Documentary vs Alger

Compare the reality of the documentary to the reality presented in the reading. Which is more real?

I think that the documentary is more real. Of course, we saw very little of it, but from what we did see, it wasn’t as off-the-wall as the reading.

Alger’s presentation of the world seems to me ridiculous. It’s all very perfect and excellent and unreal. Seriously, who really learns to read and write in a year as an adult, have the opportunity to save a drowning boy and have the father really do something in response? Even if Rockwell didn’t pay the 10,000 dollars he said he would, for Dick, the job he gave is just as good. The main character is just as perfect as the world he lives in. He’s brave and good enough to jump in after a drowning child without thought of reward, thankful for his success, successful and has a loyal friend. Alger’s world is extremely unrealistic. It’s the world we would all like to live in but can’t. I think the word I’m looking for here is ‘cheesy’. At least, that’s how it seemed to me.

Now, the documentary had some ridiculous stuff in it, too. On the whole, though, I think it represents reality more real that Alger does. The people in it are crazy (the rabbit-lady, the one woman who got so depressed because she was the wrong ‘colours’, etc), but they’re crazy in the way all humans are crazy. They’re not perfect. Now, there were some moments, especially in the beginning when they interviewed those singers, that it did border on cheesy. (That’s not a very good word to describe this, but it’s the best I can do). All the interviewees talked about how perfect Flint was, how anyone could drudge up from it, how there were loads of jobs and opportunities, etc., when there clearly wasn’t.