The Boiler Room for Marxist Theory

Karl Marx’s theory is described as “how the normality of our everyday world, with its quiet routines and rituals, its workaday habits and its working day, its monetary stresses and pressures on one end and its leisure and freedom on the other, is riven from within by… class struggle”( Rivkin 231). In this clip from Boiler Room, we see a couple examples of Marxist theory. Not only are the separate class systems showcased, but the driving force behind them: capitalism. In the first portion of the clip, the narrator is describing the values of what we see in society today, how to make the money and live the American dream. It states, “Culture may seem the least important of capitalism’s instruments of social control, but for Marxists, it is quite important, for if everyone is simply trained from birth to think alike and to think alike especially that it is a gift to be free, to seek one’s own rewards in a more or less open economy… they force will not be required” (Rivkin 232). The narrator in the clip goes on to talk about a large corporation (Microsoft) that made its employee’s large amounts of money by giving them stock. He proceeds to say that he saw a picture of a grounds keeper with a Ferrari, now if that’s not living the American dream, then what is? The point though is that this character, like Marx says, thinks his values are his own. However, he has been raised to idealize the aspects of wealth, because that is what society projects; that’s the culture. By pushing this capitalistic view point, a system is locked in place where people will work not only to live, but strive to live well. This is exactly what we see in the first half of the clip. Rivkin also states, “The ideas that prevail in a culture tend by and large to be ones that certify as legitimate the shape of that society and to reinforce the hegemony of the ruling elite” (Rivkin,237). In other words, the people with money are the ones that influence what the rest of us think we want, or need. They shape the values of society.
In the second portion of this clip, the interview, Ben Affleck’s character plays the wealth card to not only entice the men to work hard, but to disguise the inner workings of management and worker relationships. Affleck plays a top recruiter for a brokerage firm. He brings the interviewees in, sits them around a long table and proceeds to tell them how wealthy he is, how he drives a Ferrari, and how he owned a huge home. Not only does this play on the societal values, but it mask’s the fact that one class will always be dominated by another. In this instance, Affleck is higher on the chain than the men at the table; who will more than likely never reach his status. “Marx argues that this appearance conceals the relations of domination and subordination between owner and worker that allow the capitalist owner to extract from the worker more value… that he paid the worker for” (Rivkin, 235). This “value” is the time the laborers put in to the job. Affleck is motivating, to get the men to work harder, therefore making him more money. In the beginning of this clip the narrator says, “honors in the dollar, kid” and that in itself is the basis of Marxist thought.




Rivkin, Julie and Ryan,Michael. Introduction: "Starting With Zero: Basic Marxism. Literary Theory: An Anthology. 2nd ed. Ed. Malden: Blackwell, 2004. 549-566.

Defamiliarizing Liberty Leading the People

In the background of Liberty Leading the People there is a yellow cloud of smoke that you can vaguely see men coming out of, their swords and guns drawn. A man in a top hat looks unscathed by the surrounding war scene. He holds a gun while looking at lady Liberty. She is holding a flag and gun, leading the men while she tromps past bodies fallen by the war. One body is half clothed wearing only a white shirt and one blue sock, the other is fully clothed in army attire. One man, on his hands and knees in a blue jacket with a red sash, is looking up at her as if only she can save him. A young boy stands beside her holding two pistols looking ready to march on. The light in the picture is around lady liberty while there is also a spot of light on the half clothed fallen soldier. While defamiliarizing this picture it could be questioned: at what price does liberty and freedom come? In this painting there is no liberty without death, as the focal points of light show. While the eye is immediately drawn to lady liberty and the positive outcome of the revolution, the underside to this that people die for freedom.

Aristotle, is that you?

While I was trying to find a video on you tube that encompassed all the points that were made by Aristotle, I found myself noticing his theories in commercials. In fact, in most commercials I watched his theories were threaded throughout. I then started thinking about the purpose of commercials and what the aim is: selling products or ideas.How does one sell a product or idea? By striking the chords that are Pathos,Logos, and Ethos. I came upon this recent clip from the past election that advocates NO on prop 8:



In this video all of Aristotle’s devises are present: Pathos (emotions), Logos (logic, reason), and Ethos (community). The arrangement of the video begins with Pathos as the women are immediately told “we are here to take away your rights.” This followed by the removal of their wedding rings evokes emotion in the viewer. The viewer feels bad for these women, who appear to be just as upstanding citizens as any. These women are your everyday people, average people, thus emotion is evoked.
Ethos is also at work here while the wedding rings are being removed the fade in facts about the percentage of same-sex couples that will be affected by this as well as the dollar amount the Mormon church has put into their YES on 8 campaigns. This brings in the community aspect and states the issue at hand,that too much money is being spent on taking peoples rights away. This leads us into Logos. Part of the argument is that it is a violation of rights which is projected in the video when the men enter the house, sifting through purses, drawers, and even undergarments. This strikes the Pathos emotional chord even further because these women are being violated in their own home. The video ends by one of the men saying “what should we ban next?” This is an effective end because it makes the viewer feel unsafe, as if anyone’s rights at any time could be taken away. I envision someone pointing their finger saying "it could happen to you" which is an effective scare tactic.
Regardless of what belief one subscribes to on this matter, it is clear that Aristotle's theory is still being used today.