Dear Great Aunt Helga,

I hope you’re having fun in the Orlando sun! College is well; thank you for asking about my final paper for class! I think the overall writing process is going well, although I do have a few minor concerns.

I’m very excited to be writing about The King’s Speech, the movie we watched together last summer when you visited. My paper will be arguing that the movie’s inaccuracies, you know, the ones about Winston Churchill and Bertie and their beliefs and views towards Nazi Germany, are part of a bigger scheme. I’m claiming that the scriptwriter made these changes intentionally, but I’m worried that I won’t be able to find sufficient evidence about this. One of the biggest parts of my argument is equating Bertie as a cultural hero of Great Britain, particularly, by comparing him with Robin Hood and King Arthur. We learned in class that a cultural hero was someone who embodied the best values of the culture. I like to think that, by getting through his speech impediment “for the country,” Bertie was a cultural hero of sorts. The movie does dramatize the necessity of his speech a lot, so I think this is a logical conclusion. I’ll need to do some more research and see if I can pull up any interviews and original script notes from the scriptwriter himself. I don’t think this is too difficult of an issue to overcome, but it is my greatest concern thus far.

One of the struggles I can see myself having to face is my lack of movie-knowledge. Unlike my cousins, I am not as well-versed in the intricacies of the movie-production process or the terminology and description for shots and the like. I’ll have to rely very heavily on my sources, but I believe I will be talking a lot about set dressings, which is apparently what they call the decorations and props for all the sets. This is definitely unfamiliar territory for me in terms of vocabulary, and I worry that I will mix the terms up or not even realize the significance of certain movie aspects. I’ll try to watch the film again and then pay closer attention to the way the movie is directed. Maybe that’ll help a lot!

Other than me potentially failing my organic chemistry course, this is a pretty good update on where I am in school! I’m always glad to hear from you, and I hope to see you over break again!

Love,

Kara

The prompt for this paper is to take a movie and argue if the movie serves as a national myth – one that tells a story that unites a group of people – or an archetypal myth – one that portrays a universal story that can be applied regardless of time period. My original thesis was that the movie Avatar was both a national myth because it unites indigenous people and an archetypal myth because it portrays the universal story that people’s greed ruins relationships and leads to hatred.

As of now, my paper feels like a bunch of puzzle pieces that I need to string together cohesively. My original thesis is not specific or arguable enough to fill up the page requirement so I decided I would connect Avatar (2009) to another movie that tackles the same concept. The second movie I chose is Disney’s Pocahontas (1995). Both films serve as a platform for positively portraying the aspects of indigenous culture to mass audiences. My new vision for the paper is to compare the cinematography of the two movies and how their aspects are beneficial to portraying authentic culture of natives. I think by breaking both movies down and showing their parallels, I have more concrete evidence that proves that the creators of these movies manipulated their cinematography in order to fit into the structure of national myth.

Dear Great Aunt Helga,

It was quite the pleasant surprise to receive your letter this past week, especially since I have not heard from you since you moved to Orlando to be with your true love, Keg Jennings, the guy who sold April and Andy that house in season seven of Parks and Rec.

(quick fourth wall break: here is the scene the last sentence is referring to in case there was any confusion)

Your letter actually has presented me with the perfect opportunity to neglect my school work. Speaking of which, I am right in the middle of an essay for my mythology class at the moment. I am actually enjoying writing this paper, which definitely can not be said about all of the work I have done this school year. This project is a critical response to two movies, and I chose Iron Man 3 and Thor.

As I know you might be a little out of touch with modern pop culture, I will give a quick summary of these works. Iron Man 3 stars Robert Downey Jr — wait, I forgot that you might be too old to know who Robert Downey Sr is, let alone junior. But Thor, you know Thor! Yeah, yeah, this movie is based on one of those stories that came out when you were younger, right? Yeah, you know Thor.

Anyway, like I said, I am enjoying writing this paper, but that does not mean I do not have concerns about this essay. Regarding Thor, I am a bit worried that I am focusing too much on the character arc and not other important factors. And with Iron Man 3, well, I rewatched the film this weekend and kind of realized that my argument just a little bit falls apart under intense scrutiny. However, I am not too worried. I can either just conveniently ignore some evidence, or I could slightly modify my thesis so that it stands stronger. There’s no way my teacher could find out, right?

Well, I better say goodbye for now. Maybe this summer my family and I could come to visit you and your house-(swamp)boat?

Sincerely, your dearest great-nephew, William Baker

Dear Great Aunt Helga,

I hope you are doing well in Orlando. I’m really sorry to hear about what happened to Great Uncle Harvey. I hope he gets better soon, and I hope the gator that chomped on his achilles tendon is brought to justice.

As for myself, I’m afraid I have my own proverbial alligator at my feet. You see, I’m taking a mythology class, and for an upcoming paper I have to analyze the mythic properties of a given film and compare them with another. The films I have chosen to compare are Truman Show and The Matrix– yes, The Matrix! I know how much you love that movie.

Now, I know you don’t know much about film theory, as the only film you own is The Matrix, and given your incredibly strict atheist ideology I understand that you do not know much about mythology. However, I nonetheless would like to tell you about my concerns, since you’re a really good listener.

Right now, I think I’ve got the theme of the movies down. Both movies are about how characters must stop accepting the reality with which they are presented and how powers greater than themselves often oppress them not directly, but indirectly. The powers that be in these films oppress our heroes, Truman and Neo respectively, by defining the bounds of the society in which they live. Thus, conformity is the biggest thing limiting their freedom.

There are some other things that are interesting, as well. As you know, in The Matrix humanity as a whole is imprisoned so they can be used as a power source by machines. In Truman Show, the titular Truman is similarly commodified. He is essentially made into a good, with The Truman Show in universe having a near-obscene amount of product placement in it. I think it would be interesting to compare the two.

Of course, there’s also the mythic element I have to consider. Themes can only get me so far. One potential route I can go down is comparing how each film portrays the idea of Utopia. You know about utopias, Great Aunt Helga, as many would consider Orlando a utopia. The idea is that the mythology behind the Utopia is fundamentally flawed. I don’t want to go too in detail here, as I value your time, but I thought it could be worth looking into.

Furthermore, I could also look at the two characters in how they compare to Christ. Now, I know Great Uncle Harvey is a devout Christian, so don’t think I’m trying to call the Bible a “myth.” What I mean is that Jesus is representative of the idea of the Messiah, or the savior. I know you don’t know much about Jesus, Aunt Helga, so I’ll explain it: It’s basically a specific kind of culture hero, a singular person who so greatly embodies the ideals of that one culture that they alone are able to save them from some form of destruction from either within or without.

Of course, Neo is obviously a Christ figure: He’s The One, after all, and the associations are pretty obvious there. However, Truman is an interesting case. He is greatly beloved by his culture, but it’s AGAINST his own will. His journey isn’t about helping others, it’s about finding personal freedom. However, the Kristoff, who plays sort of a “god” role in the story, considers Truman to be a son to him. Plus, Truman has to go through a metaphorical death and resurrection in overcoming his fear of the water in order to escape. So I feel like there’s some interesting stuff there.

Anyway, sorry to ramble, Great Aunt Helga. Just had to get that stuff off my chest. Hopefully I’ll find a way to figure all of this stuff.

Hope you’re doing well in Orlando!

Love,

Leif.

Dear Great-Aunt Helga,

I cannot wait to visit you in Orlando this summer, but as you know, I still have plenty of schoolwork to complete including my final paper for CLUSTER 30CW- Never-Ending Stories: Multidisciplinary Perspectives on Myth–Special Topics: Uses and Misuses of Mythic Storytelling in Hollywood. As per your request, I will share some problems I have been facing and possible solutions to these problems, but first, I will share a little bit of my paper as a whole.

The subject of my paper is the comedic drama Lady Bird, which—if you remember—we watched together with Elvin before I left for college. When choosing a movie, I was drawn to this movie because I noticed that something special empowered the storytelling of the movie but could not identify it. After some research, I found out that this ‘something’ was the writer/director’s personal connection with the setting and events of the movie. At this point, I realized that Lady Bird fit well with the prompt, and so, I established the foundation of my paper.

I started encountering problems when I began attempting to connect my foundation to mythic storytelling, where ‘myth’ has a definition closer to “a traditional story” than to “a widely held but false belief.” The problem was that I could not figure out how to make any such connection. My solution was to turn to articles written by film critics under the impression that these people would be much more capable of making this connection. Esther Zuckerman did not disappoint as she positioned Lady Bird among the two mythic traditions that we discussed in class. I will use Esther Zuckerman as a guide down a path exploring coming-of-age as a universal experience. However, I now wonder if my paper’s reliance on Zuckerman’s argument undercuts my paper since the foundation is another person’s thoughts. I still have not thought of any good solutions to this problem, and I will likely write my first draft without addressing this problem.

I hoped you enjoyed this look into my writing process.

Love,

Great-Nephew Elija

Dear Great-Aunt Helga,

I hope you are having a fine and dandy time in Orlando. I have a few updates on the paper you wanted to know to me about. In case you forgot, I’m doing it on the pair of superhero movies named Guardians of the Galaxy vol.1 and vol.2. I have to write about how the movie was made and about mythological elements that relate to it. By myths, I mean are the stories you read or were told when you were a kid, or maybe old stories passed down by other cultures (think Greek/Roman/Asian).

Right now I’m a little bit stuck. I know a bunch about how they made the movie. Things like the people who wrote it, why they choose some details,and how they used machines to make the fancy-shmancy effects you see on the screen (like the tree and raccoon). I also have information on what people’s reactions where to the movie. But, I am missing one important thing, and that is how the movie is similar to myths like I mentioned. I thought of a solution, but I don’t know if it will work. I may relate the story in the movie to that of the director’s in real life upcoming in Hollywood. The story in the movie is that a group of small scale criminals band together to do big things, like save their galaxy. Similarly, the director James Gunn was a small-scale director, and he and his friends (the recurring actors in his movies) go into making movies for the large-scale Marvel superhero universe.

Another concern I have is that my paper will not be long enough. I don’t really know how I’m going to solve this one, but hopefully it’ll come to me as I continue writing. I’ll brainstorm more topics to talk about for the paper, and I’ll keep you updated so you know how it’s going.

Shameek

Dear Great Aunt Helga,

I hope Orlando is treating you well! I appreciate your concern about my final paper in GE 30CW, and I just wanted to write to you about some of the problems I’ve been facing. As I briefly mentioned in my last letter, I’m hoping to write my paper on a couple of western movies (I know you’ve seen westerns, remember when you told me what a hunk you thought John Wayne was?), and I want to write about how they fit in the western genre and how they use mythological elements.

The two movies I’m writing about, No Country For Old Men and The Ballad of Buster Scruggs were made by the same people, but they’re very different. I think Buster Scruggs is probably a lot closer to what you’re used to seeing in the old pictures you used to go to with your best friend Gladys, but both of them are actually totally different from the usual westerns in theme (You know how all the ones you watched were about the good cowboys versus the evil Indians? These ones are about the bad cowboys versus the other bad cowboys).

The main problem I have is that both of them are really similar in theme, but I need to find some clear way to differentiate them for my thesis. It sounds complicated, but mainly what I want to differentiate between the films is the semantic and syntactic elements of them, which Rick Altman talks about in the journal I’ve attached to the back of this letter (since I know you’re always looking for more reading material). Basically, I want to incorporate this in my paper and hopefully convincingly argue how the movies differ in their semantic elements, but that they come to the same syntactic conclusion, also addressing how Buster Scruggs uses more mythological elements. I hope to make this argument more clear by the next time I write. I hope I can visit you soon, and please make sure Rufus doesn’t wander into any more swamps for me!

Love,

Hayden

Dear Great Aunt Helga,

I hope you are having a great time in Orlando! We missed you and Great Uncle Chester at Christmas this year 😦 Yes all is going well in school and I appreciate your interest in my upcoming paper! As you know the paper is for my mythology and film class, and I need to pick a movie and write about its “mythic qualities”. Sadly I already have picked my movie and could not use your idea of Percy Jackson. Instead I am writing about the original Iron Man movie, which is totally awesome in itself! I still can’t believe you dated Stan Lee in High School! Anyways I am experiencing a little writer’s block with my paper right now and was hoping you could help me out. I am having difficulty making all of my points flow together. I have a lot of ideas, and my paper might be a little all over the place in some parts and a little repetitive in others. When I finish my first draft I can mail it too you and hopefully you can help me edit it all! Mom told me that you used to teach English haha. Also, I am worried that I am not using my sources enough in my paper and I might need to find more. It would help make my points stronger because I will have extra evidence to back it up. On top of all of this, I am worried about the classic grammar and spelling mistakes that have plagued me my whole life haha. Hopefully rereading my essay a lot will help with this, but I am still worried that I will make grammar mistakes, and my sentences will be more complicated than they need to be.

Besides that all is going well for the paper and I am excited about it! Again thank you for the help and I can’t wait to see you again!

Love,
Clayton  

Dear Great-Aunt Helga,

    I appreciate your curiosity about my mythology paper as I have been working very hard on it. I know that GoodFellas featured too much murder for your tastes, but I am glad you found Brad Pitt’s soap making tips in Fight Club useful. I just will not wash my hands at your home any time soon. I am struggling with a few parts of my paper. My thesis focuses on contrasting nationalist myth and archetypal myth which I feel GoodFellas and Fight Club fall into nicely. After tying both movies to their respective category, I feel like the contrasting of the two types of myth is almost pointless; it would just be pointing out the obvious as I describe both kinds of myth throughout the piece. Instead, I might try to add more detail to my argument of why each movie falls into each category as I focused possibly too much on the production processes. In addition to this, I am struggling with the structure of my essay. Right now, I have a section dedicated to the expository side of the piece (production history, director’s history) for each movie. While this is obviously important, it is kind of a block that leads to my analysis as opposed to it flowing with my argument. I am not sure if this is problematic because it is a good way to get my research across and also allows me to have a smooth analysis as opposed to having to stop and explain what happened during the production process. If it is an issue, I will have to find a way to integrate all of that background into my argument without sacrificing the amount of information I have to use. Hopefully I resolve this and formulate a masterpiece that will make my GSI proud.

I hope Orlando is treating you and your sixth toe well!

Love,

Cannon

Dear Great-Aunt Helga,

I hope all is well down in Orlando. I’m writing to tell you all about the final paper in my mythology class. I have to write a 6-8 page, well-researched academic paper on a movie of my choice, finding the connection between its production history and what actually ended up on screen, with a focus on mythology. Production history basically means anything involving the development of the movie or even the inspiration for the movie. There are two types of mythological approaches we can take: nationalistic and archetypal. Nationalist myths represent a set of values of a nation or other group, while archetypal myths represent universal symbolic patterns and values that anyone can relate to.

I chose to write about Spirited Away because of the great memories I had watching it with you as a little kid. I was originally going to attempt to argue the presence of both archetypal and nationalist elements in the movie, but I later realized that it would be far too much content to cover within the page limit. I also had far more evidence for the nationalistic side, so the paper would have felt really unbalanced. I’m now focusing on Hayao Miyazaki’s (the director of the movie) contempt for Japan during the time of the film’s production and how it contributed to the nationalistic mythic storytelling.. According to my sources, Miyazaki felt Japan was abandoning its traditional values of spirituality and discipline, so he made Spirited Away as a sort of message against the cultural shift. He based many of the characters off of different traditional Japanese myths, and attempted to make the movie specific toward the Japanese collective identity and experience.

For the most part, I think the paper is going pretty well! The one thing I’m having trouble with is figuring out specifically what I’m trying to argue in my paper. I also am unsure how I’m going to bring the argument into the bigger picture, and provide a definite “so what?” in order for people to actually be interested in what I have to say. Hopefully as I continue my draft, these issues will sort themselves out. Feel free to give me advice if you have any! I’ll be sure to visit you as soon as possible.

Love,

Trevor