|
SubscriptionsSites I Read
|
|
|
|
| Reader Response on Lethem's "Ecstacy of Influence"Jonathan Lethem describes the postmodern age as a period where artists do away with the "anxiety" that modernism has wrought "across the chasms of illusion, mediation, demographics,
marketing, imago, and appearance" by tapping new fields (in which "collage" is the nuclear motif) like "futurism, cubism, Dada, musique concrète,
situationism, pop art, and appropriationism" that prevailed in the 20th century.
He doesn't want to address the 21st century, because he believes the path we've sort of taken in the previous century with surrealism and all the ruin its brought through its prodigality and manipulation of preexisting art, offers really a very few "alternative[s]" but "to flinch, or tiptoe away into some ivory tower of irrelevance."
That "tower of irrelevance," I am wondering about, Lethem may attribute to the interdependency that art and commerce share with eachother - that to escape this bind would be "to flinch, or tiptoe away into some ivory tower of irrelevance." On the end of the section "The Beauty of Second Use," he writes, "By [artists...attacking the collagists and satirists
and digital samplers] they make the world smaller, betraying what seems to [him] the primary motivation for participating in the world
of culture in the first place: to make the world larger." When he mentions the word "culture," I can't help but to draw the binary of nature versus culture, which would lead me to the question of whether this "ivory tower" he was talking about signifies the nature side of the binary. If an ivory tower is somewhere aloof, where you aren't distracted by the commotion below that must also mean you are alone, at work or in solitary confinement and retreat from the world. Does Lethem mean to say that humans are irrevocably alone, and they need this sort of "commonwealth culture" where they may thrive off of eachother? Is Lethem a propogator of communist ideology? Should his own work be 'isolated and made analyzable,' or would that beautify the second use of his message to much to be reproduced by another?
| | |
| Reader Response on Lethem's
| | |
| Viewer Response to Ararat on ThursdayAs far as conveying a historical narrative, I thought the movie might have been a little over-the-top. There were too many layers to the storytelling as to relate them to the occurence of the Armenian genocide, and that confused the reinforcement of what actually happened. Plus, the premise of the movie with the Jewish security guard at the airport and the art historian's son's drug habit/personal history seemed almost arbitrary and forced, and I thought maybe it could have had more of a bearing if the affairs (the film's premiere, the book reading/signing, the general Hollywood vibe) of the present were more engrained in the background of the message they were trying to convey--which if it was, that the past is what makes us who we are today, that there's no escaping the past despite having carved out for yourself a new life in America, then it particularly was coming through strong enough as it should. In other words, the main actors' present day entanglements seemed unattached to the injustice they were trying to vindicate, aside from the fact that they were Armenian. The casting of the half-Turkish actor and his two cents about the Armenian genocide trivializes the Armenians' cause--the high emotional point of which was demonstrated through the son Peter's blurb on Hitler and how he reminded that nobody paid attention to the Armenian genocide. And why should they, when the premise of the Movie seemed inappropriate to begin with in covering the grisly subject-matter, genocide? | | |
| Taking Away from Sekula's "The Body and the Archive"Whoa, 37 pages! Okay Let's see here. Okay, having to look up a term once every few lines in a span of thirty seven pages is a little too much and I'm finding it a bit troublesome to relate. But hence we continue nonetheless! This guy's got an interesting way of making things seem fit as he sees it; he's explaining that photography at the turn of the 19th century was a double entendre, a bourgeoisie "self" (Sekula 3)-portrait in one sense and a tool to suppress "subproletariats" or any miscreant lowballing enough to try and "purloin" the self-incriminating "evidence" off Talbot's (presumably a sensible bourgeosie his self) china shelf. Photography as a way to actualize the structural limitations of the "other" (3) in the "regulatory sciences" (4), but also a way to regulate the sociopathic behaviors of lawless men whom after having been photographed are easily made "referent" (4), the "lurking, objectifying inverse in the police files" (4). Sekula speaks so close to my heart, as I was once unfortunately a victim of this "honorific" tradition of having my own fingerprints and photos documented under juvenille records. So I guess the utilarian purpose to preserve the greater good of the whole confers somehow with the prison system. I'm still not very convinced where Sekula is headed with this demeaning retrogressive exploration of a cultural pasttime. So I guess he has yet to get into the inculcated surveillance practices of the Gestapal's CC cameras in modern day Britain. And I guess it is our job as art students to pick this innocent act of photography apart to somehow get an edge over common, non-art students. By the 6th page the reading has slowly got into topics like "penal reform" (6), and I begrudgingly moved to the seventh with a heap of fleshy words continuing to mount (a nice reader for a college student, btw.) Here's my alternative theory to back up Sekula: "Maybe the human inkling is to side with those that appear less primal not only as a way to patronize but to lessen the backfire when slowly letting off the patronage--as for instance--now when craniological and phrenological studies are shown to be obsolete. Then, what now for these hapless babes?" SO WHAAAATTTTTTTT? (only on page 8). So throw those lesser and greater beings all down the stairs, where the lesser ones will have survived with having nothing to have lost before the incident so death doesn't seem like a premonition just a relapse and the greater ones with traumatic brain injuries but survived nonetheless. If system is there to produce manual laborers, why not just drug em so the pain will be less - vegetables? If you have the sufficient man-power to intervene withstanding a backlash engendering negligible casualty, the day is your's for the taking. {stops at the end of page 12 for fear of degeneration of the lower lumbar region of the spine}. {proceeds to do what he normally does and that is, saunter around the apt. w/ after-the-fact affectations} I resume my dialogue with the text in page 21 where I've just witnessed the oh so benign photographs taken of the decapitated men by the anthropometricians of the criminalogical/criminalist registrars and can say that the "system" is somehow just as savage or "Draconian" as Allen mentions with their execution of punishment. Makes you wonder, if all the violence was all for due justice in this age of bureaucratic consent. By page 25, I am thinking, man, has this guy done his research! Thinking, how much of this raw info he must have internalized in order to be convinced what he was writing has actual bearing to present day standards of criminological disposal. His writing may fall a little victim to complexity and being a prisoner to it's own verbiage, maybe asking for a little measurement of its own. {stops at page 25 and goes home at 2 in the morning from Grainger library. In one hour they will start issuing parking tickets. the reading shall be tackled at a later, unarranged time.} Conclusionary remark: The difference between getting the "right one" during a snapshot for a bourgeoisie and the criminally inclined proletariat I guess would be on the issue of subjectivity and objectivity. One is more dealt with as an object, or so it seems. Could class difference really be drawn based on these distinctions of how photography notarizes people in different ways? Is class really all an illusion created by a trick camera angle? ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- schema, anthropometric, zone of normality, utopian project, binomial curve, organismic, ebbs and flow, jurisprudence, indeterminism, nominalist, prefecture, proof of recidivation, tau·tol·o·gy    /tɔˈtɒlədʒi/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[taw-tol-uh-jee] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation –noun, plural -gies. | 1. | needless repetition of an idea, esp. in words other than those of the immediate context, without imparting additional force or clearness, as in “widow woman.” |
| 2. | an instance of such repetition. |
| 3. | Logic. | a. | a compound propositional form all of whose instances are true, as “A or not A.” |
| b. | an instance of such a form, as “This candidate will win or will not win.” |
|
[Origin: 1570–80; < LL tautologia < Gk tautología. See tauto-, -logy] re·course /ˈrikɔrs, -koʊrs, rɪˈkɔrs, -ˈkoʊrs/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[ree-kawrs, -kohrs, ri-kawrs, -kohrs] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation –noun | 1. | access or resort to a person or thing for help or protection: to have recourse to the courts for justice. |
| 2. | a person or thing resorted to for help or protection. |
| 3. | the right to collect from a maker or endorser of a negotiable instrument. The endorser may add the words “without recourse” on the instrument, thereby transferring the instrument without assuming any liability. |
[Origin: 1350–1400; ME recours < OF < LL recursus, L: return, retreat, n. use of ptp. of recurrere to run back; see recur] nom·i·nal·ism /ˈnɒmənlˌɪzəm/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[nom-uh-nl-iz-uhm] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation –noun | (in medieval philosophy) the doctrine that general or abstract words do not stand for objectively existing entities and that universals are no more than names assigned to them. Compare conceptualism, realism (def. 5a). |
—Related forms nom·i·nal·ist, noun nom·i·nal·is·tic, adjective nom·i·nal·is·ti·cal·ly, adverb "Daguerreotype- pre·science /ˈprɛʃəns, -iəns, ˈpriʃəns, -ʃiəns/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[presh-uhns, -ee-uhns, pree-shuhns, -shee-uhns] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation –noun | knowledge of things before they exist or happen; foreknowledge; foresight. |
cal·o·type /ˈkæləˌtaɪp/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[kal-uh-tahyp] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation –noun | 1. | an early negative-positive photographic process, patented by William Henry Talbot in 1841, in which a paper negative is produced and then used to make a positive contact print in sunlight. |
| 2. | a print made by this process. |
pur·loin /pərˈlɔɪn, ˈpɜrlɔɪn/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[per-loin, pur-loin] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation –verb (used with object) | 1. | to take dishonestly; steal; filch; pilfer. |
–verb (used without object) | 2. | to commit theft; steal. |
[Origin: 1400–50; late ME purloynen < AF purloigner to put off, remove, equiv. to pur- (< L prō- pro-1) + -loigner, deriv. of loin at a distance, far off < L longé] pur·loin·er, noun pro·te·an /ˈproʊtiən, proʊˈti-/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[proh-tee-uhn, proh-tee-] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation –adjective | 1. | readily assuming different forms or characters; extremely variable. |
| 2. | changeable in shape or form, as an amoeba. |
| 3. | (of an actor or actress) versatile; able to play many kinds of roles. |
| 4. | (initial capital letter) of, pertaining to, or suggestive of Proteus. |
de·lim·it /dɪˈlɪmɪt/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[di-lim-it] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation –verb (used with object) to fix or mark the limits or boundaries of; demarcate: A ravine delimited the property on the north. sur·feit /ˈsɜrfɪt/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[sur-fit] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation –noun | 1. | excess; an excessive amount: a surfeit of speechmaking. |
| 2. | excess or overindulgence in eating or drinking. |
| 3. | an uncomfortably full or crapulous feeling due to excessive eating or drinking. |
| 4. | general disgust caused by excess or satiety. |
–verb (used with object) | 5. | to bring to a state of surfeit by excess of food or drink. |
| 6. | to supply with anything to excess or satiety; satiate. |
–verb (used without object) | 7. | to eat or drink to excess. |
| 8. | to suffer from the effects of overindulgence in eating or drinking. |
| 9. | to indulge to excess in anything. |
[Origin: 1250–1300; (n.) ME sorfete, surfait < MF surfait, surfet (n. use of ptp. of surfaire to overdo), equiv. to sur- sur-1 + fait < L factus, ptp. of facere to do (see fact); (v.) sorfeten, deriv. of the n. ] —Synonyms 1. superabundance, superfluity. 5, 6. stuff, gorge. 6. fill. —Antonyms 1. lack. Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1)
Based on the Random House Unabridged Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2006. |
Ben·tham·ism (běn'thə-mĭz'əm) Pronunciation Key
n. The utilitarian philosophy of Jeremy Bentham, holding that pleasure is the only good and that the greatest happiness for the greatest number should be the ultimate goal of humans.
Ben'tham·ite' (-mīt') n. pal·li·a·tive (pāl'ē-ā'tĭv, -ē-ə-tĭv) Pronunciation Key
adj. - Tending or serving to palliate.
- Relieving or soothing the symptoms of a disease or disorder without effecting a cure.
n. One that palliates, especially a palliative drug or medicine.
pal'li·a'tive·ly adv.
sal·u·tar·y /ˈsælyəˌtɛri/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[sal-yuh-ter-ee] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation –adjective | 1. | favorable to or promoting health; healthful. |
| 2. | promoting or conducive to some beneficial purpose; wholesome. |
Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1)
Based on the Random House Unabridged Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2006. |
ex·em·plar (ĭg-zěm'plär', -plər) Pronunciation Key
n. - One that is worthy of imitation; a model. See Synonyms at ideal.
- One that is typical or representative; an example.
- An ideal that serves as a pattern; an archetype.
- A copy, as of a book.
| panopticon |
noun | | 1. | an area where everything is visible | | 2. | a circular prison with cells distributed around a central surveillance station; proposed by Jeremy Bentham in 1791 |
in·ter·pel·late /ˌɪntərˈpɛleɪt, ɪnˈtɜrpəˌleɪt/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[in-ter-pel-eyt, in-tur-puh-leyt] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation –verb (used with object), -lat·ed, -lat·ing. | to call formally upon (a minister or member of a government) in interpellation. |
[Origin: 1590–1600; < L interpellātus ptp. of interpellāre to interrupt, equiv. to inter- inter- + -pellā( re) to speak + -tus ptp. suffix ] lex·i·cal /ˈlɛksɪkəl/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[lek-si-kuhl] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation –adjective | 1. | of or pertaining to the words or vocabulary of a language, esp. as distinguished from its grammatical and syntactical aspects. |
| 2. | of, pertaining to, or of the nature of a lexicon. |
|
pro·cliv·i·ty /proʊˈklɪvɪti/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[proh-kliv-i-tee] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation –noun, plural -ties. | natural or habitual inclination or tendency; propensity; predisposition: a proclivity to meticulousness. |
in·de·ter·min·ism /ˌɪndɪˈtɜrməˌnɪzəm/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[in-di-tur-muh-niz-uhm] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation –noun Philosophy. | 1. | the doctrine that human actions, though influenced somewhat by preexisting psychological and other conditions, are not entirely governed by them but retain a certain freedom and spontaneity. |
| 2. | the theory that the will is to some extent independent of the strength of motives, or may itself modify their strength in choice. |
pre·fig·u·ra·tion (prē-fĭg'yə-rā'shən) Pronunciation Key
n. - The act of representing, suggesting, or imagining in advance.
- Something that prefigures; a foreshadowing.
| | |
| Reader Response To Miller's "Pictures for Rent"This happened to be another FYI type of piece that more-or-less gave me insight to the world of stock photography. The part that interested me I guess was how stereoscopic images always came in duplicitous binaries which helped reinforce the idea of what a stereotype may be: an arbitrary encapsulation of an idea through constrained reinforcement. I wondered then how anything replicative of itself can only fall into depleting itself into stereotypical representation. That when anybody gazes into the mirror for too long, they can happenstance fall into and drown inside a stereotypical representation of their selves. It's kind of amazing to see stock photography available on the subject in front of a mirror, because that just seems so self-reflexive and borderlines irony too unbearable to fathom.
| | |
|
