The Raven Foundation

“Guiltiest guilty pleasure.  Reality T.V.”

So began last night’s episode of ABC’s “20/20” called “Reality Rules.”  Anchor Deborah Roberts continued by claiming “America’s appetite for reality TV is extreme.  In 1998 there were zero hours of reality tv in primetime on broadcast networks.  In 2011, there will be as many as 15 hours per week.  Meanwhile, reality has dominated the cable channels for nearly a decade.”

The second segment of “Reality Rules” focused on Bravo’s hit reality show The Real Housewives of New Jersey.  They showed a scene from this season’s premiere episode.  Melisa and Joe, a couple on the show, had their baby christened.  A brawl between Joe and his brother in law, who also happens to be named Joe, broke out at the after party.

“This is one of the hottest reality shows around and it’s changing the television landscape,” Roberts claimed.

Andy Cohen, the executive producer of the Real Housewives series, started out skeptical about the authenticity of the show.  But in filming the series, he found that when he “scratch[ed] below the surface, [these women] were somehow really human.”

And that anthropological statement is where I want to begin this examination of the reality show that is “changing the television landscape.”

Real Housewives New Jersey is full of drama and violence and it’s tempting for us to avoid discussing reality television.  We could easily view it as the lowest form of pop-culture. But maybe Cohen has a point.  As much as we may criticize reality television for being fake and constructed, there is something very real about it.  It is the reality behind these shows that make many of us uncomfortable with them; that, indeed, make us scapegoat them.  We want to believe that we are nothing like those fake and excessively dramatic people.  But maybe we are more like the stars of reality television than we want to admit. For example, I fear that 85% of family reunions fall into the same cycles of family drama.  Please, no cameras at my house during Thanksgiving.  Okay?  Thanks.

Instead of scapegoating these shows, maybe we could view them as a study in mimetic anthropology.  For example, the main stars of Real Housewives of New Jersey are Teresa Giudice and her husband Joe Giudice.  Teresa’s brother Joe Gorga and his wife Melissa Gorga are also stars in the show.  What makes the show so compelling is the mimetic rivalry between the couples. 

What is a mimetic rivalry?  When we are in a mimetic rivalry with someone, we want what our rival has.  Our rival is also our model for success.  Here’s a great example from the gossip magazine In Touch. (Have I hit a new low by quoting In Touch?”  Okay, let’s not scapegoat gossip magazines!)  The article “Fame Destroyed My Family" (June 6, 2011) starts, “There was a time when Teresa Giudice found strength in the love of her family – and knew that no matter what life handed her, she could count on their unwavering support.  But that was before Teresa became a star on The Real Housewives of New Jersey – and achieved the type of fame that her younger brother, Joe Gorga, and his wife, Melissa, desperately wanted for themselves.”

That’s the formula for mimetic rivalry.  We desperately want what our rival, who is also our model, has.  Joe and Melissa Gorga desperately want fame, not because they are necessarily bad and greedy people, but because their sister and brother-in-law has it.

When we are in a mimetic rivalry, we want what our rival has, but we also want to become our rival.  In other words, we want to possess the essence of our rival.  Joe Giudice points this out in the article.  The article claims that “Melissa and Joe Gorga love the cameras and wanted a taste of the spotlight badly.”  The next sentence quotes Joe Giudice as saying, “They want to be me and they obviously want to be Teresa …  Go find your own life!”  The drama continues in the same paragraph.  (Oh boy.)  Melissa “claims on her blog that Teresa tried to keep them off the show so that she could be the more successful sibling – which Teresa and Joe Giudice deny.”

So much drama.  But I do think there is an anthropological truth here.  In rivalry, we always want what the other has, and we always think that we deserve what the other has more than the other deserves it.  We blame and demonize our rival, while at the same time think we are the innocent one, the good one.  But the truth is, when it comes to rivalries, no one is innocent. 

So, we’re left asking, “What’s the way out of a mimetic rivalry?”

For the Giudices and for the Gorgas, the only way out of a mimetic rivalry is to let go of the shared desire. If they really want reconciliation, the Giudices and Gorgas need to release their shared desire for fame.  In order to do that, they need to find a new model that will lead them away from rivalry and toward compassion.  That’s a difficult and painful spiritual transformation, but that's the transformation they need. 

And, in a world that breeds rivalry, that's the transformation we all need – unless you happen to live in a monastary . . . a desert monastary.

Suzanne and Adam discuss the Royal Wedding. While William and Kate tied the knot in a very modern way, what do we know about the formation of ancient kingship? What is the point of a monarchy? Suzanne and Adam discuss the monarchy as it relates to mimetic theory, kingship, archaic sacrifice, and violence.

Adobe Flash Player not installed or older than 9.0.115!

The 2011 Raven Award for Excellence in Arts and Entertainment was presented to Award winning composer and lyricist Stephen Schwartz for the blockbuster musical Wicked on March 1, 2011 at the Loyola University Museum of Art. The evening included a champagne reception and an interview of the honoree by Suzanne Ross.

Raven Founder Suzanne Ross, Raven Award Recipient Stephen Schwartz and Raven Founder Keith Ross.

Suzanne and Stephen enjoy a moment during their interview. Listen to their lively and engaging conversation. View a slide show of the event.

Celebrating Wicked

Entertainment Weekly declared Wicked to be the best musical of the decade, and we agree. Not only is it blockbuster entertainment, but like a powerful tornado, it upends what you thought you knew about how to be good and where wickedness is hiding. Join us in honoring the talented, profound, and award winning Stephen Schwartz, composer and lyricist for this original and provocative musical. It promises to be a Wicked celebration!

For an exploration of the themes and insights found in Wicked, see The Wicked Truth: When Good People Do Bad Things  by Suzanne Ross.

"It is a rare privilege as an artist to have one's work explored in such a profound way. The Wicked Truth is a fascinating and valuable study of the ways we all wrestle with the wickedness within and without us and how we can combat it." Stephen Schwartz, Composer/Lyricist, Wicked

The Wicked Truth is the thinking person's guide to the wildly successful Broadway musical Wicked. Using political, social, and historical examples, it explores the ways in which modern society is not so different than the mythical land of Oz. The Wicked Truth challenges the very framework of our culture, our understanding of Good and Evil, as well as our sense of right and wrong. Whether you've seen the show or not, discovering The Wicked Truth's broad application, to everything from personal relationships to how our society is governed, will leave you spellbound.

Award Recipient

 Stephen Schwartz was born in New York City on March 6, 1948. He studied piano and composition at the Juilliard School of Music while in high school and graduated from Carnegie Mellon University in 1968 with a B.F.A. in Drama. Upon coming back to live in New York City, he went to work as a producer for RCA Records, but shortly thereafter began to work in the Broadway theatre. His first major credit was the title song for the play BUTTERFLIES ARE FREE; the song was eventually used in the movie version, as well.
Photo: Joan Lauren

In 1971, he wrote the music and new lyrics for GODSPELL, for which he won several awards, including two Grammys. This was followed by the English texts in collaboration with Leonard Bernstein for Bernstein’s MASS, which opened the Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts in Washington, D.C. The following year, he wrote the music and lyrics for PIPPIN, and two years later, THE MAGIC SHOW. At one point, GODSPELL, PIPPIN and THE MAGIC SHOW were all running on Broadway simultaneously.

He next wrote the music and lyrics for THE BAKER’S WIFE, followed by a musical version of Studs Terkel’s WORKING, to which he contributed four songs and which he also adapted and directed, winning the Drama Desk Award as best director. He also co-directed the television production, which was presented as part of the PBS “American Playhouse” series. Next came songs for a one-act musical for children, CAPTAIN LOUIE, and a children’s book, THE PERFECT PEACH. He then wrote music for three of the songs in the Off-Broadway revue, PERSONALS, lyrics to Charles Strouse’s music for RAGS, and music and lyrics for CHILDREN OF EDEN.

He then began working in film, collaborating with composer Alan Menken on the scores for the Disney animated features POCAHONTAS, for which he received two Academy Awards and another Grammy, and THE HUNCHBACK OF NOTRE DAME. He also provided songs for DreamWorks’ first animated feature, THE PRINCE OF EGYPT, for which he won another Academy Award for the song “When You Believe.” He most recently collaborated with Alan Menken on the songs for Disney’s ENCHANTED.

Mr. Schwartz provided music and lyrics for the original television musical, GEPPETTO, seen on The Wonderful World of Disney and recently adapted for the stage as MY SON PINOCCHIO. He has released two CDs on which he sings new songs, entitled RELUCTANT PILGRIM and UNCHARTED TERRITORY.

Mr. Schwartz’s most recent musical, WICKED, opened in the fall of 2003 and is currently running on Broadway and in several other productions around the United States and the world. In 2008, WICKED reached its 1900th performance on Broadway, making Mr. Schwartz the only songwriter in Broadway history ever to have three shows run more than 1900 performances.

His first opera, SEANCE ON A WET AFTERNOON, will be presented by the New York City Opera in April 2011.

Mr. Schwartz has recently been given a star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame and inducted into the Theatre Hall of Fame and the Songwriters Hall of Fame. A book about his career, “Defying Gravity,” has recently been released by Applause Books.

Under the auspices of the ASCAP Foundation, he runs musical theatre workshops in New York and Los Angeles and serves on the ASCAP board; he is also currently President of the Dramatists’ Guild. For further information, please visit http://www.stephenschwartz.com.

This morning it was the penguin.

It could just as easily have been the bear, the dog, the giraffe, or even the man dressed in blue pajamas who is missing his red cape.  But this morning it was the hand puppet penguin.

I have two boys, ages four and two.  They are adorable little tykes (which they clearly get from their Mother), but sometimes they fight.  As children do.

“I want penguin!” shouted our youngest.  (Part of what makes him adorable is that he isn’t quite speaking in full sentences yet.  That’s cute.)

“I had it first!” retorted his older brother.

Of course, our house is F.A.O. Schwartz on steroids.  Toys are everywhere: We have stuffed animals, Hot Wheels, Playmobils, and even a roller coaster in our basement.  (Seriously.  I ride it frequently.)  “Are you kidding me?”  I began to wonder.  “Why are you fighting over a stupid hand puppet penguin when we have a freakin roller coaster in our basement?”

I tried all the parental tricks I know.  Distraction.  Reasoning.  Sharing. None of it worked.  Why?

Here’s the thing: It wasn’t about the penguin.  The only reason our younger son wanted the penguin was because our older son had it.  His possession of the toy made that toy desirable – more desirable than any other toy.  But it was about our older son – his possession of the penguin.  So, they got in a power struggle over possessing a penguin.  Seems pretty irrational, huh?  Especially when you consider that there is a roller coaster in our basement!

It may seem irrational, but it is human.  As Rene Girard wrote in his book Deceit, Desire and the Novel, humans “desire according to Another” (4, italics in original).  So, our youngest son was desiring according to the desire of his older brother.  This created a cycle that went like this: the more our older son wanted to keep the penguin, the more our younger son wanted the penguin.  The more our younger son wanted the penguin, the more our older son wanted to keep the penguin.   That cycle of desire is natural, as is the unfortunate conflict that ensues.

It is easy to see how this mechanism works in children, but the truth is that adults fall into the same traps.  I’ve heard that married couples sometimes fight like this.  But, for me, the most obvious example is in our politics.  When we pick a political side of the spectrum, we often fall into the trap of trying to grasp political power from the other person or party.  Politics becomes our stupid penguin.  But again, it’s not about the penguin; it’s about possessing what the other has.  Sure.  Ideally, politics is about finding ways to do what’s best for citizens of a country.  Unfortunately, we so often use politics as a means to exert our political will.  It becomes a game of winners and losers, of possessing power, as opposed to doing what’s best for a country.  Yes, yes.  We have some different ideas about what is best for the country, but our ideas are mired in our shared desire to win the political power game.

So, what’s the solution?  I don’t know.  When my boys were fighting over the penguin, I asked our older son to look at his brother’s face and tell me what he saw.  Well, he ran off crying and I felt like the world’s worst Dad.  But, now that I’ve had a few hours to reflect about that, it seems to me he ran off crying because in that moment he empathized with his brother.  He moved into his brother’s place.  He felt his brother’s humanity.  And that’s an intense experience.  When we are able to have that experience with a family member (or a political opponent) to run off crying is an appropriate response.

I’m gonna go ride the roller coaster.

Adobe Flash Player not installed or older than 9.0.115!

Becoming a father of two young boys has allowed me to relive my childhood movies.  Working with mimetic theory for the last three years has made me sensitive to whatever bears the marks of mimesis.  So, when my boys began watching The Jungle Book, I couldn’t help but notice René Girard’s master theory of human relationships play out on our television screen.

Girard claims that what makes us human is our natural capacity to imitate the desires of others.  His basic formula that we “desire according to Another” is simple, but far from simplistic.  (Stick with me here.)  The ramifications of mimetic theory impact every facet of human relationships.  One major implication of the formula is that we tend to desire acquisitively.  In other words, we seek to acquire objects another person desires or possesses.  Acquisitive mimesis leads us into rivalry for objects.  As one person reaches to acquire an object, another person reaches to keep and protect the object.  It doesn’t take long before the object no longer matters; what we really seek is to acquire the identity of the other person.               

What gives the animals in The Jungle Book a human-like quality is their capacity for mimetic desire.  In this song, appropriately called, I Wanna Be Like You, we are given a primer on mimetic desire.  King Louie speaks for his fellow apes when he sings to Mowgli the mancub, “I wanna be like you, I wanna walk like you, talk like you, too.  You’ll see it’s true, an ape like me, can learn to be human too.”

Later in the song, King Louie claims that he desires “man’s red fire.”  In terms of mimetic theory, we would call this the object.  King Louie doesn’t really want to acquire “man’s red fire.”  What he really wants is to acquire the identity of being human.

Acquisitive mimesis is a dangerous part of our humanity.  Bagheera the panther rightly conveys the danger.  He understands that Mowgli’s life is in jeopardy, so he and Baloo the bear devise a plan to rescue Mowgli from Louie’s acquisitive desire.  Here we see acquisitive mimesis at play again.  When Louie discovers their plan to rescue (or is it acquire?) Mowgli, Louie wants to keep Mowgli even more.  If the clip continued for a few more minutes, we would see Mowgli in the paws of Baloo, then Louie would acquire Mowgli, then Baloo, then Louie, and finally Mowgli ends up in the safe paws of Baloo.

Whenever I refer to childhood stories to explain mimetic theory, I worry that the explanation might not be taken seriously.  We would be remised if we discounted The Jungle Book’s anthropological message.  It is a classic story because its message about human desire are true.  René Girard’s mimetic theory helps us understand that truth.