Page 36 of 59 FirstFirst ... 26343536373846 ... LastLast
Results 526 to 540 of 883

Thread: Dematerialisation.

  1. #526
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    25,326

    Default

    yes, you have to share. or you become mad, as you say, you become solipsistic and you become barren. you deplete your own resources. there is a process of desertification. come out of the wilderness and talk.
    Last edited by luka; 08-10-2018 at 11:49 AM.

  2. #527
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    London
    Posts
    5,958

    Default

    been a couple of mentions of infantilisation and castration.

    you see this in dancehall and rap. compare alkaline or kartel's new voice to the hyper-masculine voices of earlier generations dancehall. it's less stark in rap but a similar thing's happened in terms of vocal timbres with the likes of lil uzi and playboi carti (crowl, would this have it's origins in future swag?).

    as far as digitalisation goes, autotune is a catalyst for this shift; infantilises/feminises/pixifies vocal timbres.

  3. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to sadmanbarty For This Useful Post:


  4. #528
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    9,157

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by luka View Post
    and this is a neat concept because it suggests that our own eyes are now only secondary and that our real eyes are the cameras we carry.
    I noticed that Rilke quote about the future this weekend - “The future enters into us, in order to transform itself in us, long before it happens.”

    I think this was discussed upthread but I can't now find it - the tremors and foreshocks of the future. In this instance, the idea of cameras as our real eyes has long been a mainstay of a certain kind of arthouse cinema - eg Peeping Tom, possibly Videodrome though I don't remember it well? Metaphor now become daily reality.

  5. The Following User Says Thank You to baboon2004 For This Useful Post:


  6. #529
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    25,326

    Default

    compare alkaline or kartel's new voice to the hyper-masculine voices of earlier generations dancehall.
    and again this is why i love vigilant citizen and that stream of discourse because it is the paranoid tracking of this same process in which it is always imposed from above by the illuminati (im not discounting the notion but i think it is by far the weakest hypothesis)

    and this is why they are obsessed with the transgender thing and see it as part of the elite's
    transhumanist agenda and birth the post human because again it is the dissolution of boundaries and binaries, the melting of all into a great puddle of oneness and the single plane. hence all this tawdry focus on alpha males and masculinity, proud boys et al.

  7. #530
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    25,326

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by baboon2004 View Post
    I noticed that Rilke quote about the future this weekend - “The future enters into us, in order to transform itself in us, long before it happens.”

    I think this was discussed upthread but I can't now find it - the tremors and foreshocks of the future. In this instance, the idea of cameras as our real eyes has long been a mainstay of a certain kind of arthouse cinema - eg Peeping Tom, possibly Videodrome though I don't remember it well? Metaphor now become daily reality.
    exactly, exactly. foreshadowing. teasers and previews. this is what the synchromystic blogs got up to their elbows in and most eventually went mad tracking it (and a great deal of them turned nazi in fact)

  8. #531
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    25,326

    Default

    futures try to smooth a path for us, load the dice we play with, coo to us, beckon us, in an attempt to make themselves inevitable.

  9. #532
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    London
    Posts
    5,958

    Default

    in the alt right/conspiracist discourse gender is a codified form of pro- or anti- digitalisation (or it's the other way round). they're all flogging survivalist gear because they want to get back to nature. the fetishisation of manufacturing.

  10. The Following User Says Thank You to sadmanbarty For This Useful Post:


  11. #533
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    London
    Posts
    5,958

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by luka View Post
    futures try to smooth a path for us, load the dice we play with, coo to us, beckon us, in an attempt to make themselves inevitable.
    i said to you the other day on our romantic walk by the river that you can feel a rush to explore all the options with samples during the 90's and early 2000's as though there was some kind of acknowledgment that any tether we still had to real-world instruments will soon be over. it was a two pronged effort:

    with hardcore and jungle there was experimentation as to what could be done with samples; stretching, speeding, chopping, etc.

    with timbaland, neptunes, alternative rap and the incredible string band era of dancehall there was this rush to expand the remit of what could be sampled.


    you can see all of these being reactions to hyper-digitized music: acid house, crunk and ward 21

  12. The Following User Says Thank You to sadmanbarty For This Useful Post:


  13. #534
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    25,326

    Default

    well its time for me to put my earth-suit back on and go and do this same thing in the material world again.
    you've all been so interesting you've made me very late for work.

  14. #535
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    London
    Posts
    5,958

    Default



    Quote Originally Posted by luka View Post
    in light of the above i have to ask myself if the really quite intense discomfort and irritation this causes me is the result of a new rhythmic template i am not ready to integrate.
    the discomfort and irritation are intentional. the drums are in 3 (very uncommon for trap) but then the vocal sample and pizzicato plucks are in 4, so you have these two conflicting subdivisions of time happening concurrently.

  15. The Following User Says Thank You to sadmanbarty For This Useful Post:


  16. #536
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    On the bus
    Posts
    1,589

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by padraig (u.s.) View Post
    a better question would be at what point this particular form of dematerialization become more or less inevitable, and how are specific qualities driven by some of those "late" capitalist conditions. I don't think that would be an easy question either, but more manageable at least.
    For me it's gotta be the 80s. Digital technology, virtual spaces, specifically malls, a new breed of consumerism. The shift in media styles as a result of the new tech. Computer generated graphics, synthetic music. Home studios, computer games. Oh and music videos! The redirecting of the attention from the ears to the eyes. With all this new tech came the idea of people being part of a progression into a new age of convenience and comfort, and it was always improving, upgrading. Things would be safer with computers taking control. But with all the advantages there was the beginning of the digital disconnect from human/living. Ofc the industrial revolution with its factories and machinery foreshadowed this by a long stretch but back then there was way more human interaction along the production line. This is not a well hashed out thought, but for me it's got to be the digi revolution.

  17. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to pattycakes_ For This Useful Post:


  18. #537
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    9,157

    Default

    also important is the moment at which it was clear that selling hardware was the future rather than selling content (or rather, a reorientation to hardware because content could be pirated so easily, and people didn't mind watching/especially listening to low quality content if they could get it for free). then the tech market goes into overdrive, and dematerialisation accelerates. clearly the record industry and others were caught short at that moment. I'm not sure who did predict that.

  19. The Following User Says Thank You to baboon2004 For This Useful Post:


  20. #538
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    2,730

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by baboon2004 View Post
    Everyone is meticulously curating their own 'content' for public consumption, to a point where it's become utterly unremarkable, conscious to the nth degree of how every picture, word and emoji contributes to their persona(l brand). Competition used to be limited to certain sectors of life, now it's a way of life.
    It's got to the point now where the people I'm friends with on social media and in real life, the actual content of what we post is often now used in a sort of art game between us where we try and find pictures or quotes which have relevance to something that happened in real life between us. Does anyone else experience this? It's like a sort of unspoken thing that a lot of people I know engage in. On Spotify too, the people I am friends with on there, we can see in real time what each other is listening to and sometimes this degenerates into conversations between us using song titles and artist names. I've brought this up a few times recently in real life with my friends and we all agree it is happening but nobody ever talks about it. It's very addictive and almost the sole reason a lot of us post even anything.

  21. The Following User Says Thank You to continuum For This Useful Post:


  22. #539
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    903

    Default

    I feel this video is relevant to the discussion



    On the one hand, you have a [cough] becoming-immaterial tendency in the imagery - combined with (but not opposed to) a hyper-materialism (Lamborghini, Chanel, Patek, Givenchy etc).

    Not opposed to, because as much as they are fetish objects, insistently solid and irresistibly touchable, the luxury brands are also signs and symbols (Baudrillard, and early Baudrillard too - 1960s!)

    You have the combination of a super-sharp digital-aspiring hyper-reality (man-made fabrics, cartoon-absurd hair extensions in flagrantly artificial dyed color) in terms of the image and styling, with a graphic physicality lyrically ("get you a straw nigga you know this pussy is juicy") and bodily (Cardi's cleavage)

    The two coming together - hyperreality and physicality - in the initial, er, sighting of Nicki's ass - an impossibly rounded globe of plastic-encased flesh so distended and packed it looks inflated

    And then you got this lyric from Cardi

    "I turn Offset on
    I told him the other day
    Man, we should sell that porn"

    I have occasionally wondered what goes through the heads of celebrity couples as they fuck

    Can they, um, relate without all the mass-mediating images of each other out there in the world intervening?

    Do they bring the Spectacle into bed with them?

    How could they not?

    So those Cardi lines are about mediatized immateriality contaminating and commingling with the Real

    The Panopticon-in-reverse - an invitation to the world (cf Beyonce and Jay-Z) to contemplate their intimacy

    All eyes on me, all imaginations on us

    We are living your fantasy; our fantasy is to be spectated, and envied, by the entire world. Levitating above ourselves as the gaze of Media itself.

    A final thing about the track itself: cf Sadmanbarty about the child-like softness and feyness of the new rap voice, there's the contrast between the floaty, angelic, half not-there-ness of especially Quavo and Offset, and the super-potent, marauding, phallic-woman cameos by Cardi and Nicki.

    Which are so overpowering, so in your face, they topple the mood of the song - overriding that fluttery ambient / IDM feeling ("Feel like I can fly"). Such that listening, I will actually skip the two female tour de forces, cut straight from Offset to Takeoff, to preserve the dreamy ambient waft.
    Last edited by blissblogger; 08-10-2018 at 06:26 PM.

  23. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to blissblogger For This Useful Post:


  24. #540
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Posts
    9,157

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by blissblogger View Post
    On the one hand, you have a [cough] becoming-immaterial tendency in the imagery - combined with (but not opposed to) a hyper-materialism (Lamborghini, Chanel, Patek, Givenchy etc).

    Not opposed to, because as much as they are fetish objects, insistently solid and irresistibly touchable, the luxury brands are also signs and symbols (Baudrillard, and early Baudrillard too - 1960s!)
    Multiplied by the is-it-real? psychedelic suspicion that anyone who's living the American dream must experience.

    And luxury-as-symbol obliterates the variation that personal taste would bring to the issue - hence the mind-numbing consistency/power of the same luxury brands trotted out again and again. This puts me in mind of porn(ification), and the endless symbolisation of a small number of sex acts, always explicitly connected with power. Whether or not something is liked or found pleasurable is secondary - it's the performance of pleasure and the performance of power that are paramount, the point of it. Which obvs links to bedding the Spectacle.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •