N
nomadologist
Guest
Ha. I definitely don't think most musicians care about criticism: when I was doing PR, they'd usually just toss the clippings in the trash after glancing over them for a second...
Reynolds' Pazz & Jopp essay
- Thread starter gek-opel
- Start date
I alternate between not listening to anything for weeks or months at a time (usually acompanied by the thought- im not ever going to go back, am I...?), then going into hyperconsumption (tho not actually paying for 98% of it).
The kind of behavior in consumerism IS negative in some senses of itself, for the way it interacts with the spurious idea of the individual, I can't see that it doesn't function in some senses as an-anti-revolutionary valve-- the creation of para-struggles, placeholders for conflicts that cannot be permitted... its also intrinsically linked to economic misconceptions--- that the role of the state is to provide an ecosystem for the maximisation of sustained economic growth through corporations, it all follows on from the placing of sustained economic growth as the primary "good" for the state, as the only conceivable methodology is to create the appropriate environment for organisations to expand desire into new areas (as well as increasing profitability by economic imperialistic means through exploitation of less developed areas of the world). In supporting this misconception consumerism allows the state to pursue goals which are antithetical to the basic human good-- a double-bind. However, even given this, it is perfectly conceivable that there is a lot more going on within free market societies than just this...
I look forward to the Virilio article...
The kind of behavior in consumerism IS negative in some senses of itself, for the way it interacts with the spurious idea of the individual, I can't see that it doesn't function in some senses as an-anti-revolutionary valve-- the creation of para-struggles, placeholders for conflicts that cannot be permitted... its also intrinsically linked to economic misconceptions--- that the role of the state is to provide an ecosystem for the maximisation of sustained economic growth through corporations, it all follows on from the placing of sustained economic growth as the primary "good" for the state, as the only conceivable methodology is to create the appropriate environment for organisations to expand desire into new areas (as well as increasing profitability by economic imperialistic means through exploitation of less developed areas of the world). In supporting this misconception consumerism allows the state to pursue goals which are antithetical to the basic human good-- a double-bind. However, even given this, it is perfectly conceivable that there is a lot more going on within free market societies than just this...
I look forward to the Virilio article...
this is like 'it is up to you to be gekians if you wish, i will always be reynoldsian!' (cf return to reynolds)
Huh? Oh I was reading a thread on ILM where they were roasting Reynolds' essay and methodology, but his line of thinking just makes more sense in context. And critic-creative interaction is a good thing in terms of increasing fluidity of a culture I think, too often the division is artificial... (french New Wave anyone?) its something that makes less sense in a world where criticism is dominated by broadsheet media tho, who are notably uncommitted in any sense...
Last edited:
N
nomadologist
Guest
I don't know that subjects are politically determined to that extent, Gek. Or, I don't feel that they *have* to be, at least.
Here's The Vision Machine in its entirety. I'll post it again zipped up with the other readings for next week in the DMT thread.
Here's The Vision Machine in its entirety. I'll post it again zipped up with the other readings for next week in the DMT thread.
that was a reference to lacan talking about freud (and i think it may have been a paraphrase of someone else)
so you are lacan, i hope that's acceptable
this thread is now moving into more interesting territories - about the double bind, are you thinking of the hypothetical schizophrenia aetiology?
Last edited:
that was a reference to lacan talking about freud (and i think it may have been a paraphrase of a somone else)
so you are lacan, i hope that's acceptable
Haha- yes that is more tha acceptable, of course!
Good idea- not in that sense, (I was thinking more bound on the micro and macro level simultaneously as the implications of consumerism) but if Bateson's double-bind theory is to apply anywhere within consumerism, perhaps it is at the level of the individualism paradox- "you must be an individual" "the only method of achieving this is exactly the same as everyone else"-- but I'm not sure that the analogy works really- is schizophrenia induced or what as an end result?
N
nomadologist
Guest
schizophrenia and autism (if you ask me) are both forms of resistance to capitalism, right? gotta love your deleuze.
without an "i" narrative at the core of the subject, without a superego, there is no way to keep them cathecting commodity fetish objects. that's where schizophrenia is significant for deleuze & guattari, and that's one of their major criticisms of freud: that he didn't give enough study to schizophrenics and preferred to labor over neurotics too much.
have you read The Anti-Oedipus, Gek?
without an "i" narrative at the core of the subject, without a superego, there is no way to keep them cathecting commodity fetish objects. that's where schizophrenia is significant for deleuze & guattari, and that's one of their major criticisms of freud: that he didn't give enough study to schizophrenics and preferred to labor over neurotics too much.
have you read The Anti-Oedipus, Gek?
noel emits
a wonderful wooden reason
Interesting area definitely. The command 'thou shalt be an individual' - is that not a relatively recent development?
N
nomadologist
Guest
It's a notion that comes after monotheism, Noel, when the individual subject becomes the locus of the (spiritual) universe. Before monotheism, the individual subject just didn't have all sorts of significance or clout--it definitely was seen as a function of the society, group, tribe, whatever.
All my classes keep haunting me in Dissensus. In 'Tactile Media' we're talking about the body and my last essay traced a line from the Greeks through Christianity, the Englightenment, and the Freudian/psychoanalytical tripartite model of the the psyche historically on the way to our present virtual model where we've tried to disentangleourselves from mind/body dualism rather unsucessfully.
All my classes keep haunting me in Dissensus. In 'Tactile Media' we're talking about the body and my last essay traced a line from the Greeks through Christianity, the Englightenment, and the Freudian/psychoanalytical tripartite model of the the psyche historically on the way to our present virtual model where we've tried to disentangleourselves from mind/body dualism rather unsucessfully.
noel emits
a wonderful wooden reason
I think it's easy to see how those conflicting demands could lead to alienation (from self as well as society/world), angst (dread) and shattered identities. Actually I have a lot of time for Laing in relation to this.
noel emits
a wonderful wooden reason
I'm not saying it's incorrect at all, but I am curious as to what evidence is cited for this?
Its on the pile, sat beneath some hefty looking Badiou.
N
nomadologist
Guest
It's definitely just a line you can trace, I'm not saying it's something that always holds true. But look at the literature from pre-monotheistic cultures. The individual's story is often epic, and usually fits in with the spiritual narrative prevalent in the society at a particular time, where the individual is seen as helpless against forces like fate, often doomed to repeat cyclic behaviors, fight wars determined by the actions of their ancestors, because the individual is nothing more than the historical extension of its predecessors. (I'm thinking really ancient Greek and some of the early Mediterrannean cultures right now). It's not until the individual has a direct relationship with God, around the time of Judaism, that the individual's actions are seen as spiritually significant in and of themselves, that the individual is seen as personally responsible for cultivating his or her own spiritual life and significance. If this makes sense.
N
nomadologist
Guest
Are you thinking of schizophrenia as a shattered identity? Schizophrenia isn't quite shattered--that's multiple personality disorder (if such a thing exists, right?)--it's more about experiencing things outside of narrative time, hallucinating your reality. I see a lot of parallels between the psychedelic experience and what D&G describe as schizophrenia.
noel emits
a wonderful wooden reason
I suppose I just mean a conflicted sense of self, especially where incongruent ideas about personal identity have been artificially imposed from without, as they undoubtedly are in our societies. That kind of internal tension could well manifest as schizophrenia in some people if not resolved. Of course people like Laing maintained that that was an indication of a natural healing (resistance as you say) mechanism at work.
timellison
Member
It's my understanding that the effect of psychedelic drugs <i>is</i> comparable to schizophrenia in terms of brain chemistry.
N
nomadologist
Guest
Hm. I'm not sure if there are different definitions of schizophrenia in the US and Europe, but schizophrenia is a pathology where the patient is plagued by hallucinations that often take on otherworldly proportions, by delusions, by nightmares that turn into waking life experiences and meld together.
N
nomadologist
Guest
probably, the hallucinatory properties are similar, I'm sure. i bet there are articles up about this.
oh man, leave the thread for a few hours, and look what happens. I must admit, when this sort of stuff comes up, I'm totally in over my head, not having read much "theory" etc.
But am I alone in feeling the slightest bit queasy at how real mental illnesses are used as sources for metaphors for ways that non-mentally ill people can different (dis/)engage with consumerism and capitalism? (i.e. sometimes this way of talking sits uneasily. but go on, please!)
But am I alone in feeling the slightest bit queasy at how real mental illnesses are used as sources for metaphors for ways that non-mentally ill people can different (dis/)engage with consumerism and capitalism? (i.e. sometimes this way of talking sits uneasily. but go on, please!)