We Are Marshall
The movie, “We Are Marshall” (2006) vividly portrays tragedy and sufferings of a small community of Marshall University. Its football team was killed in a plane crash and their families, faculty stag and students had to cope with this loss. The movie is based on the theme of coping personal conflict and communication differences as a result of social and personal differences. The director portrays that the centrality of sport to the social life of Marshall University implies a society devoted strictly to competition, and McG description of the various competitions in the University is the negative consequences of this emphasis on competition. While winners are feted in a variety of grandiose ceremonies designed to glorify their victories, losers are subjected to public humiliation like being forced to run around the track with their shoes on backward (usually resulting in blisters or other minor but painful injuries that will decrease the likelihood of their victory in future competitions) while crowds jeer or even pelt them with pebbles, broken bottles, or bits of scrap iron.
Following social theory, people are a part of the community and have to adjust their behavior to the adopted rules and principles. The movie portrays that in extreme cases, losing athletes can even be condemned to death by stoning, their dismembered corpses then being suspended on butcher’s hooks and displayed outside the stadium gates. For instance, President Donald Dedinon has to accept a difficult and controversial decision concerning the football game. Still, he is persuaded by the faculty staff and students that the game should be played. The society at first glance appears to be organized for maximum efficiency, an extensive bureaucracy But this emphasis on “regularity” in fact leads to extreme regimentation and to an almost complete lack of individual freedom. For example, students have very little opportunity to make their own decisions; their entire lives proceed according to a strictly scripted sequence designed to contribute to the complex of athletic competitions around which the society revolves. There is so little room for individuality in this society that individuals do not even have names. All athletes are male, and women live even more restricted lives than do men, who at least have some opportunity to achieve success through their athletic feats. In fact, women have virtually no social function other than bearing children, so their numbers are kept small by killing four of every five female infants at birth (Schaefer, 2006, p. 54).
Functional theory will help to identify the main social structures and social differences discussed in the movie. The director of the movie suggests the cruelty of capitalism and of patriarchy; moreover, it suggests that this cruelty goes far beyond the simple fact that those who perform better receive greater awards in a capitalist society. For example, despite the extensive system of harsh and inflexible rules and regulations in sport that governs every aspect of life, the enforcement of these rules is in fact capricious, arbitrary, and completely unpredictable. Even the athletic competitions themselves are based on a system of “organized injustice” under which supervising officials arbitrarily discriminate against particular athletes by assigning various handicaps, varying the rules of competition, or otherwise interfering in the progress of the various events (Carpendale and Muller 2004, p. 64). The game is a fight and the Marshall players have to perfume their best during the game. They have lost 66 to 6 but still is very proud of their decision to accept the game. Presumably this system of inequities enhances competition by making the outcome of individual events more uncertain, but it also suggests an element of irrationality in this seemingly ultra-rational society. Generally, society and communication behavior influence what people do and how they behave. People accomplish actions which are publicly observable such as body movements, speaking, and so on (Schaefer, 2006, p. 17).
Following a conflict theory, social interaction happens within the framework of the society, and thus this interaction impacts seriously the behaviors and relations of individuals interacting. Thus, there exists a responsibility for everything said and done by any individual within the society. The movie portrays the conflict between different values and traditions through the character of Jack Lengyel, the new coach of the team. The movie depicts that this is social responsibility of the university staff – an entire theory which regulates the relationships between people and which is the basis for the actions people perform. When they consider social responsibility in the context of communication, it is necessary to emphasize upon three angles of this question: individual level of social responsibility, interpersonal communication in the context of social responsibility, and finally, group communication and social responsibility which in many situations can be made equal to corporate social responsibility (if organizations are contemplated). And thus, all these three angles will be discussed hereinafter. Red Dawson and Jack Lengyel resist negative attitudes towards the game and manage new team in a short period of time. This notion implies the individual becoming responsible in one’s actions which may have some kind of effect upon communities outside one’s immediate circle (which is one’s family and friends). In other words, the individual is always included in the community one lives in, and individual social responsibility will mean interest towards all events which happen within the community, as well as active participation in solving the problems of the community (Carpendale and Muller 2004, p. 82).
Processing your request, Please wait....
