forked from logenkain/criticalsarcasm
268 lines
16 KiB
HTML
268 lines
16 KiB
HTML
|
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
|
|||
|
|
<html>
|
|||
|
|
<head>
|
|||
|
|
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8"/>
|
|||
|
|
<title></title>
|
|||
|
|
<meta name="generator" content="LibreOffice 6.0.5.2 (Linux)"/>
|
|||
|
|
<meta name="created" content="2018-01-05T14:03:39.991112897"/>
|
|||
|
|
<meta name="changed" content="2018-06-04T18:28:32.024220088"/>
|
|||
|
|
<style type="text/css">
|
|||
|
|
@page { margin: 1in }
|
|||
|
|
p { margin-bottom: 0.1in; line-height: 120% }
|
|||
|
|
h2.cjk { font-family: "Arial Unicode MS" }
|
|||
|
|
h2.ctl { font-family: "Arial Unicode MS" }
|
|||
|
|
a:link { so-language: zxx }
|
|||
|
|
</style>
|
|||
|
|
</head>
|
|||
|
|
<body lang="en-US" dir="ltr">
|
|||
|
|
<div title="header">
|
|||
|
|
<p align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0.2in; line-height: 100%">GROUP
|
|||
|
|
DYNAMICS <sdfield type=PAGE subtype=RANDOM format=PAGE>0</sdfield></p>
|
|||
|
|
</div>
|
|||
|
|
<p align="center" style="margin-bottom: 0in; line-height: 200%"><br/>
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p align="center" style="margin-bottom: 0in; line-height: 200%"><br/>
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p align="center" style="margin-bottom: 0in; line-height: 200%"><br/>
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p align="center" style="margin-bottom: 0in; line-height: 200%"><br/>
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p align="center" style="margin-bottom: 0in; line-height: 200%"><br/>
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p align="center" style="margin-bottom: 0in; line-height: 200%"><br/>
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p align="center" style="margin-bottom: 0in; line-height: 200%"><br/>
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p align="center" style="margin-bottom: 0in; line-height: 200%"><br/>
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p align="center" style="margin-bottom: 0in; line-height: 200%"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Group
|
|||
|
|
Dynamics as Seen in Films</font></p>
|
|||
|
|
<p align="center" style="margin-bottom: 0in; line-height: 200%"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Joseph
|
|||
|
|
J. Green</font></p>
|
|||
|
|
<p align="center" style="margin-bottom: 0in; line-height: 200%"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Northern
|
|||
|
|
Arizona University</font></p>
|
|||
|
|
<p align="center" style="margin-bottom: 0in; line-height: 200%"><br/>
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p align="center" style="margin-bottom: 0in; line-height: 200%; page-break-before: always">
|
|||
|
|
<br/>
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p align="center" style="margin-bottom: 0in; line-height: 200%"><font face="Times New Roman, serif">Group
|
|||
|
|
Dynamics as Seen in Films</font></p>
|
|||
|
|
<p align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in; line-height: 200%"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"> Among
|
|||
|
|
the films Primary, Judgement at Nuremberg, and The Manchurian
|
|||
|
|
Candidate, we see an example of many different types of groups and
|
|||
|
|
their evolutions. First we will look at a brief summary of each film,
|
|||
|
|
then we will see many key concepts of group dynamics are found in
|
|||
|
|
each film, and finally we will try to look at how the theories of
|
|||
|
|
group dynamics relate to each film.</font></p>
|
|||
|
|
<p align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in; line-height: 200%"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"> In
|
|||
|
|
Primary we take a look at what it is like to be a candidate running
|
|||
|
|
in the presidential primary elections. Specifically, we look at the
|
|||
|
|
1960’s battle between John F. Kennedy and Hubert Humphrey for the
|
|||
|
|
primary vote in Wisconsin, which ultimately results in a win for
|
|||
|
|
Kennedy. With what we are shown of Humphrey, it appears that he takes
|
|||
|
|
a dictator-like approach to tending to matters of his campaign, and
|
|||
|
|
Kennedy seems to take a more democratic approach where he requests
|
|||
|
|
people to do their best as opposed to telling them how to do their
|
|||
|
|
jobs. The main groups we have in this film are the public groups who
|
|||
|
|
support each candidate, the voting population as a whole, and the
|
|||
|
|
members of the two campaigns.</font></p>
|
|||
|
|
<p align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in; line-height: 200%"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"> Judgement
|
|||
|
|
at Nuremberg takes us to a couple years after the end of World War
|
|||
|
|
II. A tribunal is formed to determined the fate of four judges who
|
|||
|
|
were in power during Hitler’s reign who did, not only nothing to
|
|||
|
|
stop it, but actively helped create the situation that was the
|
|||
|
|
horrors of Nazi Germany. The main question on trial was, do we punish
|
|||
|
|
those who were following orders and laws they knew to be unjust at
|
|||
|
|
the time? The four men on trial were, Dr. Ernst Janning, Emil Han,
|
|||
|
|
Werner Lampe, and Friedrich Hofstetter with Chief Judge Dan Haywood
|
|||
|
|
presiding. Interesting groups to note are, the tribunal as a whole,
|
|||
|
|
the defendants, the judges, and the plaintiff and defendant.</font></p>
|
|||
|
|
<p align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in; line-height: 200%"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"> The
|
|||
|
|
Manchurian Candidate starts off with a group of soldiers in Korea who
|
|||
|
|
get captured, transported to the Manchu region, and brainwashed. One
|
|||
|
|
man in particular is brainwashed to be a sleeper agent of sorts, a
|
|||
|
|
person who has had h{is,er} mind so invaded that special codes can be
|
|||
|
|
used to control h{im,er} and (s)he’ll be powerless to stop it, or
|
|||
|
|
even know that it happens. In this case that person is Raymond Shaw.
|
|||
|
|
The rest of the group is brainwashed to promote this man and retell
|
|||
|
|
his deeds of saving his platoon, except for two men, from a prisoner
|
|||
|
|
of war camp and eliminating an entire Chinese platoon in the process.
|
|||
|
|
However, in reality, he was programed to kill the two men who didn’t
|
|||
|
|
make it back, and he is used as a weapon in America to aid the spread
|
|||
|
|
of Communism. This film has many interesting groups. However, unlike
|
|||
|
|
the other two films, this film mostly focuses on two person groups.
|
|||
|
|
The only notable exceptions are the communist group and the Army.</font></p>
|
|||
|
|
<p align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in; line-height: 200%"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"> In
|
|||
|
|
all of these films we see many key concepts of group dynamics. The
|
|||
|
|
first is that groups have their own nature, or entity. That is, there
|
|||
|
|
are many individuals that make up a group, but a group is its own
|
|||
|
|
creature as well. The group also, over time, normalizes where the
|
|||
|
|
extreme opinions are removed and the individuals are brought to a
|
|||
|
|
general agreement on matters at hand. We see this come out strongly
|
|||
|
|
in Primary when simply comparing the two camps. When we see people
|
|||
|
|
Humphrey tries to support, the group tends to be quite and looking to
|
|||
|
|
him for leadership. In the case of Kennedy, we see that there is this
|
|||
|
|
group of people who are more lively, particularly with the songs they
|
|||
|
|
sing. Yet, at the same time, when we see the general public talk
|
|||
|
|
about votes, that is, the combination of both camps, there is a super
|
|||
|
|
group more concerned about what the actual result of this vote will
|
|||
|
|
be for the nation, and if their leader should or should not be a god
|
|||
|
|
fearing man. </font>
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in; line-height: 200%"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"> We
|
|||
|
|
also see it in Judgement at Nuremberg as the defendants, the
|
|||
|
|
prosecution and defense, and the judges all have their initial
|
|||
|
|
feelings about the case. Over time, these three groups normalize and
|
|||
|
|
change with each other. The defendants start to feel like they have
|
|||
|
|
been bad people and deserve punishment, the prosecution and defense
|
|||
|
|
begin to settle down to where both don’t feel so strongly about
|
|||
|
|
their side of the case anymore, and the judges too come to their
|
|||
|
|
conclusions along with a dissenting opinion. After this, the tribunal
|
|||
|
|
as a whole started to come around to the idea that these men should
|
|||
|
|
be punished, but it might not be in the best interest to the nations
|
|||
|
|
of the west to put Germany’s leaders in prison.</font></p>
|
|||
|
|
<p align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in; line-height: 200%"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"> The
|
|||
|
|
Manchurian Candidate is a bit trickier. We really only have two large
|
|||
|
|
groups, the Army and the Communist conspirators. Neither one being
|
|||
|
|
particularly well detailed throughout the film. Major Bennett Marco,
|
|||
|
|
a member of the captured platoon, had been having nightmares for some
|
|||
|
|
time which were revealing the truth about his time in Korea. When he
|
|||
|
|
started talking to the Army about it, the Army looked into Shaw’s
|
|||
|
|
history and found nothing. Ultimately, the Army believed that the
|
|||
|
|
Major was simply suffering from some sort of shell shock. PTSD wasn’t
|
|||
|
|
a well known issue at the time, but it wasn’t uncommon for soldiers
|
|||
|
|
to suffer after high stress combat and for others to recognize that
|
|||
|
|
there is a problem. Even the Major himself believed it, and while it
|
|||
|
|
may have been wrong, this group made a judgement. However, like the
|
|||
|
|
other two films, the Army did start to see the truth when presented
|
|||
|
|
with new information, such as another soldier starting to report
|
|||
|
|
dreams that were the same as the Majors, and eventually the group
|
|||
|
|
came together to accept that Shaw may be some sort of sleeper agent.
|
|||
|
|
The communist side seemed to have even less description than the
|
|||
|
|
Army. They mostly represented an evil villain for the movie to use as
|
|||
|
|
the big bad guy. The only real group dynamic they seemed to have was
|
|||
|
|
forcing thoughts of group dynamics into the minds of the captured
|
|||
|
|
soldiers, aside from that, they were portrayed little more than as an
|
|||
|
|
unrealistic evil.</font></p>
|
|||
|
|
<p align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in; line-height: 200%"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"> All
|
|||
|
|
of these films seem to play into some of the theories of group
|
|||
|
|
dynamics, In particular, Bruce Tuckman’s theory of group
|
|||
|
|
development and Kurt Lewin’s field theory behavior. Tuckman found
|
|||
|
|
that every group goes through a series of five stages. Forming,
|
|||
|
|
getting people together and figure out the goals, storming, everyone
|
|||
|
|
pushes opinions and seek status within the group, norming, where
|
|||
|
|
group norms are developed, performing, the actual actions, and
|
|||
|
|
Adjourning, a wrap up and abolishment of the group (Forsyth, 2010;
|
|||
|
|
Smith, 2005). This was somewhat touched on when describing the key
|
|||
|
|
concept of groups ultimately coming to a common ground, but there is
|
|||
|
|
more to it than just an average. Lewin’s theory found that people
|
|||
|
|
are a function of their individual personality and their social
|
|||
|
|
environment. Basically, people are heavily influenced by their social
|
|||
|
|
environment.</font></p>
|
|||
|
|
<p align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in; line-height: 200%"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"> In
|
|||
|
|
Primary, we start off with the groups already formed. Both Humphrey
|
|||
|
|
and Kennedy have their own campaign staff who’ve been, presumably,
|
|||
|
|
working with them for quite some time outside the state of
|
|||
|
|
Washington. However, we can still see the results of some of the
|
|||
|
|
stages. It’s clear that the respective groups were formed for the
|
|||
|
|
purposes of convincing the public to vote for their candidate. We do
|
|||
|
|
see some storming actively happen as Kennedy supports the opinions of
|
|||
|
|
some of his staff and to let them do as they do, and with Humphrey
|
|||
|
|
squashing an idea or two and demanding things go the way that he
|
|||
|
|
says. This also plays into norming and performing quite well as both
|
|||
|
|
candidates continue to do this throughout the film. Finally, at the
|
|||
|
|
end of the film, they do adjourn, at least in part. They stop their
|
|||
|
|
campaigning in Wisconsin, and plan to campaign and win other states.
|
|||
|
|
More interestingly, the public who were part of each respective camp
|
|||
|
|
seemed to go through their own stages as they form to support their
|
|||
|
|
candidates, applause in unison, and sing their songs.</font></p>
|
|||
|
|
<p align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in; line-height: 200%"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"> Judgement
|
|||
|
|
at Nuremberg, however, showed the whole process. Judges were sought
|
|||
|
|
from all around to preside over the case until Haywood finally
|
|||
|
|
accepted. He, along with other judges, the defense and prosecution,
|
|||
|
|
and the defendants all came together to form the tribunal. Opinions
|
|||
|
|
are taken from the prosecution, defense, and the defendants right at
|
|||
|
|
the start of the trial. It would appear that court cases are an
|
|||
|
|
amazing place to see group dynamics in action from start to finish.
|
|||
|
|
Norms came to terms as the defense and prosecution started to relax a
|
|||
|
|
bit, the defendants started to come to terms with the horrors they
|
|||
|
|
assisted in, and even the judges, though the judges already had
|
|||
|
|
fairly well defined terms on how to act well before this trial was to
|
|||
|
|
take place. As for performing, everyone seems to perform their roles
|
|||
|
|
as excepted of a tribunal until Dr. Janning makes his speech that
|
|||
|
|
effectively admits his own guilt along with the other defendants.
|
|||
|
|
After that, the trial has come to a close, sentences are carried out,
|
|||
|
|
and everyone else returns home.</font></p>
|
|||
|
|
<p align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in; line-height: 200%"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"> In
|
|||
|
|
The Manchurian Candidate, the group is already formed. An army
|
|||
|
|
platoon, but what’s interesting is that after they are brainwashed,
|
|||
|
|
they, in a way, become a completely different group. All the soldiers
|
|||
|
|
aside from Shaw were programmed to revere him and tell everyone how
|
|||
|
|
much they reverie him, and to confirm his exploits of heroism. Also,
|
|||
|
|
what’s interesting, is that this isn’t a group that occurred by
|
|||
|
|
people getting together in any natural way, such as friends, or
|
|||
|
|
specific way, such as a court room. This is a group that didn’t
|
|||
|
|
exist, yet was imprinted to the minds of people who do exist.
|
|||
|
|
Creating the group, and its dynamics, but non-voluntarily. Being that
|
|||
|
|
the film is about a bunch of people who are being manipulated, the
|
|||
|
|
stages are all forced. In a way, the stages don’t exist, just the
|
|||
|
|
results of having had the stages. Forming, storming, norming, and
|
|||
|
|
performing are all controlled by the communists. Adjourning was the
|
|||
|
|
only stage that had any reality, which was merely a result of
|
|||
|
|
soldiers being allowed to return home.</font></p>
|
|||
|
|
<p align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in; line-height: 200%"><font face="Times New Roman, serif"> These
|
|||
|
|
three films show many concepts and theories of the field of group
|
|||
|
|
dynamics. Though, they all seem to get to that point in different
|
|||
|
|
ways. Primary was a bit of a concept of a dictatorial vs a democratic
|
|||
|
|
group, Judgement at Nuremberg set up a group which would decide, as a
|
|||
|
|
whole, the fate of four men, and The Manchurian Candidate took a
|
|||
|
|
radically different approach by, quite literally, forcing the
|
|||
|
|
existence of a group upon unknowing and unwilling people. Group
|
|||
|
|
dynamics can be found in any gathering of humans. In fact, it’s so
|
|||
|
|
natural, that films are written about it with likely no knowledge of
|
|||
|
|
doing so.</font></p>
|
|||
|
|
<p align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in; line-height: 200%"><br/>
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in; line-height: 200%"><br/>
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
<p align="center" style="margin-bottom: 0in; line-height: 200%; page-break-before: always">
|
|||
|
|
<font face="Times New Roman, serif">Resources</font></p>
|
|||
|
|
<h2 class="western" align="left" style="font-variant: normal; letter-spacing: normal; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: 200%">
|
|||
|
|
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman">References</font></font></h2>
|
|||
|
|
<p style="margin-left: 0.2in; text-indent: -0.2in; margin-bottom: 0.08in; font-variant: normal; letter-spacing: normal; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal">
|
|||
|
|
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman">Forsyth, D.
|
|||
|
|
(2010). <i>Introduction to Group Dynamics</i>. 5th ed. Wadsworth
|
|||
|
|
Publishing, pp.14-29, 47-52.</font></font></p>
|
|||
|
|
<p style="margin-left: 0.2in; text-indent: -0.2in; margin-bottom: 0.08in; font-variant: normal; letter-spacing: normal; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal">
|
|||
|
|
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman">Johnson, D. and
|
|||
|
|
Johnson, F. (2016). <i>Joining Together: Group Theory and Group
|
|||
|
|
Skills</i>. 12th ed. Pearson, pp.1-45.</font></font></p>
|
|||
|
|
<p style="margin-left: 0.2in; text-indent: -0.2in; margin-bottom: 0.08in; font-variant: normal; letter-spacing: normal; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal">
|
|||
|
|
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman">Rcgd.isr.umich.edu.
|
|||
|
|
(n.d.). <i>Research Center for Group Dynamics: History</i>.
|
|||
|
|
[online] Available at: http://rcgd.isr.umich.edu/history/ [Accessed 4
|
|||
|
|
Jun. 2018].</font></font></p>
|
|||
|
|
<p style="margin-left: 0.2in; text-indent: -0.2in; margin-bottom: 0.08in; font-variant: normal; letter-spacing: normal; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal">
|
|||
|
|
<font color="#000000"><font face="Times New Roman">Smith, M.
|
|||
|
|
(2005). <i>bruce w. tuckman - forming, storming norming and
|
|||
|
|
performing in groups</i>. [online] People.vcu.edu. Available at:
|
|||
|
|
http://www.people.vcu.edu/~albest/woodbadge/SR917/Planning/CDDC/Team%20Building%20Ideas/Tuckman%20More%20Form%20Storm%20Norm%20Perform.pdf
|
|||
|
|
[Accessed 4 Jun. 2018].</font></font></p>
|
|||
|
|
<p align="left" style="margin-bottom: 0in; line-height: 200%"><br/>
|
|||
|
|
|
|||
|
|
</p>
|
|||
|
|
</body>
|
|||
|
|
</html>
|