The Waffle; Conform to Conformity

In the book Uniforms: Why We Are What We Wear, Paul Fussell says “…everyone must wear a uniform, but everyone must deny wearing one.” His comment addresses people’s need to express individuality therefore denying the uniform or uniformity, however they so often yearn to be like everyone else. There are many that wear their uniform with pride. The members of Kairos are known to wear the waffle to symbolize an unforgettable weekend. People come together for the most part as strangers but leave feeling forever connected by the weekend they spent together.

   

            Kairos is a spiritual retreat where participants contemplate God’s role in their lives. Although it is a Christian retreat they don’t discriminate or deny people participation. The meaning of the retreat has evolved into more of a statement. People who go on the retreat are on “the inside.” They keep it secret as to not ruin the surprise for future attendees. The evolution of what the trip means has ultimately changed how people, at least at New Trier, react to the Kairos symbol. To people who have not attended Kairos, the waffle may be seen as an inspiration to go. Other people may view the waffle as a symbol of something that will remain a secret forever. People who have attended Kairos won’t deny that they ultimately changed because of the retreat. People who wear the Kairos waffle don’t deny wearing it. Instead they wear it as a reminder to themselves of how important their trip was.

 

             However, in another part of Fussell’s quote about uniforms he says, “if you refuse to dress like others, you will be ridiculed, and no one wants to appear in public dressed like a fool or an odd-ball.” This is what the Kairos waffle is really about. Kairos members have created their own “norm” by making the odd-balls the people who are not wearing the waffle. The Kairos kids don’t ridicule others, but the secrecy of the retreat makes everyone who hasn’t had the Kairos experience are the outsider or “odd-ball.”

Everything Creates the World we Inhabit

What are the ways that the influences in our lives create a world that we inhabit?

Everything that is seen or heard, whether we consciously take it in or not, will eventually shape a small part of who we are. Radio can influence what we do and do not listen to, we choose our channels based on our beliefs or music taste. The radio can shape how we think about certain topics, if listening to a talk show, give us new perspectives to a community, state, national, or international crisis or event. Radio talk shows that revolve around politics can influence the listener to lean towards one political party even if strong feelings were already held with the opposite party. The popular talk show in the chicagoland area "Eric and Kathy on the Mix" can change conversation just due to the amount of people who listen to it in the mornings on their way to school or work. People make references to radio all of the time.
People also make references to movies all the time. Movies can influence who someone talks to, if sharing a liking or disliking of a similar movie. It also can influence how people act. After watching a moving documentary people could stop going somewhere or start using something that the documentary revolves around. Same with commercials on television or the previews before a movie at the theatres; someone may buy a product or go see a certain movie due to the advertisement they say.
Parents are one of the sole creators of the world we inhibit. Childhood has been proven by psychologists such as Lorenz, Freud and Erikson to be a pertinent time of our lives. How parents treat a child during the first few years of life can be the reasons why a person acts they way they do in later life. Parents are also the first teachers in life. They teach you morals; do this, but not that. Parents can influence our later decisions as well. When applying to colleges parents can influence where their child should apply even if they say nothing at all. Their child may be inclined to go to their parents alma mater even if the parents never pressure them into applying just due to the fact that parents are great influences in our lives; if a student applying to colleges thinks that their parent is great maybe they think the college they went to helped them turn out to be the person they are now. Also the opposite can be applied to this situation as well; a person applying to colleges may immediately take off the college their parents went to because they don't want to become their parents.

Shortcomings

In this scene, Keyes is talking to a man known to have seen "Mr. Dietrichson" at the trian station. The actual Mr. Dietrichson did not show up at the train station. Filling Mr. Dietrichson's shoes was Walter Neff.
Walter Neff is incredibly nervous in this scene. He is a sitting duck, waiting to see if the man from the train recognizes him or not. Walter is clearly nervous, just by looking at the stance he is taking. He is standing with a protective arm across his chest, while the other arm is to his mouth, as if he is biting his nails in anticipation. His brow is furrowed and he is staring at the man who could decide his fate. Walter is also leaning against a large cabinet structure. The structure is massive, in heighth and width. Walter is a tall man and if he were to lean against something it needs to be able to hold him up, which this successfully does.
The fan in the room is still during this scene. It can indicate that the air in the room is still as well, it doesn't give any relief to Walter, who probably is sweating through his suit. The fan not moving adds to the fact that everything is waiting in this scene. The man from the train station is waiting to get out of there to enjoy his short vacation, Keyes is waiting for the man to give any hint to whether or not he saw the real Mr. Dietrichson and Walter is waiting to see if the man recognizes him.
Keyes is more of the foreground of this shot while Walter is the background. This is often done throughout the film, to create the effect that Keyes is taller than he actually is. Keyes is supposed to be the big authority figure, when in fact he is so much smaller than Walter. Also, Keyes plays a more prominent role during this scene as investigator, while Walter can't do to much and is just watching the discussion unfold.
The man from the train station was craftily placed between the two men to show that he is the separating factor. He stands (or sits) alone as the deciding factor to Walter's fate, and to Keyes' discovery of Walter's crime.

Two Sides Divided

Although the pre-crime cop, Fletcher, is standing dead center in this shot from Minority Report, he is not the main subject. Fletcher stands there not really to act as a person in this shot, but as a wall that divides Chief John Anderton (Cruise) and Danny Witwer (Farrell). When looking at this shot, the viewer's eyes are drawn to both Anderton and Witwer, skillfully placed on opposite sides of the screen. They are on either side of the screen so the viewer decides which person to look at, already making them choose a side. Anderton being on the side for pre-crime, and Witwer being against pre-crime.
The darkness in the middle created by Fletcher creates a literal seperation of sides; a wall. The darkness is contrasted with the light that is casted on Anderton and Witwer's faces. They stand equidistant from Fletcher and have the same light on their faces and bodies. They even stand eye-to-eye, even though the height of the actors varies by three inches (Farrell being the taller of the two).
A close shot created the perfect effect, making visible the distance between the two highly ranked officers of the law, as well as keeping the facial features still visible.
The two sides of the screen are very equal in appearance, the only varying factors are the clothes, and what is immediately behind the head of Anderton and Witwer. Anderton is in a polo, which tends to be more relatable attire than the suit that Witwer wears. Suits are more often thought to be worn by "men who mean business" and have a colder appeal. What is directly behind the heads of Anderton and Witwer was probably not intentional, however it still adds to the shot. Behind the men is the screen that Anderton uses to conduct the break down of each crime scene. The lighting used in the room creates a warped effect on the screen. Inbetween the two men there really isn't any effect, but behind Anderton's head it gets very messy and warped, which is how his mind works as well. He believes in pre-crime and follows the rules (for the beginning of the film), yet he still has a void that needs to be filled, which he fills with illegal drugs. Not so morally sound for a chief. As for what is behind Witwer's head, it goes along with how his mind works as well. There are a few lines right near the top of his head. Very exact, very precise, just like his motives. His goal is to find the hitch in pre-crime, to find a fault.