Cities and Films Lecture - Writing Task

Cities and Film – Writing Task

I compared both articles on cities and film and found that both of the sources consider the city as a place of social change and physical change. Both of them through two different forms of media look into the development, architecture and urban environment of the city.

Stout analyses the city in an artistic form, looking at how the public viewed the cities such as through the act of photography. The photo’s showed city folk for what they were, poor and poverty. Maybe this was used as a shock tactic? Or a method of change but the lives still remained poor and nothing.

Stout identifies through journalism the feelings that the pictures convey, they provide a comical portrayal of the city and it’s people, however the actual photographs used more feeling from different perspectives such as artistic and emotional. 

Donald considered the city and architecture to be a not very nice place, possibly stuck in it’s way like an old house, he says things like, ‘ he helped to extend it’s appeal beyond a working class audience to one that incorporated middle classes.’ I think that’s total rubbish I think that society is to blame for what classes we have in the past and today and that the city took away the identity of the people due to the fact they felt like they were’ middle class’ because of the way the city looked and the reality of things.

Both Stout and Donald make good and valid points, they both believe that the cities and it’s architecture have a negative effect on people and there way of life, however this made way for a more urban way of life which is still around today, it created a sense of separation and art in expressing yourself through the city whether you are socially excepted or not.