{"id":30,"date":"2017-04-19T17:32:37","date_gmt":"2017-04-19T21:32:37","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/sites.williams.edu\/engl117s17\/?p=30"},"modified":"2017-04-19T17:32:37","modified_gmt":"2017-04-19T21:32:37","slug":"grunge-bob-needs-spare-pants","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/sites.williams.edu\/engl117s17\/uncategorized\/grunge-bob-needs-spare-pants\/","title":{"rendered":"Grunge-bob Needs Spare Pants"},"content":{"rendered":"

Drew Cohen<\/span><\/p>\n

4\/19\/17<\/span><\/p>\n

English 117 Thorne<\/span><\/p>\n

Grunge-bob Needs Spare Pants<\/b><\/p>\n

Might our drive for a better life beyond our reach actually ruin our chances of ever having one? \u00a0Now, I don\u2019t mean \u201cbetter life\u201d in terms of fast cars, solid gold faucets, or cashmere cardigan sleeves tied in knots around our necks as we tour the green. \u00a0No, I mean the \u201cgreeting every day with a smile on our face\u201d and \u201chappiness without the tender consolation of our bed-pillow\u201d kind of better life. \u00a0Stick with me and I\u2019ll show that killing the \u201cgrass is greener\u201d pipe dream can make a \u201cjob\u201d seem more fulfilling than a \u201ccareer.\u201d \u00a0I can prove that if we\u2019re made comfortable with the idea that settling for less is a legitimately satisfying option, we can be fooled into believing that we would all live happier, more meaningful lives in mediocre dead-end jobs.<\/span><\/p>\n

This notion seems impossible to the rational, college-educated sector of civilization, especially to a certain well-intentioned, grouchy German named Theodor Adorno, who, with the help of Max Horkheimer, wrote about stagnancy and uniformity in the 1940s after escaping to America from the twisted Third Reich. \u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

https:\/\/s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com\/find-a-grave-prod\/photos\/2009\/48\/7948579_123497240543.jpg<\/p><\/div>\n

Adorno criticized the \u201cunending sameness\u201d of industrialized American popular culture and the notion that \u201cnothing is allowed to stay as it was\u201d with technology and innovation, and that this promised that \u201cnothing will change\u201d and \u201cnothing unsuitable will emerge\u201d (Adorno 106). \u00a0America\u2019s counterintuitive use of new technology to both keep society from advancing and decrease individual quality of goods justifies Adorno\u2019s frustration: what\u2019s the point of technology if not to improve our daily lives? \u00a0To Adorno, our new ability as an industrialized nation to mass-produce anything we see fit is poison to our take on the quality of our lives, and emphasizing minute differences among cultural products of industrialization that are, on the most basic levels, the same, ruins our ability to see what\u2019s really good for us and what\u2019s phony crap. \u00a0Is he right about this?<\/p>\n

Well, consider the cartoon <\/span>Spongebob Squarepants<\/span><\/i>.<\/span> \u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

https:\/\/upload.wikimedia.org\/wikipedia\/en\/0\/0b\/Nickelodeon_SpongeBob_SquarePants_Characters_Cast.png<\/p><\/div>\n

Our bubbly and optimistic titular sea-sponge\u2019s life is filled with<\/span> excitement and eye-popping color by his friends, neighbors, and undersea environment in his hometown of Bikini Bottom (note the colorful flower outlines in the \u201csky\u201d that function as clouds). \u00a0<\/span>The hugely popular cartoon\u2019s creator, Stephen Hillenburg, was noted by Jonah Lee Rice to have said that the show\u2019s characters are <\/span>\u201c<\/span>intentionally bizarre and have strange shapes and that they all share the same strangeness\u201d to the explicit purpose that <\/span>Spongebob<\/span><\/i> \u201cemphasizes sameness among creatures that seem different\u201d (Rice, 2009). \u00a0This seems like the classic \u201cunity from diversity\u201d ideology that drives modern liberal mentality, something positive, rather than harmful ideology, derived from a focus on \u201csameness.\u201d \u00a0Viewers see examples of all types of sea life (fish, crustaceans, cephalopods, squirrels in diving suits, even people!) coexisting in an intact, inclusive community without the fish equivalent of racism. \u00a0Along these lines, Sean McElwee of <\/span>Salon.com<\/span><\/i> calls Bikini Bottom a \u201cliberal utopia,\u201d an idealized place not only for the intended child viewers but also for the parents and adults that watch alongside them (McElwee, 2013). \u00a0Sandy Cheeks (above mentioned squirrel in diving suit) is a key example of this, portraying a woman who devotes her life to scientific research rather than, as McElwee mentions, \u201cstaying at home and cooking for the kids\u201d (McElwee, 2013). \u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

But like most cartoons, <\/span>Spongebob<\/span><\/i> incorporates frequent examples of violence ranging from Spongebob and Sandy\u2019s playful love for karate to large-scale destruction of property and massive car wrecks, leading to the inevitable wail of sirens from police cars and\/or ambulances.<\/span> \u00a0<\/span>Countless inconclusive studies have been carried out testing children\u2019s tendencies to mimic the violent behavior seen in cartoons like <\/span>Spongebob<\/span><\/i>, often with results that contradict other studies\u2019 findings (Kirsh, 2005). \u00a0Adorno expresses his own distaste for violence, not in terms of the impact on physical behavior it has, but rather of the humorous response it often receives, calling it cruel that laughter mostly prevails in modern pop culture \u201cwhen there is nothing to laugh about\u201d (Adorno 112). \u00a0Adorno goes so far as to say that in our \u201cwrong society,\u201d laughter is a \u201csickness infecting happiness and drawing it into society\u2019s worthless totality,\u201d acting as a consolation for a life poorly lived (Adorno 112). \u00a0I disagree with this sentiment, and I\u2019ll explain my disagreement by considering <\/span>Spongebob Squarepants<\/span><\/i> as an example:<\/span><\/p>\n

https:\/\/cdn-webimages.wimages.net\/053a5f963987f7cc803dd49a982d1fd2b98b56-v5.jpg?v=0<\/p><\/div>\n

 <\/p>\n

Adorno claims that \u201claughter about something is laughter at it\u201d in any context (Adorno 112). \u00a0There are examples of this anywhere you look, even in <\/span>Spongebob<\/span><\/i>: characters like the grouchy Squidward Tentacles practically subsist by means of derisive laughter, mostly at Spongebob\u2019s misfortune or misery. \u00a0Even some of the more lax characters like Spongebob\u2019s friend Patrick Star laugh at violence on occasion, one case being when Patrick laughs at a character on TV getting hit in the head with a coconut. \u00a0Adorno would argue that this laughter \u201creplaces pain \u2026 with jovial denial\u201d (Adorno 112). \u00a0Derisive laughter is a primary indicator of the exhaustion, dissatisfaction, and lack of fulfillment Adorno blames industrialized culture for. \u00a0Squidward, who hates his job at the Krusty Krab, feels the weight of the limitations of his life regularly and is seemingly jealous of Spongebob for his happiness and optimism. \u00a0Patrick\u2019s example is more contextual, as his laughter at violence is present after he returns home from a long day at \u201cwork\u201d (actually just watching TV) in the episode \u201cRock-a-Bye Bivalve.\u201d \u00a0As Adorno would argue, these characters indulge in this derisive laughter to cope with daily struggle. \u00a0\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

http:\/\/i.imgur.com\/7evNYM5.gif<\/p><\/div>\n

But this type of laughter is rare and dwarfed significantly by the amount of laughter on the show not necessarily directed at anything or anyone, but rather erupting from the joy of the moment. \u00a0The two primary sources of laughter on the show are Spongebob and Patrick: pretty much any time Spongebob isn\u2019t working at the Krusty Krab, he and Patrick are playing games together or catching jellyfish in Jellyfish Fields. \u00a0Neither one of them laughs <\/span>at<\/span><\/i> the other: both laugh simply because of their shared joy. \u00a0Studies have shown that associating laughter with interpersonal communication, whether face to face or by device, indicates a higher average level of happiness from both people interacting (Vlahovic et al., 2012). \u00a0Spongebob and Patrick\u2019s laughter makes their genuine happiness together clear, and in these cases this laughter is much more similar to carnivalesque laughter, common when considering movies like <\/span>Jackass<\/span><\/i>. \u00a0When carrying out crazy, \u201cball-busting\u201d antics, such as when Ryan Dunn gets beat up by female world boxing champion Naoko Kumagai, the men of <\/span>Jackass<\/span><\/i> don\u2019t laugh at Dunn, but rather at the absurdity and joy of the situation. \u00a0Much like these <\/span>Jackass<\/span><\/i> stars (and young children, the two groups likely on the same intellectual plane), Spongebob and Patrick laugh together simply because they\u2019re happy and having \u201cfun,\u201d which Adorno claims, mistakenly in this case, \u201cmakes laughter the instrument for cheating happiness\u201d (Adorno 112). \u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

https:\/\/media.tenor.co\/images\/2eb7db235c16e8e38ef5b88123582c51\/tenor.gif<\/p><\/div>\n

But when this laughter is taken away, both Spongebob and Patrick lose that happiness they share. \u00a0In the episode \u201cPatrick Smartpants,\u201d a freak accident makes Patrick a genius and he hates his life because he doesn\u2019t find his usual activities fun. \u00a0Losing his ability to have fun and laugh with his best friend makes Patrick\u2019s once fulfilling life miserable. \u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

Adorno would say to this that if losing your ability to laugh makes you unhappy with your life, your life was never fulfilling in the first place. \u00a0I see this hearty crock of bullshit and raise one Spongebob Squarepants to meet his claim. \u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

https:\/\/i.ytimg.com\/vi\/NaSd2d5rwPE\/hqdefault.jpg<\/p><\/div>\n

Spongebob, aside from being kind, optimistic, and dedicated to his work, is notably unambitious, simply due to having a job he enjoys. \u00a0Once he gets his position at the Krusty Krab, Spongebob makes no attempts to work anywhere else or move past his beloved greasy spoon. \u00a0Spongebob\u2019s boss, Mr. Krabs, is cheaper than cheap so Spongebob earns minimal salary, but he never once complains about this and is even fine with regularly having his pay docked to solve the \u201cissue of the day\u201d or avoid getting fired. \u00a0Squidward often notes on the show that Spongebob has an \u201cabnormal\u201d relationship to his work, and Sean McElwee goes so far as to label Spongebob a \u201cmarxist\u201d because of his love for his labor (McElwee, 2013). \u00a0But Spongebob\u2019s daily satisfaction is far from Adorno\u2019s \u201caustere\u201d description of joy (Adorno 112). \u00a0Spongebob is known worldwide for his nasal, dolphin-like laughter which frequently makes itself known, especially while he\u2019s working. Spongebob finds fulfillment in making Krabby Patties, his happiness marked by his signature laugh. \u00a0Interestingly enough, the only time Spongebob ever gets as thoroughly depressed as the times when he (briefly) loses his job is in the episode \u201cFunny Pants,\u201d in which Squidward tricks him into thinking that he\u2019s broken his \u201claugh box\u201d and can never laugh again. \u00a0When Spongebob wakes up the next morning and actually can\u2019t laugh, he shuts himself in his house and cries uncontrollably until the morning after that when Squidward tells him that he was just joking. \u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n

https:\/\/media4.giphy.com\/media\/ONnik0q3YU0g0\/giphy.gif<\/p><\/div>\n

Spongebob\u2019s laughter is the purest manifestation of his happiness: losing it doesn\u2019t simply expose pre-existing dissatisfaction as Adorno claims, but rather removes Spongebob\u2019s already present satisfaction with his life, which makes laughter the absolute antithesis of Adorno\u2019s claim for him. \u00a0Adorno is wrong here, simply because he fails to understand that not all laughter is derisive or malicious – in cases like this, laughter is an expression of satisfaction.<\/p>\n

So how can we be tricked into settling for less? Well, children watch <\/span>Spongebob<\/span><\/i> all around the world and are influenced by this cartoon role model who laughs and plays with his friends just like they do. \u00a0Children pay more attention to products in stores that have characters like Spongebob on them, and one study shows that boys aged 6 to 7 tended to choose food items in grocery stores advertised with pictures of Spongebob, even if they\u2019re healthier and less appealing than unhealthy foods (Ogle et al., 2016). \u00a0We see Spongebob\u2019s happiness and optimism and want to have the life he has, forgetting that he lives in a literal utopia (and a literal pineapple) and that his life is completely unrealistic – not only because he\u2019s a talking sponge, but also because he can casually be docked a year\u2019s pay and be fine with it. \u00a0I mean, we could try to live in a pineapple too – it\u2019s all we could afford on Spongebob\u2019s salary. \u00a0Adorno\u2019s incorrect claims about laughter actually make his complete argument worth deeper consideration. \u00a0<\/span>Spongebob<\/span><\/i>, meanwhile, proves that laughter itself can be used to fool us into thinking that settling for subpar pay and treatment is a good option, maybe even the best option for us. \u00a0We\u2019re trained to accept unjust labor expectations as long as we love what we do. \u00a0We see not even just Spongebob but Squidward also unwilling to actually leave the Krusty Krab for something better. \u00a0Meanwhile, Patrick is perfectly content with being unemployed. \u00a0Watch any episode of <\/span>Spongebob Squarepants<\/span><\/i> and tell me whether or not you feel some urge to abandon your current dreams and become a fry-cook as well. \u00a0Then, if you will, look up \u201cgelotophobia\u201d and see if you can still look at Spongebob the same way you might have as a child. \u00a0In short, <\/span>Spongebob<\/span><\/i> recreates the world as a child might imagine it: void of financial issues, higher education, and regulation of fair employment standards, but still satisfying and, you know, full of laughter.<\/span><\/p>\n

https:\/\/vignette1.wikia.nocookie.net\/spongebob\/images\/e\/e3\/Funny_Pants_05.png\/revision\/latest?cb=20130126193605<\/p><\/div>\n

 <\/p>\n

This essay was read by <\/span>Chloe Henderson.<\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

References<\/span><\/p>\n

Adorno, T. and Horkheimer, M. (1944). The Culture Industry: Enlightenment as Mass Deception. \u00a0<\/span>In T. Adorno and M. Horkheimer. \u00a0<\/span>Dialectics of Enlightenment<\/span><\/i>. Translated by John Cumming. \u00a0New York: Herder and Herder, 1972.<\/span><\/p>\n

Kirsh, S.J. (2005), Cartoon Violence and Aggression in Youth. Aggression and Violent Behavior, <\/span>11: 547-557.<\/span><\/p>\n

McElwee, Sean. \u00a0\u201cSpongebob Squarepants is a Marxist!\u201d <\/span>Salon.com<\/span><\/i>. 14 November 2013.\u00a0<\/span>http:\/\/www.salon.com\/2013\/11\/14\/spongebob_squarepants_is_a_marxist\/. \u00a0Accessed 15 April 2017.<\/span><\/p>\n

Ogle, A.D., Graham, D.J., Lucas-Thompson, R.G. and Roberto, C.A. (2016), <\/span>Influence of\u00a0<\/span>Cartoon Media Characters on Children’s Attention to and Preference for Food and Beverage Products. Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, 117: 265-270.<\/span><\/p>\n

Rice, J. L. (2009), SpongeBob SquarePants: Pop Culture Tsunami or More?. The Journal of <\/span>Popular Culture, 42: 1092\u20131114. <\/span><\/p>\n

Vlahovic, T. A., Roberts, S. and Dunbar, R. (2012), Effects of Duration and Laughter on <\/span>Subjective Happiness Within Different Modes of Communication. J Comput-Mediat Comm, 17: 436\u2013450. <\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Drew Cohen 4\/19\/17 English 117 Thorne Grunge-bob Needs Spare Pants Might our drive for a better life beyond our reach actually ruin our chances of ever having one? \u00a0Now, I don\u2019t mean \u201cbetter life\u201d in terms of fast cars, solid … Continue reading →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1581,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-30","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/sites.williams.edu\/engl117s17\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/30","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/sites.williams.edu\/engl117s17\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/sites.williams.edu\/engl117s17\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sites.williams.edu\/engl117s17\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1581"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sites.williams.edu\/engl117s17\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=30"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/sites.williams.edu\/engl117s17\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/30\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":33,"href":"https:\/\/sites.williams.edu\/engl117s17\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/30\/revisions\/33"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/sites.williams.edu\/engl117s17\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=30"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sites.williams.edu\/engl117s17\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=30"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/sites.williams.edu\/engl117s17\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=30"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}