Rockler: WW Group 3 (pg. 13)

In this portion of Rockler's analysis, I agree with her 100%. Rockler here is essentially saying that the students who viewed The Lion King and participated in the study didn't think problems that Newberger talked about in her column were actually there. She says the students, "the receiver either comprehended the message correctly, or else was misinterpreting the film," (Rockler 13). In an excerpt from one of the students, they were saying that people who found Scar to have "gay clichés," were "pushing it big time to pull stuff" and that it was "ridiculous," (Rockler 13). I think that one of of the best things of interpretations is digging deeper into a movie, text, or anything at that matter and trying to find things that could be there. I myself am guilty of the low grade analysis, just as the unnamed student was in the reading, in my underclassman years. The first time I took a class with Vrooman and heard all his different interpretations of things, I discredited it all and thought there was no way directors could put something so horrible in a children's movie. Once I took more Comm. classes and learned of different theories, I actually understood and agreed with all of his claims. In the case of Scar having gay clichés, I think that Newberger's argument works because she has the evidence to back it up. As long as she has the evidence to back up her claims, (and in this instance she does) then I think the interpretation is successful. In the instance of the students way of thinking in WW Group 3, I think that they have yet to gain that knowledge and see how deep analysis is constructed. Once they have learned and figured that out, they will be able to understand Rockler's claims.

All in all, Rockler's anaylsis and study was a good read. It gave me flashbacks of how I used to think and showed me how much I've grown as a critical thinker and scholar.