravery as complete fearlessness and begin to value obedience over courage. They also fail to recognize the importance of “standing up for another.” Tris stands up for a fellow initiate in her class who was about to be punished (by being challenged not to flinch as knives are thrown at him). She takes his place and receives the punishment for him. Instead of being rewarded for her courage and selflessness, she loses “courage points” for being disobedient. As Dauntless value obedience more, Erudite learns how to manipulate this fact for their advantage. One day, Four shows Tris the loading area for deliveries and they see a few Erudite members loading boxes full of a serum that would render the Dauntless mindless, turning them into subservient slaves controlled by the will of the Erudite. The next day, all the Dauntless are injected with the serum and unknowingly begin to attack Abnegation and even kill some of their members. This is the handiwork of the Erudite leader, Jeanine Matthews, who strongly believes in the conformity of the masses to social order and she believes that Divergents are a threat because they cannot fully conform to only one faction. Her insistent, selfish ideology disrupts the balance of the utopian society and causes it to become a dystopia.  Again, this shows that Utopia is unsustainable due to the effects of human pride and stubbornness, which eventually destroy it.

A final dystopian aspect of Divergent is the existence of the “Factionless.” The factionless are those who fail the mandatory initiation process and therefore must live in poverty and exile as members of the “factionless.” Only the Abnegation are willing to help and serve the factionless by providing them with food and clothing. However the Erudite accuse Abnegation of selfishly using the resources which they say are for the factionless and so, with the impending revolution, the factionless are also in danger of losing even more resources. The existence of such a marginalized, unfortunate group of people in an otherwise ideal and affluent society blemishes the utopian image and reveals the innate dystopian influences in the society.

Even before uncovering the dystopian aspects of Divergent, the people seem to hold a constant desire for improvement. While this ambition ultimately causes the destruction of the utopian society in Divergent, it is also a necessary attribute for the creation of a progressive society. The paradox of desire as both a helpful motivator for progress as well as an inhibitor to social unity and tranquility in some cases further demonstrates the need for balance in order to sustain a utopian society. The moments when the film appears the most joyous for Tris occur when she feels liberated from the rigid social system and can truly enjoy the moment she is in. Tris was born into the Abnegation faction, whose members are often mockingly called “stiffs” because they are seen as uptight and over-zealous. While she believes in the value of selflessness in an abstract way, she has always found it difficult in practice. Therefore she chooses Dauntless because she desires to have new experiences among a new group of people. She had watched the Dauntless with admiration and longing for a long time, as she wondered if she would belong better with them. Near the beginning of the film there is a cafeteria scene in which, Tris and the other initiates are lifted up to crowd surf as they smile brightly, laugh, and cheer about being Dauntless. This is one of the most joyous scenes in the film. Another joyous scene was when Tris went zip lining through the city after her team won an initiate competition. Both of these scenes demonstrate the need for spontaneity and a sense of freedom. Although the societal structure of the Divergent world did create a utopia in which everyone can live in peace and harmony, it did not create a fantasy world in which there would be no conflicts or desire for more. Despite our ability to imagine a better world, we will never be satisfied with its implementation. A perfect utopia is not possible to be obtained because of the negative aspects of human nature, which are impossible to completely erase.

Despite the obvious negative connotations of a dystopian society, it is a naturally occurring, inevitable phenomena. Dystopian elements are necessary in maintaining equilibrium in a functional and progressive society. Although this may be counterintuitive, the previous examples demonstrate the need for a balance between the negative and positive aspects in order to vary the roles that members within the society must fulfill. Also, without dystopian elements, there would be no incentive to stimulate change and progress. This would create a stagnant society without innovation or improvement. Therefore, to avoid the creation of such a banal and fruitless society, the vital necessity of dystopian elements is apparent. As Veronica Roth once said, “If you actually succeed in creating a utopia, you’ve created a world without conflict, in which everything is perfect. And if there’s no conflict, there are no stories worth telling – or reading!”

Works Cited

What makes a work of art “great” or “classic”? Can there be modern classics? And how is that decided? While looking for a response to these questions, I searched for “modern classic movies” in Google. The third result was an article on the Business Insider website which listed the 2008 Disney/Pixar film, WALL-E, as a “modern classic” because it “explores so many different issues that you can watch it a dozen times and enjoy focusing on each one.” (Guerrasio) According to this article a classic is re-watchable and able to be returned to with a new focus. The word, “classic,” often implies antiquity, especially because of its use with reference to Greek and Roman culture, but the other aspects of its definition and connotation do not require that a classic be from a distant past. In the claim: “It is important to study great works of art, and especially great works of literature, because they give you a head start on the path of human perfection. They help make you fit for a humane existence, help you plan out a life worth living,” a “great” work of art is valued as being able to effectively present ideology of living a “good” life or a “life worth living.” Using this criteria, WALL-E still fits. It first presents the potential negative consequences of not resolving social issues before arriving at an imagined solution which promotes ideals. WALL-E is a great work of cultural art because of its positive message in response to multiple social issues.

WALL-E brings to light the issues of climate change, obesity, and attachment to technology. It also critiques big business and ignorance before arriving at a semi-happy ending when the people work to resolve the issues. The issue of climate change is the most obvious. The film takes place in a post-apocalyptic future where humans have lived on a giant, highly technological spaceship, the Axiom, for over 700 years because the waste and pollution on Earth made it unable to sustain life. Once any sign of plant life is found on Earth, the humans are supposed to return to restore and re-inhabit the planet. The name, WALL-E is an acronym that stands for “Waste Allocation Load Lifter – Earth-Class.” WALL-E appears to be the only functional robot of his kind left on Earth. He lives all alone with his cockroach friend in the run-down, complete landfill that is now Earth. He collects the trash, forms it into cubes, and builds towers out of it. Sometimes he finds objects that interest him and he takes it home where he organizes them. One day, he finds a little plant and saves it. Then another robot, named EVE (another acronym, which stands for Extraterrestrial Vegetation Evaluator), arrives to search for plant life. After meeting WALL-E and finding the plant, she returns to the Axiom in hibernation mode with WALL-E following her. On the Axiom, we meet the humans, who are constantly lounging in hover chairs with video screens in front of their faces to chat with each other and watch advertisements about food and drink on the ship. Robots run the ship while the humans relax like they are always on vacation. They are all obese because they barely even have to move. They are also so focused on their screens that they do not notice anything else around them. The Axiom is operated by Buy N Large, the corporation whose logo is the only one that appears – both on Earth and on the spaceship. When the former leader, who sent the humans to space, is shown, we see that he was not the President, but the CEO of Buy N Large. The movie seems to blame all big businesses for ruining the Earth and causing all of the other issues. The movie suggests that this (a waste-filled, barren Earth with humans living in outer space as little more than blobs) is what could happen if we do not resolve these issues now.

After critiquing and presenting the issues, the movie then provides solutions for them and arrives at a semi-happy ending. Shortly after the Axiom left, it was thought that Earth would forever be uninhabitable so the CEO sent a message to the Axiom that they should never return to Earth. However, this movie shows that there is still hope to reverse the pollution on Earth, even after it has been completely overcome by garbage. Therefore it is also possible to change now so that Earth does not get to that point. In addition, WALL-E and EVE take care of the one little plant and treat it as precious and valuable as they protect it from the auto-pilot robots who want to destroy it and force the humans to stay in space instead of returning home to Earth to recolonize. This shows how we should treat plants, even now, because they are necessary for our survival on Earth. At the end of the movie (after the captain changes the “Auto” robot to manual), the humans return to Earth and begin to farm to begin to reverse the damage done by all the pollution and waste. This ending is only semi-happy because there is still much work to be done; it is only the beginning of more struggles as they try to rebuild the Earth and start over. Because the captain turns off the autopilot of the head robot, he shuts down the former big business leader and gains control. The movie presents the ideology that in order to restore the planet, big business leaders have to realize that there is still hope for the planet and treat plants the way WALL-E and EVE do by taking care of them instead of destroying them.

An interesting part of the movie is that WALL-E and EVE act like humans more than the humans do. WALL-E watches black and white movies on a TV in his home and wants to fall in love and hold hands with someone. He acts like he has a crush on EVE when he meets her and eventually they seem to fall in love. They are the only robots who make decisions on their own and show human emotions. In fact, they also teach the humans how to take charge, stand up (both metaphorically and literally) for the planet, and care for one another. The fact that humans learn from robots also presents hope because technology will not necessarily ruin the planet.

The movie also suggests that we should be aware of our surroundings and appreciate nature instead of being so attached to technology. WALL-E accidentally knocks a man off of his chair and introduces himself as he helps the man back up. With the video screen no longer in front of him, the man finally looks around and says “I didn’t know we had a swimming pool.” Later, WALL-E interrupts a woman’s video chat because he wants to move closer to EVE and she was in the way. Again, without the screen in front of her, she notices that they have a swimming pool. The man and the woman meet and later they observe in awe as WALL-E and EVE fly around outside the spaceship. They appreciate the beautiful stars and scenery that they only notice now that they are not constantly watching a screen. They also leave their chairs voluntarily and exercise a little bit as they have fun swimming in the swimming pool and they disregard a robot that tells them it is time to leave. The movie encourages physical activity and agency both in this scene and when the captain finally has to stand up and walk to turn off Auto. The captain takes charge of the technology and tells Auto “I don’t want to survive, I want to live.” Even though humans are surviving on the Axiom, they are not living because they are not being active or taking agency. The ideology presented in this movie makes this movie a great work of art because it is positive and teaches how to live a life worth living.

Several cultural critics would disagree that WALL-E could be considered “great.” Matthew Arnold, whose argument is paraphrased in the claim quoted above, implies in his writing that his definition of a great work of art would almost exclusively include art created before the Industrial Revolution. F. R. Leavis, who would also agree with the above quoted claim, draws a distinction between popular media intended for mass consumption and great works of literature and art that makes the two mutually exclusive. Theodor W. Adorno and Max Horkheimer introduced the term, “the culture industry,” to criticize the mass production and standardization of cultural media and the arts because it turned art into a product to be marketed and sold and it caused all the works to be very similar to each other. Louis Althusser, who also critiques the capitalization of the arts, argues that popular media is used by the ruling class to indoctrinate the proletariat with ideology that maintains them as subservient workers. All these men agree, although for different reasons, that cultural works which are the products of the entertainment business are damaging to society because they are not produced freely. They would all likely contest the above assertion that WALL-E, a children’s movie created by one of the largest and most influential media companies, could be likened to a classic work of art because of its positive messages. But it fits Arnold’s and Leavis’ criteria for a great work of art even though it is a product of the culture industry and it was made for both entertainment and ideology.

I disagree with Althusser’s cynical view and I believe the ideology in this movie is intended to teach values and ideals to children because the producers actually believe in their ability to change the world for the better – not because they want to prepare future workers. Leavis’ point that we should be able to tell the difference between a work of art which can teach ideals and one that represents what we should not follow is applicable even to products of the culture industry. WALL-E’s ideology is what makes it valuable and worth watching despite its production. Even some mass-produced works of art can be great in the way that Arnold and Leavis argue.

Works Cited

Adorno, Theodor W., and Max Horkheimer. “The Culture Industry: Enlightenment as Mass Deception.” Dialectic of Enlightenment: Philosophical Fragments. Ed. Gunzelin Schmid Noerr. Trans. Edmund Jephcott. Stanford, California: Stanford UP, 2002. 94-136. Print.

Althusser, Louis. “Ideology and Ideological State Apparatuses.” Lenin and Philosophy and Other Essays. Trans. Ben Brewster. Monthly Review, 1971. 1-65. Print.

Arnold, Matthew. Culture and Anarchy. Ed. Jane Garnett. New York: Oxford UP, 2006. Print.

Guerrasio, Jason. “20 Modern Classic Movies Everyone Needs to Watch in Their Lifetime.” Business Insider. Business Insider, Inc, 01 Jan. 2016. Web. 16 Mar. 2016.

Leavis, F. R. “Three Editorials.” The Importance of Scrutiny. Ed. Eric Bentley. New York: George W. Stewart,. 1-11. Print.

WALL-E. Dir. Andrew Stanton. By Andrew Stanton, Jim Reardon, Ben Burtt, Elissa Knight, and Jeff Garlin. Prod. Jim Morris. Walt Disney Studios Motion Pictures and Pixar Animation Studios, 2008.