reading media texts journal

context i something i seem to be able to grasp a little more easily, for some reason.
my notes from the class say that context is the situation (place and time) in which a text is “read”. context is constantly changing, from minute to minute, person to person.
The example we used in class really got through to me, so i will try to elaborate on it and then give my own example a go.
in the example from class the text was WW2. we looked at how the same text could have a different meaning, depending on which context it was placed in. first we watched 2 film previews for films about WW2 that were made when WW2 was just beginning. the films starred big-named actors. they were propaganda films to make people feel positive about the war, like a pep talk. in this context the text (WW2) was read as a huge, manly adventure for brave, handsome and smart guys.
the next film was made after the war and was about a former fighter pilot who had been to war and was surveying a “graveyard” of fighter planes. the mood of the film is solemn, reflective and sad. in this context, the war is seen as a burden this man must shoulder for the rest of his life. in this context, the war is something which has negatively affected people.
we watched some more films after that but i think these two examples really give the gist of it. in different times and places the same text can have a different meaning. different attitudes, experiences and knowledge evolve with time and differ from place to place, so the one text can be viewed in myriad way. while the text remains essentially as the same “thing”, it can be read differently depending on who and where (space and time) we are (ie, the war will be seen “through different eyes” from country to country, military to civilian, one century to the next etc).
i will try another example…i will try a quite traditional text to give me more of a feel for it.
“a clockwork orange”
in this case, making it a bit more complicated, the text is actually 2 texts, originally a book by anthony burgess, and then a film directed by stanley kubrick. but for this i guess we’ll just stick with the film.
when the film was first released it drew a lot of controversy. the film contains a lot of violence and sexual violence.
in the UK for the film was hard to see for 27 years because of how controversial its violent scenes and ideas were.
in the US people were accused of copycat crimes and 30 seconds of the film had to be replaced with something less extreme to get the rating from X to R.
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Clockwork_Orange_%28film%29#Responses_and_controversy)
these days though, the film is a cult favourite. while the film has not changed, the context has, and peoples reaction and reading of it has changed. people no longer see it as a senselessly violent film, they see it as commentary on institutions, society and control. another interesting point is the violence itself- the lvel of violence remains the same yet people have a much more subdued response to it because as time has passed we have been desensitised against violence- we see ultra-real violence in movie and on television and the shock factor that people must have experienced when the film came out is no longer the same.