This week in ASTU class we watched the film Through a Blue Lens and connected to Jiwani and Young’s article Missing and Murdered Women: Reproducing Marginality in News Discourse to conduct a thorough discussion thread on Connect. As well as a very useful UBC Library Research Workshop that provided us with valuable research skills that will be beneficial for the rest of our university career.

To a certain extent, the topic of study among my courses (within global citizen core courses and electives) this week seems to directly and/or indirectly link back to ASTU class, almost as if I never even left the classroom. In Sociology, the term “intersectionality, or the idea that members of any given minority group are affected by the nature of their position in other arrangements of social inequality” (Ritzer and Guppy 335-6) is very relevant towards our study of vulnerable subjects (sex workers and drug addicts of Vancouver’s Downtown Eastside). More or less, it is the socially constructed stereotypes often associated with these vulnerable subjects that makes them more criticized and judged by outsiders who don’t understand the realities of their lives. Therefore, when the concept of “parallel lives” came up in Geography class, an immediate connection was sparked as I thought about it in terms of Vancouver’s Downtown Eastside (DTES) and felt the urge to declare it as my topic worth discussing right here right now!

First of all, the concept of “parallel lives” in the context of Geography class was used in  the discussion of global tourism. In thinking of tourism there are tourist attractions or beach resorts that are often constructed on the ideal of pure perfection and is made to be a desirable location to go to. However, the idea of parallel lives is that tourism promote to tourists a singular representation of the city (usually the perfect/valuable aspect). In a sense the tourism part is segregated from the rest of the city, creating an illusion that attracts tourists. But it does not accurately display the reality of life for the majority of people living there especially the tourism industry in developing nations.

At the same time, one does not need to look far to find the existence of parallel lives when it exists right here in Vancouver. For example, by looking at Vancouver as a tourist destination there are certain locations and parts of the city that would attract tourists. For them their memory of Vancouver will be based on these tourist attractions and limits them to see only the “perfections” of the city. From a new perspective, tourism from seems to play a role in marginalizing areas of a city while promoting what is deemed as “valuable”. It may not be necessarily problematic that segregation of certain areas exists within Vancouver (and other cities) but rather it is what the impact of segregation has on the people living in marginalized areas that is problematic. Within Vancouver, the marginalized area of DTES is further emphasized by media and news coverage as ” ‘mean streets’ and the women working in those streets [are] drug-addicted sex workers” (Jiwani and Young 897). This stereotypical image cast upon DTES and the people that lives there further enforces segregation and marginalization from the rest of the city. Furthermore, a simple Google image search between “Downtown Vancouver” and “Vancouver’s Downtown Eastside” displays this concept of parallel lives that differentiates the reality of Vancouverites.

Yet, it came as a surprise,  when I came across newspaper articles today that featured a proposed city development plan for Vancouver’s Downtown Eastside. Although, there is great emphasis on the positive aspects that this development plan has for DTES (the area and the people who reside there) in the article, I personally have mixed-feeling towards this plan. Perhaps, since it is still in a planning phase there is a sense of uncertainty of whether or not it can be achieved without several eruption of conflicts between interest groups. Also, with any kind of city development (construction wise), the process would most likely disrupt and affect the everyday lives of those who live there. This is especially true for the homeless population who depend on the streets to make a living and for shelter. Hopefully, along with the city development plan, there will also be certain plans arranged for the welfare of individuals during the course of development. Nonetheless, it is definitely one ideal way to change the stereotypical view of DTES. An ideal worth paying attention to through news coverage (be critical when doing so), and more importantly worth seeing in terms of it becoming a reality for the folks living there.

The cliché saying of  “the truth shall set you free”, settled in my mind throughout this week as we revisited the Indian Residential School TRC events, the exhibitions at MOA and Belkin. As well as the introduction to testimonies, in which I drew this connection of telling the truth and the empowerment of an individual once the truth is revealed. But there is a difference between telling the truth and testifying about a truth; especially since Whitlock defines testimony as “a speech act that demands recognition and a response in terms of social action and social justice” (77), and so it seems that the genre is more exclusive for dealing with injustices such as the Indian Residential School system.

 This discussion of truth telling and speaking up then led me to interviews of Demi Lovato (access here for the video clips)  as a form of life narrative. In the  interview, Demi spoke about  personal problems such as drug and alcohol addiction, and eating disorder. These problems are very real in terms their connection to one’s mental health, which is relatable to the general public, where ordinary people suffer from these problems as well. But considering that Demi went through that as a celebrity, the pressure of fame, the entertainment industry, and media further complicates it. Therefore, speaking about it after receiving treatment in forms of interviews to direct to the public, she is able to put perhaps clarify her situation (especially if the media had made up assumptions about her condition to the public). This kind of truth telling may not fit Whitlock definition of a testimony but it certainly fit under the genre of life narratives. As well as the fact that her status as a celebrity puts her is a more “privileged” position to speak about to a much broader audience and allows for perhaps better awareness. 

Telling the truth of about a difficult personal experience is not easy at all.  There are many questions worth considering, such as who should I tell? When is the right time? Where is the right place? These seem like considerations that the TRC in putting together the testimonial events had to think about, prior to the events. However, the act of testifying and truth telling is never an easy thing to do. If we as ordinary people find it hard to tell the truth about personal problems to our family members, or secrets to a close friend then imagine how hard it really is for a celebrity to come forward and reveal personal information (information that should exist only in their private sphere) to the public. Ultimately, blurring the lines between the two spheres. From a different perspective we can argue that “oh, celebrities live under the spotlight all the time anyways, why does it matter?” or “they are just saying that, to seek more attention” and the list goes on. I must say, that I for one probably said that once or twice. However, such an ignorant comment that I made is most likely because I don’t and never would understand what it’s like to live under the constant pressure of the media, public attention and most importantly FAME.

In the aftermath of Demi’s  treatment, she is able to recognize the need to control her workload, and that others around her recognize that she is a human being and not a product. This links to the commodification of celebrities and their life, a concept mentioned previously by Margot in her post Everyone seems to have the Bieber Fever these days. The attachment of fame to idolize celebrities, and to a certain extent perceive them as “perfect” human beings objectifies them. If there is anything to be proved through Demi’s case, it’s  that she and many celebrities out there are not close to being perfect because as humans we should be allowed to make mistakes. The importance of making mistakes is that we are able to learn from it.

In relation to Demi’s interview clips,  the Witnesses catalogue also featured  Chief Robert Joseph’s interview, in which he speaks about his experience in the IRS system, the problems he faced coming out from it (an alcoholic), and most importantly overcoming it all as a true survivor (recognize a change needs to occur). The similarity between these two life narratives taking the form of interviews, shows that these experience are meant to be shared and through this process of speaking out, they are self discovering (reflecting upon their experience), healing themselves through the dialogue, and most importantly becoming role models for people. In another interview (with Ellen Degeneres), Demi talks about being a role model for young girls especially in terms of eating disorders. While Chief Robert Joseph remarks that: “I think having learned about the human condition and conflict and harm, that I have a duty and a responsibility to include all of us, not just Aboriginals[…]all of the harm we suffer is similar, it doesn’t matter what race or creed or colour[…] So we have to nurture all our our people wherever they live”

Lastly, consideration about the sites in which the interviews were produced is significant, those being Access Hollywood, BBC Radio 1, The Ellen Show (via YouTube as well) for Demi’s interviews, and the Witnesses catalogue for Chief Robert Joseph. It raises the question of  who are the interviews targeted to in relation to the location of the site?

Having came across the documentary, Starsucker, I would suggest that this video is worth watching in terms of wanting to perhaps further understand our addiction to celebrities, the concept of FAME, and how the media exploits us to consume and contribute to the commodification of celebrity news, despite the news being mostly rumours and gossips that misrepresent the TRUTH. If there is one thing I learned from this documentary, it’s that fame is exploitive and harmful