Re: [-empyre-] What is to be done
- To: soft_skinned_space <email@example.com>
- Subject: Re: [-empyre-] What is to be done
- From: "mez breeze" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2007 18:03:25 +1100
- Delivered-to: email@example.com
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding:content-disposition; b=siNuoPOBxjanJqtVOJdOBtH/b+4qYHBx2gm0yOK0C8+wv5plmyxvsJc6IaG7D1hLB8zkX5hY3UFkSFY6TDWAqsalaVOQ57TYTAIvEUKsipTG3GpwQV3bAYmR9QQGFz2w071tqvaUgGlpBgbw9CIYB8E5Te0+7X2jHXbS7krB4lE=
- Reply-to: soft_skinned_space <firstname.lastname@example.org>
On 1/18/07, Melinda Rackham <email@example.com> wrote:
hi mel + all.
The basic polemic annoys me.. we cant operate today without speaking the
language of economics. Culture and commerce do go hand in hand. Are we
trying to dive an educative wedge into this ? I don think that's in any way
i suspect those m.mersed in the _production_ [as opposed 2 the
codification] of culture cogitate less about their place in the
[socio]economic stratosphere + more about the manif[r]e[ali]s[a]tation
of their ideals+concepts. the notion of b.ing unavoidably mired in a
"language of economics" seems tied 2 a framework driven by certain
processes that seek 2 n.stitutionalise these n.deavours via a
formal[recogn]ised/parcelled 'cultural' product/stream [i'm seeking
clarification on ur use of the term "we" here?] ....
......."we" [as in certain n.divi_duals that /loc.ate themselves
(either geospacially or perceptually) elsewhere from a heavily
westernised conception of reality that d.fines worth thru capitalistic
n.dicators/m.mersion] can function quite fine [thk_u!] in a reality
that may b quantitatively different 4rm urs - does this then make it
invalid according 2 how u box ur definition of reality?
i find certain modes of cu[ltural]rrency veering strongly _away_ 4rm
this top-down/ratified-via-precedent/sanctioned approach x.tremely
n.teresting...@ present i'm x.ploring/researching/plotting a faux
soc_network project [_feralC] that cs this formalisation as clinging
within stratified fibres n.dicative of a close-ended/linear approach 2
"The academy ... is today so swamped by the assumptions and practices
of market economics that it is deeply implausible for academics to
tell their students they inhabit a postmodern world where a
multiplicity of ideologies, world-views and voices can be heard. Their
every step hounded by market economics, academics cannot preach
multiplicity when their lives are dominated by what amounts in
practice to consumer fanaticism. The world has narrowed
intellectually, not broadened, in the last ten years. Where Lyotard
saw the eclipse of Grand Narratives, pseudo-modernism sees the
ideology of globalised market economics raised to the level of the
sole and over-powering regulator of all social activity –
monopolistic, all-engulfing, all-explaining, all-structuring, as every
academic must disagreeably recognise. Pseudo-modernism is of course
consumerist and conformist, a matter of moving around the world as it
is given or sold."
- Alan Kirby
Of necessity cultural producers embrace the language of policy
and the languages of spin.
they do? in order 2 have them con[de]fined + validated with a
rubber_stamped acceptable sign [ie make it in2 the
inner-sanctioned-power-definer's eye_path] i agree....but 4 those not
oriented within the "reality" [my definition of reality is more a
heavily_variable faceted patterning] of becoming culturally relevant
or mass marketed along a e[ducative]conomic axis, i'd beg 2 diffa.....
This is basic survival in producing sustainable
"education" and by that i mean cultural events, spaces for dialogue, skills
development, introducing new concepts to new audiences.
....again, according only 2 those status_quo channels geared 2wards
the event/xhibition/object/"the pitch" as defining how cultural
landscapes lie....fomenting abstractions currently perceive
"education" [as defined thru these means] as essentially perpetuating
a dynamic molded within expressive confines out-of-step with the
n.credible rewriting of hub_networking or flattening of the
creator/absorber/audience [think:myspace, blogging, liveleaking]....in
the potentiate infoclimate of social nets redefining m[eme]odes 2wards
anything _but_ the sustainable, of rewriting the market/canon from the
inside via a removal of the x.clusivity of function according 2
n_dividual creator labels [such as an artist, definer, teacher]
education as such ceases 2 b....
[troll_bait snipping here]
Dirk wrote that Second Life is harnessing all the creativity out there.. Is
that wrong? I used to be highly critical of it, but have changed my mind.
i'd b really n.terested 2 c wot in fact changed ur position here mel -
if it was the gradual seeping of Second Life as an acceptable platform
for corporations/'educators'/other m[eme]ainstream_signifiers?
It Performs a fabulous educational and social role in our society. Art
organisations are falling over themselves to have galleries exhibitions and
residencies there - be part of the culture you've got.
bzzzT: i say:m.plode.the.cult[ural].trend
Love the one youre with.
bzzzT: i suggest: luv.the.1.ur.not
--LFG Curiosity, Play, or Xperimention PST--
This archive was generated by a fusion of
Pipermail 0.09 (Mailman edition) and