Friday, November 17, 2017

Power in Candy

            In his essay, Michel Foucault says, “power exists only when it is put into action, even if, of course, it is integrated into a disparate field of possibilities brought to bear upon permanent structures.” Foucault claims that power is not something that a person knowingly creates. It cannot be created but instead is dependent upon peoples’ actions. When people act a certain way, Foucault says power comes into existence. This definition is a bit mind-blowing when you think about it. A person could make one move and unknowingly exert power over someone else. Something that immediately comes to mind when I think of this is the way I used to act when my two younger brothers and I were little. I always used to want to ride in the front seat of the car with our Mom and used the fact that I was the oldest to get my way. When coming out of a store, I would speed up ahead of my brothers, open the car door, and hop in the front seat. While this is a very normal action for a child to perform, Foucault would explain this as an exertion of power. Power over my younger brothers existed when I performed the action of opening the car door.

            The 2005 movie, Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, is very dependent on the characters’ actions when it comes to power. Foucault says, “what defines a relationship of power is that it is a mode of action which does not act directly and immediately on others. Instead, it acts upon their actions: an action upon an action, on existing actions or on those which may arise in the present or the future.” Willy Wonka is the main holder of power in the movie because his actions spark actions from the children, which make him the holder of power in the relationships. For example, Wonka displays the piece of everlasting bubblegum to Violet, knowing she craves competition, which then causes her to take the gum and chew it, which results in her turning into a blueberry. Wonka’s initial action is supported by Violet’s action and their combined actions create power. Wonka holds the power in the relationship between them because his initial action started the trend, and Violet ended up having to listen to Wonka to be cured from her blueberry situation.   

            Throughout the movie, Wonka performs actions that the children respond to. Everything Wonka does, from the placing of the golden tickets in the chocolate bars to giving the children a tour of the factory to announcing Charlie the winner, displays his power over the children and their parents. However, the very last scene of the movie displays Charlie’s power over Wonka, as his choice to track down Wonka’s father eventually leads to Wonka’s allowance of Charlie’s family to stay with him at the chocolate factory. I think Charlie’s display of power over Wonka at the end presents him as the true holder of power in the movie, as Charlie causes the ultimate holder of power to go back on his word and give him what he wants.


            Charlie and the Chocolate Factory is completely dependent on the actions of the characters- on their choices. Whether the power lies in the hands of Charlie or Wonka, the characters’ actions, followed by the string of actions of people they interact with, create the power in the movie, just as Foucault describes. It is crazy to think that a single action can create power over another person. When thinking of power, it seems to always have a negative connotation. However, if actions create power, it seems as if it can sometimes be created without a person even realizing it. Just as Charlie and the Chocolate Factory displays, we should truly think twice about what we are really doing before acting, as it could lead to something you did not originally intend.    

4 comments:

  1. It is interesting to think that simple actions can make a huge difference in terms of power and how easy it can be to manipulate a situation if you are aware of these power plays. You mention how we have to be careful of our actions, which is true but I think many people use their actions to purposely remain in the position of power. And this can range from a group of friends to dictators of countries.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I think this could also be applied to the Hunger Games. Katniss didn't mean to originally show power of President Snow, but when she defied the rules of the Games and told Peeta to eat the berry with her, she did. If she and Peeta had both died, it would have been very bad for the Capital. And as a result, Katniss got her way over someone who was much more powerful than she.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Another thing we can bring up when it comes to the children's actions is how they were raised. From what we can tell, Charlie and his family aren't exactly the most wealthy, especially compared to the other children that get to visit Wonka's factory. The way the children were raised made them think they could have whatever they wanted because they were "privileged." They were well off, which I suppose you could compare to you acting the way you did when you and your brothers were young, because you were "well off" in your age you had more power over them.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I think a great example of Foucalt's definition of power in the real world today is the capitalist market economy. The initial action is consumer's consumption of the product and the resulting action is the fluctuation of prices. I have never viewed power as action versus action but rather solely on person versus person, and my viewpoint on the topic of power has changed completely now.

    ReplyDelete

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.