Fast Times at Stuyvesant High

Hey FUNFUNFUN,

It's not a movie "completeley about exciting moments etc at Stuy". It's just a flyer mentioning Stuyvesant because that's where the Tribecca Film Festival has it's screenings every year.

I left a long comment before, this is a short one :)

correction - commented

typos

Seriously, all of you attacking the people who commend on the poster's portrayal mainly black students needs to calm down and just consider what these people are saying. They're not trying to be racist, they're just saying that the advertisement goes out of its way to represent a minority that is not largely represented in the school. I don't think any one is trying to be offensive or prejudice, and there's no need to get on your high horse and criticize these people who are trying to be honest. There's no need to get into the specifics of various races and skin colors, it was just someone's observation.

I think that this has to be the dumbest thing ever made. Even my friends from stuy have to agree with me. I actually go to Brooklyn Tech, and am quite happy I didn't get into Stuy considering that I probably can't take the work force. I did get into Bronx Science, but I didn't bother since Tech is closer.

Now, besides me, there were thousands of kids attempting to get into Stuy. Many of them tried their best.

Now, to be as egotistical as to go and make a movie completely about exciting moments etc at Stuy, well... that's retarded. Now there are thousands of kids across the city feeling stuy envy thanks to this. I already see numerous people talk about jumping stuy kids. I find that kind of stupid, but I feel sorry for the kids going there who have to put up with it. Oh well. Blame the idiots who made it.

Oh, and the poster is of horrible design. The only relevance to the school would be the fact that it says it. And there are no black people in Stuy. Don't give me that bullshit about them looking similar. They don't. Fail.

where is the hole in the wall?

where is the ugly bridge?

Since being in special progress, advanced placement, Stuyvesant, Trinity, all these elite institutions, I've always made the mistake of expecting my peers to be in the top percent intellectually, to be the wisest, and the most open minded or learned scholars.

Yet these schools do not admit us based on our actual experience, understanding, etc. We get in mostly due to our awareness of the test-taking process, our ability or preparation for specific exams, etc.

I understand Tien's concern, because i have been similarly disappointed with having elite academic institutions misrepresent the group I believe myself to be apart of, which is a group not only intelligent in taking tests, or in particular subjects, but intelligent in understanding other people, in finding the truth beyond assumptions, and intelligent enough to know that - when someone tells me i'm the smartest person in the world based on a test - there may be more to the story.

If you'll follow the metaphor: Stuyvesant is to the group of really intelligent youth in New York City, as the above flyer is to Stuyvesant.

The flyer represents some part of Stuyvesant and it's relationship to the film event in particular. However, it will disappoint some to see that it is not a large scale representation of their own connection to the school.

In much the same way, the school represents some part of the really intelligent youth in New York City, and those with access to entry in particular. However, it will disappoint some to find that it is not a large scale representation of all the intelligent youth of New York.

This is not specific to Stuyvesant by any means, by the way, because it consistantly pops up in every elite class and institution I've attended.

To simplify, those of us who attend these schools either have egos and self-esteem high enough, OR mentors, guidance counsellors, relatives who believe in us enough, that we become aware of these institutions, believe we belong in them, and do what is required to get in.

There is nothing wrong with this, the problem emerges when we mistake our self-esteem and ego for actual intelligence and value to the society at large. Of course, that type of mistake sort of goes along with having a big ego, but you'd think if our ego was based on how intelligent we are, we'd forego this kind of mistake.

LET ME SAY THAT I AM SORRY FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO FIND THIS TO BE AN UNECESSARILY LONG "COMMENT".

I find that it only takes a sound byte or a quick assumption to make a certain group feel bad or separate, but it takes a bit more to discuss why things really are the way they are. So this post isn't intended to be humourous or entertaining per se, but to address some very sensitive issues that were brought up here, in an honest way rather than be quiet or leave the issues to a quick opinion here and there. This is the type of thoughtful discourse I expected from my peers at Stuyvesant, and that I would still hope to represent us with.

HERE ARE A FEW POINTS REGARDING THIS FLYER, AND WHAT WE REPRESENT AS STUYVESANT STUDENTS AND ALUMS

1. One of the things that I got at Stuyvesant was a glipse out how diverse Asia is, and how many different groups of people we are referring to when we use the word "Asia". There are Cambodian, Vietnamese, Chinese, Indian, Korean, Burmese, Thai, and Japanese students at Stuyvesant, just to name a few. I'm not sure how one would represent "THE ASIAN" so to speak. And since this one monolithic image of the Asian student isn't real anyway, I'm not sure I will EVER see this representation.

2. Even though there are far less Black students at Stuyvesant, there are enough to observe that there are a large number "Black" people who are more light-skinned than a many Asian people. There are many dark-skinned Asian people and many light-skinned "Black" people.

3. If you ever go to the Carribean, which many Stuyvesant students do for their graduation trip, you will see that many Black people ARE Asian, and many Asian people ARE Black. Because Carribean society promotes nationalistic pride somewhat more heavily than racial pride there is a larger amount of people of different features being comfortable with, and raising children with eachother.

4. The categories of Asian and Black are based on two criteria: physical characteristic and geographic location. Humans have reproduced sexually for quite some time now, which means that successive generations have always been different from the previous, which is a problem with classifying people of the same species by separate, yet static descriptions. Additionally, modern technologies and modern civil rights have allowed for a drastic increase in how frequently members of the same family alter both the geographic location (birth place or residence), and physical characteristics of their children.

So it is not surprising to see two children, of the same mother, who live on two different continents, whose children have very different features, and who go to work every day, speaking two different languages.

(Ironically, also due to modern technology, people may soon choose to reproduce ASEXUALLY, which would mean it then becomes easier again to say "He's just Asian" or "She's just Black" - I personally hope that we as humans can control and improve the words that we use to identify ourselves, rather than have these words, and constructed identities determine or control the way we reproduce and interact with eachother)

5. The "Black" people on the above flyer, whom, as JM has already pointed out, clearly appear Asian if you've seen the actual poster, do not appear very Black or Afrocentric, there are no traditional symbols of "Blackness", no African symbols, no red black and green flags, no locks, or afros, or dashikis. There are many Black students at Stuyvesant with very dark skin, and with much denser concentrations of melanin in their skin than these two characters. What is it that we consider so Black-but-not-Asian about them? Is it the orange skin?

6. To bring this full circle, the last observation leads to another important point, which I first became conscious of at Stuyvesant - I'm not sure if we know what it means to be human, to be ourselves, to be "Black", "White", "Asian", or "Latino" (a word which surprisingly didn't come up to describe the flyer's apparent non-Asian-ness, but not really surprising since "Black" is practically a keyword for controversy in our society), if we define who we are these days, or if we just go with the propoganda.

The Northface brand which became extremely popular with Asian students was started by some hikers in California who liked hiking - is there something inherently "Asian" in this? Are they contributing to Asian charities? Or doing something besides making fashionable hiking gear that raises the quality of life for people of Asian descent? I would ask the same questions of the Guess/Polo, and Hilfiger brands which became so popular with Black students - is there something inherently beneficial to Black people in these brands?

As far as I know, most of the popular brands still practice large-scale exploitation of Asian workers (many women and children) - also known as slave labor - and employ exploitation of the prison industrial complex - which disproportianately convicts Black youth for minor offences (as has been statistically shown in many an eye-opening study) - also known as prison labor, to make increase profit and lower cost of labor (literally paying a few cents per hour to these mostly Asian and Black laborers, with little to no safety provisions)

7. Popular Music and Music Videos provide a plethora of quick examples of how something can be hugely popular in mainstream media athough it is hugely unpopular, detestible, or simply unauthentic when compared with the lives, viewpoints, and realities of most of our society.

Many of us can UNDERSTAND why something is popular even if we don't agree with it. For instance, we understand a product will be more popular if associated with sex and violence, even though we would rather have it become popular based on it's actual value/merit.

Having that in mind, I can see that the popular symbol of Stuyvesant is the "Nerd" with a pocket protector. I can see that casual clothes and colored skin sells a "cooler" image of the school.

My question is why is it appropriate to register White and Asian youth as symbolic of intelligence, and register Latino and Black youth as symbolic of cool, before the've even gotten half way through their teens? Why does something as universal as smiling register as a Black image? Why is it appropriate to use hiphop to sell products and the fashion trends emerging from Black communities to look good, but not appropriate to represent the Black intellects? There is a huge Asian influence on hiphop, why isn't it appropriate to see "cool" dressed students as Asian and/or Black yet?

8. I sometimes do workshops for public school students, regarding the pursuit of higher education. It is alarming how convinced the students are that they will not go to college, even if they are producing exceptional grades. I LITERALLY have to convince them and explain to them how they can pay for college through grants, scholarships, etc. how even many wealthy students do not pay for part or all of their education, and furthermore that there are options with financial aid and loans. As some of you know, after White women, the handicapped, and Latino people, affirmative action benefits Black and Asian students.

Elite students are simply not the most "gifted", we are the ones who feel the most ENTITLED and the ones who are the most AWARE of our options.

So it is good that we should all feel entitled and demand to be represented on a flyer, poster, or anything else, but how many "Asian" students want to represent something Authentically Asian on the flyer? (symbols, language, culture, diversity of the continent, involvement with things not known to be Asian). How many "Black" students want to represent something Authentically Black on the flyer, in the same regard?

I would like to see this flyer with different versions to it, hundreds of different complexions, features, clothing styles, symbols, to truly represent all the intelligent, beautiful, talented students of Stuyvesant. They would all promote the same event with a different face. But alas! it is only one flyer for one event out of many that Stuyvesant is involved in - and though the characters do not represent or replicate me, or many of the students there - I can bet that there are probably a young man and woman who look just like those two (maybe they even modeled for the picture) - and more importantly I can see that all of us have something in common with the two characters on that flyer.

It wasn't too long ago that there were NO women accepted to Stuyvesant, there was no room for Black, Brown, or Asian students either, although all of these groups have made extremely important leaps and contributions to our global civilizations from thousands of years. It always pains me to see racially-based competition or hate between Black and Asian people, because the history of this country has shown that if Asian people had the most noticeably different physical trait from slave traders, the proportions of incarceration and academic pursuit would likely be the same but with the names reversed. Asian people have been exploited in America from the railroads to the clothing warehouses, and now in the oh so lucrative pornography industry. If we really are the elite intelligentsia, let's not continue to diss other people based on how they look different from us.

Do we want one monolithic stereotype? Stereotyping doesn't require intelligence or awareness. All it takes is some heresay, some distance, assumptions, and self-esteem gone wrong, twisting into insecurity. I still believe Stuyvesant is a nurturer of intelligence; let's represent Stuyvesant with intelligence, not stereotypes.

I wasn't going to post anything. The first thing I thought that was weird about the poster was the two brownish skinned people that are in focus. But all the comments from people who noticed this seem like you took it too personally. There are inaccuratcies in population samples all over the place in advertising. Let it go or fight the power. I do understand the group that was missing and that represented the largest part of stuy was asian and a minority in America, but hey we've been going through it since we got here. Your time of over representation, to make up for the inaccuracies, will come.

regarding the images on the poster, i agree with jesse. aside from the drawing of stuyvesant's building, all the other images are just sort of random. the new york skyline isn't visible from where stuy is, a limo doesn't really have anything to do with the school, and the people on the top of the poster look more like movie goers rather than students.

whoa, the above comments, except for scott, are completely idiotic. you all just took down my opinion of stuy grads.

like hello?!?!?....the person who created the poster OBVIOUSLY did not like take drafting....like the entire right side (east side?) of the building is like totally missing...geez!!!

and like who the hell eats popcorn in the Murray Kahn theater!?

alright peeps, i think everyone needs to chill the f#@k out. i graduated in '96, and i'm fully aware that there was a limited number of black kids in the school, but I think everyone's reading too much into the poster. it's merely an ad! the couple in the poster are probably just new yorkers going to the festival to enjoy the movies, and not a representation of the student population. just the fact that they mentioned the school and have a picture of it was pretty cool. Aren't we asking too much when we also expect some marketing intern to research our school population? This was one of the lasting impressions that many stuy kids exuded across the city that i hoped we would grow out of, but apparently have not- THAT WE ARE JUST WAY TO FULL OF OURSELVES! GROW UP!

as for the "something weird," is it that the guy on the left appears to be smoking up? or maybe im reading too much into this and hes just giving the a-okay sign. i think smoking might be more accurate, but whatever.

oh my god. haven't any of you seen the poster in person. it's really obvious on the poster in person that they are both asian. does that make you all happy?

Being a black female who graduated from Stuy, I can tell you it seems quite strange to have black people on an ad for a school where blacks were sorely lacking. Maybe it's an "optimistic" poster....

Uhm... there's definitely something wrong with the building. There are no windows on the right hand side, which means either a) we're looking at the back of the building (which is now covered because there's a building there.. which, btw, has a really nice lobby) or b) we're looking at the front of the building (which the left side appears to represent), then there are no windows and no bridge. The rest of the stuff I can accept as some sort of montage. But the building is all screwy.

I smoked pot in the stairwell once but that's about all I remember.

i need to steal one of those posters.

heh, i remember geller catching me cut class a couple of times.

i thought everyone's favourite teacher was orna? ;)

i was in the first class to graduate from the new building (1993) and let me tell you, we never looked like THAT. also, mayhaps i would have attended class more often if there were limos and stars shooting out of the sky or the cannon that is apparently the empire state building, but alas, this was not the case.

I think it's a retro-70s theme. But nothing about the poster says "Stuyvesant" to me except the outline of the building. Nothing really says "Ridgemont High" either. It's just a jumble of bizarre, unconnected images. I don't recall exactly what the other ads look like, but I don't think they have much to do with the movie name they're parodying either.

Then again, I was in Toby's class at the real - I mean "old" - building, so what do I know about downtown Stuy? Maybe it really was a funkadelic place where everyone commuted by limo.

And Geller rocked. Thanks to him, I actually understood calculus.

If the 70s theme is carried through, then it should be the old Stuy building. But then it wouldn't be involved with the Tribeca Film Festival, so I don't know - the pimping white limo?

perhaps that the auditorium wasn't a classroom at all, and that they label it as one is weird?

hey, where'd that white limo come from? wish i had that when i was at stuy... dang. ;)

sam, clearly you don't know what the school was like. i'm not saying it was a picture of racial harmony or anything. there just weren't many black people.

spae, i had geller as my homeroom teacher...it was a very organized homeroom.

whatever--it a symbolic design--be happy they mentioned your school--and so what no asians are featured--who said a fictional and lets not forget-ADVERTISEMENT--has to be completely accurate to the percentage breakdown of races at stuy. stop hating on the "black" people in the picture. they actually look orange to me...

its sad...to have graduated from such a highly regarded school, some of you make some pretty close minded comments.

where are the cups of coffee? where is the SAT symbolism? where are the asians? : )

and... where's mr. geller? (or insert your favorite teacher here) : )

i love your blog!

Hard to get the details from the screen image. Do you mean the traffic light?

I graduated out of the old building, so all this newfangled stuff is whippersnapper business. You know.

I was in the last class out of the old building so no opinion about that, but yeah, it's weird to have only black people on the poster. I think my class was 6% black, 51% Asian. I think the limo maybe implies the fabulous way you'd arrive to the festival? Maybe?

nono, it's definitely the black people. i think it's a collage of images associated with stuy. and not sure about the limo, i didn't think the prom was that big a deal.

not to be racial or anything...but think about it. at stuy, half of the people are asian and a quarter are chinese. so to have two black people on the poster strikes me as the most "off" thing. it's true, ask any stuy alum.

I must be behind the times. Since when did we move the Empire State Building to Jersey? And since when did they landfill the Hudson with a beautiful promenade and a white limosine? Check it out for yourself: http://www.stuy.edu/about/

Are those supposed to be the outlines of the twin towers on the right-hand side of the image? The poster's supposed to have a retro look, but still, weird given the school's proximity to ground zero and the effect it had on Stuyvesant.

black people?!? well, i guess we did have a few...but why no asian flava?

We appear to be standing in the middle of the Hudson River? The theater is south of the pool...

Um, how about the asynchonous graphic design?

Fast Times came out in 1986, but Love American Style was over by 1974. The Electric Company, meanwhile, stopped shooting in 1977.

It points to a designer who didn't actually live in the 70's, only through That 70's Show. The way I learned about the 50's from Happy Days.