- Sep 22, 2013
- 4,956
- 250
- 85
Here's a modernized version of Shakespeare's controversial contract-culture play The Merchant of Venice, which arguably could be adapted into a thought-provoking(!) Hollywood (USA) culture-incendiary film, perhaps starring Ethan Hawke and Amy Adams.
The purpose of such 'dialogue' is to raise consciousness about new age 'confluence media.' Is such consciousness justified?
====
Stanley worked at Wal-Mart for about 3 years after graduating from Rutgers University, where he was a mediocre student studying communications and marketing. He lived in a modest apartment in Washington, and he began dating a pretty young female co-worker named Elizabeth. Stanley was happy in his work and tried to save his salary-money to one day purchase a nice house for himself (and perhaps Elizabeth, whom he planned to offer a proposal of marriage).
One day, an irate Jewish man of 40 named Elias walked into Stanley’s Wal-Mart and began pestering the clerks about a price dispute over a large can of tomatoes. Elias insisted that the tomatoes were the generic Wal-Mart brand and that its price was suddenly and unfairly hiked up. The clerks explained to the irate Jewish man that the price increase was not limited to the tomatoes but reflected an overall inflation of prices of goods across the store and across Wal-Mart chains over the last two years, but Elias would not hear it.
Stanley suddenly felt like a hero. He walked up to Elias who was now arguing with the store manager and offered a solution to the irate Jewish man’s aggravation. Stanley proposed that Elias be signed up for the store’s ‘frequent-shopper rewards’ program which would entitle him to various bargains and discounts which Elias would be notified of by email. Stanley was pleased at how diplomatic he felt, but he was horrified when Elias, now even angrier, claimed that any such rewards program Wal-Mart was offering must be interrogated and that the business was due for a lawsuit.
Wal-Mart settled its claims with Elias, but the irate Jewish man still intended to make a public statement of some kind about the business’s false claims of fair salesmanship. Stanley was called in by his manager who explained that the ‘Elias scandal’ may generate unwanted press and that the store needed a ‘heroic scapegoat’ and that Stanley was the perfect candidate. Stanley was to deliver a public message which stated that it was his own foolish representation of Wal-Mart’s product salesmanship which confused and aggravated Elias who was a respected customer.
Stanley’s girlfriend Elizabeth was enraged. She insisted that Stanley was being taken advantage of, by Elias and Wal-Mart. Elizabeth proposed they do something to get this terrible Jewish man off their backs and hopefully restore Stanley’s regular position at Wal-Mart. Elizabeth wrote a special op-ed to the Washington Post which relayed the tale of her boyfriend becoming subject to a gross misunderstanding thanks to the terrible mood of an irate Jewish customer named Elias. Elizabeth wrote that America’s special ‘consumerism culture’ made it quite convenient to use all kinds of ethnic/culture clichés and stereotypes to justify self-serving stubbornness.
Wal-Mart decided to reinstate Stanley after Elizabeth’s op-ed in the Washington Post generated some degree of ‘town talk.’ However, Stanley came home one day to find his girlfriend Elizabeth was murdered in their apartment with a chainsaw. There was note left in the apartment (seemingly from Elias) which stated that Elizabeth’s op-ed about the ‘culture of consumerism’ creating lifestyle problems created bad vibes for the Jewish community and that the chainsaw Elizabeth was killed with was purchased at a Home Depot hardware store located right near Stanley’s Wal-Mart branch.
Elias was never arrested for the murder of Stanley’s angelic girlfriend Elizabeth, and Stanley committed suicide out of pure manic depression. A writer for the Washington Post named Richard Wentworth wrote that if Elias was indeed the culprit of the murder, Wal-Mart’s approach to ‘conflict resolution’ unfortunately created unwanted ‘bad press’ for the Jewish community which would certainly be scapegoated in some way. Wentworth went on to say that ironically, this unusual and terrible incident would generate some strange but intriguing ‘social dialogue’ about how Elias just might be the modern Shylock (Shakespearean allusion) and that this case would be remembered as a ‘culture hellmouth.’
====
Such storytelling reveals a modern age interest in ‘populism propaganda,’ which suggests that we could perhaps re-examine culture-based controversy-intellectualism stories such as The Merchant of Venice through the modern lens of ‘traffic disgust.’
The Merchant of Venice:
The Merchant of Venice - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The purpose of such 'dialogue' is to raise consciousness about new age 'confluence media.' Is such consciousness justified?
====
Stanley worked at Wal-Mart for about 3 years after graduating from Rutgers University, where he was a mediocre student studying communications and marketing. He lived in a modest apartment in Washington, and he began dating a pretty young female co-worker named Elizabeth. Stanley was happy in his work and tried to save his salary-money to one day purchase a nice house for himself (and perhaps Elizabeth, whom he planned to offer a proposal of marriage).
One day, an irate Jewish man of 40 named Elias walked into Stanley’s Wal-Mart and began pestering the clerks about a price dispute over a large can of tomatoes. Elias insisted that the tomatoes were the generic Wal-Mart brand and that its price was suddenly and unfairly hiked up. The clerks explained to the irate Jewish man that the price increase was not limited to the tomatoes but reflected an overall inflation of prices of goods across the store and across Wal-Mart chains over the last two years, but Elias would not hear it.
Stanley suddenly felt like a hero. He walked up to Elias who was now arguing with the store manager and offered a solution to the irate Jewish man’s aggravation. Stanley proposed that Elias be signed up for the store’s ‘frequent-shopper rewards’ program which would entitle him to various bargains and discounts which Elias would be notified of by email. Stanley was pleased at how diplomatic he felt, but he was horrified when Elias, now even angrier, claimed that any such rewards program Wal-Mart was offering must be interrogated and that the business was due for a lawsuit.
Wal-Mart settled its claims with Elias, but the irate Jewish man still intended to make a public statement of some kind about the business’s false claims of fair salesmanship. Stanley was called in by his manager who explained that the ‘Elias scandal’ may generate unwanted press and that the store needed a ‘heroic scapegoat’ and that Stanley was the perfect candidate. Stanley was to deliver a public message which stated that it was his own foolish representation of Wal-Mart’s product salesmanship which confused and aggravated Elias who was a respected customer.
Stanley’s girlfriend Elizabeth was enraged. She insisted that Stanley was being taken advantage of, by Elias and Wal-Mart. Elizabeth proposed they do something to get this terrible Jewish man off their backs and hopefully restore Stanley’s regular position at Wal-Mart. Elizabeth wrote a special op-ed to the Washington Post which relayed the tale of her boyfriend becoming subject to a gross misunderstanding thanks to the terrible mood of an irate Jewish customer named Elias. Elizabeth wrote that America’s special ‘consumerism culture’ made it quite convenient to use all kinds of ethnic/culture clichés and stereotypes to justify self-serving stubbornness.
Wal-Mart decided to reinstate Stanley after Elizabeth’s op-ed in the Washington Post generated some degree of ‘town talk.’ However, Stanley came home one day to find his girlfriend Elizabeth was murdered in their apartment with a chainsaw. There was note left in the apartment (seemingly from Elias) which stated that Elizabeth’s op-ed about the ‘culture of consumerism’ creating lifestyle problems created bad vibes for the Jewish community and that the chainsaw Elizabeth was killed with was purchased at a Home Depot hardware store located right near Stanley’s Wal-Mart branch.
Elias was never arrested for the murder of Stanley’s angelic girlfriend Elizabeth, and Stanley committed suicide out of pure manic depression. A writer for the Washington Post named Richard Wentworth wrote that if Elias was indeed the culprit of the murder, Wal-Mart’s approach to ‘conflict resolution’ unfortunately created unwanted ‘bad press’ for the Jewish community which would certainly be scapegoated in some way. Wentworth went on to say that ironically, this unusual and terrible incident would generate some strange but intriguing ‘social dialogue’ about how Elias just might be the modern Shylock (Shakespearean allusion) and that this case would be remembered as a ‘culture hellmouth.’
====
Such storytelling reveals a modern age interest in ‘populism propaganda,’ which suggests that we could perhaps re-examine culture-based controversy-intellectualism stories such as The Merchant of Venice through the modern lens of ‘traffic disgust.’
The Merchant of Venice:
The Merchant of Venice - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
