Re: [-empyre-] Do You Still Your Own Reality?
Alicia Keyes was pictured in our weekend paper's cultural section (Auckland
Herald, 16/10/04) wearing a VOTE OR DIE T-shirt. The bluffage appended said
that artists as a class were usually more concerned with self-preservation
than using their status in society to put their message across.
I suppose that's what my rhetorical No is about.
As for Michael Franti (he spends a good deal of time here, doing what some
call 'getting real' or just chilling), I would not describe what he's doing
in Iraq as 'useful' in "political discourse" because I don't know whether I
understand what the latter is meant to include.
However, I understand Herbert Blau - director, some time ago now, of the
Actor's Workshop, San Fran - when he talks of Beckett's Waiting for Godot as
being supremely apposite to the political scenario playing itself out - and
out - in 1960s America: commentary or comment? presentation or
representation? art/propaganda/advertising/journalism? complex or necessary
or necessarily both?
('Discourse' makes me think of the Nietszchean weakness in Foucault - the
revelation of a mise-en-scene that engenders a mise-en-scene, in discursive
reductio: I tend to think of the will to lie before the will to power!)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Geri Wittig" <gwittig@adobe.com>
To: "soft_skinned_space" <empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au>
Sent: Saturday, October 16, 2004 6:05 AM
Subject: Re: [-empyre-] Do You Still Your Own Reality?
> Hmmm, I'm not exactly sure what you are saying "no" to Simon, so I'm
> seeking clarification. Are you saying that art is useless in the
> political discourse? If so, I disagree when I see people like Michael
> Franti, one of our local art assets here in the San Francisco Bay
> Area going to Iraq and creating an opportunity for discourse through
> his art with both the Iraqi street and the various military presences
> over there. Reaching people on a very personal creative level and
> bridging very disparate voices in this huge quagmire the U.S. has
> created.
>
> If you're saying art shouldn't take it's role so seriously and see
> it's impact so grandiosely, yes I can agree, it's only part of the
> huge layered web of the ever mutating world.
>
> geri wittig
>
>
> >No. I refuse to accept this. Something quite other is going on. "All art
is
> >quite useless." Oscar Wilde was a modernist when he said this. English
> >suffers from the lack of the second person plural: you who own your
reality
> >(?): we who don't doubt our reality because we are not I; we who are not
> >others to ourselves; we who do not write in order to be other; we who
cannot
> >imagine why it might be necessary to write or think sous rature. Harold
> >Bloom has called our culture a late efflorescence of Romanticism and this
is
> >appreciable in the current fetishisation of art, masquerading or queered
> >under its drag of utility. The Great Fetish Art. This has always meant
the
> >virtual to me with all that is problematic about it. And also liberating.
> >(And Deathlike - or enantiomorphic. Caution: Dark Ages Approaching.)
> >Technology and Art together: my God - our God - your God - what a
> >floundering is thereby engendered...
> >There is a general - even amongst amateurs and dilletantes - discretion
and
> >delicacy about poesis: a poem is what one aspires to make and writing one
> >does not automatically make one a poet. An artwork is it not the same?
> >(There is a beautiful and extended discussion in Ariel Dorfman's Some
Write
> >to the Future on the literary qualities - qua literature - of the
> >'confessional literature' in Chile. Most nations and states now have this
> >sort of literature, mirror-struck - as Stravinsky said he was not - by
its
> >own mental state.) And being human is it not a sort of poesis?
> >For godssake write propaganda - like old EZ - draw it, paint it, and
> >writedrawpaintfilm it in the ether: your personal belief is possibly the
> >worst way to win converts; the market and the Affect shall judge it; but
I
> >agree that posterity can go fuck itself: it's task has been abrogated in
the
> >most insipid way: you know now who owns your reality... we do. ...
> >
> >What is going on here? What happened in Australia? A culture that still
> >holds to the ladder of creation, with the squatters at the top and the
abos
> >at the bottom?
> >If I were in America (North) would I be on those buses, signing up the
> >flaccid voters - are they complacent? or - as the moralists would have
it -
> >apathetic? - or would I be trying to be funny in a way that doesn't
travel
> >without its laughtrack?
> >I've brought up the NSK before with narry a nibble but I would have
thought
> >they'd be a godsend to this sort of discussion and to relieving it of its
> >claptrap about art! ...
> >
> >Bush must go but even Democrats are saying the worst thing that could
happen
> >for the Democrat Party is inheriting the country after Bush. Machivellian
> >desire for longevity may prevail over the expedient of removing the
current
> >administration. But as Randall says, you will know the devil you don't
know
> >as the devil, when he is voted in, and seen to be the devil, etcetera.
> >
> >Clinton - a man who could speak in complete sentences - with clausation -
> >bombs a pharmaceutical factory in the Sudan. And sanctions, what were
they?
> >and how did they work to the betterment of the general population? (Or
IMF
> >incentives and initiatives, for that matter - seeing as how they work in
> >Papua New Guinea.) And debts, 'third world' debts - as John Ralston Saul
> >says - a Solon would be wise to...
> >
> >This is not cynicism. This might not even make sense. But it seems to me
the
> >struggle is within the West as it is within the East - with Israel as the
> >exception that will prove the rule - of misrule.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "Randall Packer" <rpacker@zakros.com>
> >To: "soft_skinned_space" <empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au>
> >Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2004 3:44 PM
> >Subject: Re: [-empyre-] Do You Still Own Your Reality? (forwarded from
> >GeriWittig)
> >
> >
> >> Yes, yes, and yes!
> >>
> >> To pick up where I left off, in the US DAT is Virtual post, this
> >> statement takes this idea one step further, in which the artist
> >> actually reshapes the world according to his or her own vision. That
> >> is truly the power of art! The artist takes command of the space,
> >> sculpts the space, refashions the space with the intent of creating
> >> something that did not exist previously. I feel that art is political
> >> by nature because it inevitably suggests some kind of change, it
> >> forces us to look at things differently. That is real change! I have
> >> no desire to be a political artist, but rather to make art that is
> >> political in the sense that it pushes us as individuals and as a
> >> society to rethink who we are, to question, to probe, and sometimes
> >> to resist.
> >>
> >> >I believe that if art has a part to play in the political sphere
> >> >(which I certaintly hope it can) it needs to discard to notion of
> >> >being an instrument that is used to fix specific problems. To me
> >> >this is a far too literal and reductive interpretation of the
> >> >potential of political art. Art doesn't change the world like
> >> >legislation does. It has a much more abstract way of working; a way
> >> >that is more concerned with experimentation, the speculative and
> >> >difference than with effectiveness. To paraphrase Kant's aesthetics
> >> >(and maybe streching my point a little): Art is effective exactly
> >> >beacuse of its ineffectiveness. I agree with Randall that art has to
> >> >connect to the world people live in but I see this as a condition
> >> >for all art not as an exclusive point in political art. Instead of
> >> >just refering to this world solely as materialistic reality or as a
> >> >surface that can be redecorated political art has to open this world
> >> >as an imaginary space, a potential for change, mental as well as
> >> >actual. Instead of being dialectical it should be multi-dimensional.
> >> >It should recognize that being political today is a far more complex
> >> >position than just 10 years ago. This is the era of bio-politics.
> >> >The society of control, where everything is politicized. To go on
> >> >the streets, whether they are physical or virtual, to protest seems
> >> >to me a dated form of political art, which has a tendency to turn
> >> >political problems into a question of symbols (brands) vs.
> >> >anti-symbols. Of course the mobilsation and the presence of the
> >> >critical people is an important factor but I think a far more
> >> >radical political statement for art would be to suggest a multitude
> >> >of reconceptualizations of the world which the system as we know it
> >> >so far doesn't allow us to comprehend. This strand of thought
> >> >connects to the recent revival of the utopia, but as this term is so
> >> >ladden I prefer to call it responsible dreaming with a cause.
> >> >Jacob Lillemose
> >> >
> >> >Den 10/10-2004, kl. 0.05, skrev Randall M. Packer:
> >> >
> >> >>Geri (didn't we meet at Joel Slayton's some years ago?).
> >> >>
> >> >>I wish you could have seen our recent installation, the
> >> >>Experimental Party DisInformation Center, installed at LUXE gallery
> >> >>right in the heart of the 57th St. gallery district in NYC during
> >> >>the Republican Convention. Also the heart of the NYC Gucci
> >> >>neighborhood. Not a typical place for political art.
> > > >>
> >> >>In any case, we had everyone from students to activists to red meat
> >> >>Republicans, etc. going through the gallery. Around 5,000 people in
> >> >>two weeks. There was one group of students from a New School
> >> >>sociology class that had been given the assignment to view the show
> >> >>and interview me. The Professor said the show had "opened the eyes"
> > > >>of her students to the current political climate and the use of
> >> >>propaganda by the Republicans. These were kids not at all
> >> >>experienced with contemporary new media art, so this struck me as
> >> >>particularly compelling.
> >> >>
> >> >>To get to the point, US DAT is a form of "performance art" that
> >> >>dissolves the border between the virtual and physical realms of
> >> >>galleries, Web sites, press releases, live performance, etc. It is
> >> >>intended to reach people viscerally in its use of fantasy and
> >> >>satire, which I believe, has been effective in drawing a large
> >> >>audience into thinking about complex issues that might otherwise be
> >> >>inaccessible.
> >> >>
> >> >>I believe that if art has a political message, it needs to touch
> >> >>people, it needs to connect with people and the world they live in.
> >> >>Otherwise, you are right, it comes off being not only humorless,
> >> >>but colorless and ineffectual.
> >> >>
> >> >>Randall
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>>Yes, thank you Randall, very valid point. That's something I've
> >> >>>been trying to reconcile for a long time myself. I was involved as
> >> >>>an artist with ActUp in the early 90's and did a lot of political
> >> >>>art in the 90's related to such U.S. domestic issues as the
> >> >>>Telecommunications Act (media concentration) and international
> >> >>>issues such as the Hong Kong handover in '97, but with the
> >> >>>explosion of global information technologies in the past decade I
> >> >>>began thinking there needed to be new strategies that weren't so
> >> >>>didactic, etc. I've been to lots of art and activism discussions,
> >> >>>actually recently went to one a few weeks ago up in Northern
> >> >>>California - one of the key points that was made there was the
> >> >>>need for not being over the top and hitting people over the head
> >> >>>in a humorless way and also communicating to people on a
> >> >>>personal/emotional level. What you at DAT do does embody humor and
> >> >>>I think that is one of your strengths, but I think my negative
> >> >>>reaction when I read some of your statements is some of it seems
> >> >>>like preaching to the choir and perhaps holds a condescending tone
> >> >>>that might not be helpful. But of course I could be wrong, as I'm
> >> >>>not really sure who DAT has been reaching in terms of audience.
> >> >>>
> >> >>>I agree with Tobias and think "stealth" was probably the wrong
> >> >>>choice of words.
> >> >>>
> >> >>>At 12:18 AM -0400 10/9/04, tobias c. van Veen wrote:
> >> >>>>Although sometimes I feel the stealth approach, unless as
disguised as
> >the
> >> >>>>ultimate model, the mythical Hashasheen, is simply an excuse for
> >faking the
> >> >>>>chameleon and reaping the benefits of the system while espousing
its
> >> >>>>downfall.
> >> >>>
> >> >>>What I mean instead is to work to communicate in a way that is not
> >> >>>in a confrontational/didactic way that builds resistance to
> >> >>>hearing, but in an expansive way that is stealth in that one
> >> >>>attempts to fully understand what makes those you're trying to be
> >> >>>in dialogue with tick and using that knowledge to be more
> >> >>>effective.
> >> >>>
> >> >>>To point to a work that I think has been very enlightening in
> >> >>>these technologically-savvy times, I would say Josh On of Future
> >> >>>Farmer's "They Rule": www.theyrule.net
> >> >>>
> >> >>>geri
> >> >>>
> >> >>>>To Geri and the rest of the empyre list:
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>Elaborate on the proposition of a "stealth" approach to
> >> >>>>confronting the current political environment and its players who
> >> >>>>partake in elaborate mechanisms of public deception and media
> >> >>>>manipulation.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>What is the 21st century solution?
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>How can artists engage in effective mediation in these
> >> >>>>increasingly, technologically-savvy times?
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>Randall
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>>I think there's a very clear understanding of the power of the
> > > >>>>>media and has been for a long time in academic, publishing, art,
> >> >>>>>media, etc. fields. I just don't think this "rhetoric" is
> >> >>>>>effectual, in my opinion it's not shedding any new light. I
> >> >>>>>think this strategy echoes a political activist art practice
> >> >>>>>that worked well in the 80's and early 90's, but we're in a
> > > >>>>>different even more media savvy time that I think demands an
> >> >>>>>even more stealth approach.
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>geri wittig
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>>The statement was posed rhetorically, clearly not everyone is
> >asleep...
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>The problem is: 45% of the country can't be awakened from their
> >> >>>>>>hypnosis. They will vote for Bush even if he is campaigning for
> >> >>>>>>the apocalypse (which, by the way he is). If the rest of us are
> >> >>>>>>searching for ways to confront our "nation of robotic
> >> >>>>>>brethren," to quote Abe Golam, we must have a better
> >> >>>>>>understanding the power of the media as the opiate of the
> >> >>>>>>masses.
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>----------
> >> >>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>From: Geri Wittig <gwittig@adobe.com>
> >> >>>>>>>Date: Thu, 07 Oct 2004 08:35:17 -0700
> >> >>>>>>>To: soft_skinned_space <empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au>
> >> >>>>>>>Subject: Re: [-empyre-] Do You Still Own Your Reality?
> >> >>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>I completely understand the sentiment of this post - the Bush
> >opposition
> >> >>>>>>>movement in this country has been critiquing the power of the
> >> >>>>>>>misinformation
> >> >>>>>>>and fear mongering that comes out of the Bush administration -
> >> >>>>>>>this is not a
> >> >>>>>>>new observation and has been duly noted for years. I watched
the
> >> >>>>>>>Cheney/Edwards debate and had the same analysis of Cheney's
> >> >>>>>>>uncanny ability
> >> >>>>>>>to hypnotically put forth inaccuracies that an uninformed
> >> >>>>>>>public would take
> >> >>>>>>>at face value without question, but to lump all of "America's
> >> >>>>>>>reality" into
> >> >>>>>>>one basket is a disservice to the many in the trenches who have
> >been
> >> >>>>>>>fighting the good fight to oppose the Bush administration in
all of
> >it's
> >> >>>>>>>varied negative policy impacts upon the world. For example, in
> >> >>>>>>>these last
> >> >>>>>>>few weeks of this campaign, the work that many grassroots
> >> >>>>>>>voter registration
> >> >>>>>>>efforts have been doing are showing results - the late voter
> >> >>>>>>>registration
> >> >>>>>>>has been surging. A friend of mine who recently moved to North
> >> >>>>>>>Carolina, a
> >> >>>>>>>Republican stronghold, informed me that late voter
> >> >>>>>>>registration is running
> >> >>>>>>>60% Democrat, 12% Republican. Yes, we need to continue to
> >> >>>>>>>critique and point
> >> >>>>>>>out the insane "reality" that the Bush administration is
> >> >>>>>>>trying to pull over
> >> >>>>>>>the uninformed American public's eyes, but we need to also
> >> >>>>>>>acknowlege where
> >> >>>>>>>the work in action is gaining some ground. On a psychological
level
> >it's
> >> >>>>>>>going to be important to help boost any momentum that is being
> >> >>>>>>>gained by the
> >> >>>>>>>Bush opposition, as it's going to be very important for
> >> >>>>>>>getting out those
> >> >>>>>>>left leaning voters who do not support Bush's policies, but who
> >haven't
> >> >>>>>>>voted in years because they've become disillusioned with the
> >> >>>>>>>system and have
> >> >>>>>>>gone into inaction. Critique is vital, but without action and
> >> >>>>>>>acknowledgement of the successes that that action may be
attaining,
> >the
> >> >>>>>>>critique is futile.
> >> >>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>geri wittig
> >> >>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>> (((((((((( We the Blog Update: Do You Still Own Your
> >> >>>>>>>>Reality? ))))))))))
> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>> October 07, 2004
> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>> The Republicans are heightening the attack, ramping up their
> >spin
> >> >>>>>>>> strategies to reinforce disinformation in order to fool the
> >country
> >> >>>>>>>> into re-election.
> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>> Straight out of the playbook from Orwell's 1984...
> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>> They continue to retool their highly refined doublespeak
tactics
> >to
> >> >>>>>>>> maintain a stranglehold on the reality of unsuspecting
> >Americans.
> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>> Have the Republicans co-opted your reality?
> > > >>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>> According to columnist Tina Brown in the Washington Post
> >> >>>>>>>>discussing the
> >> >>>>>>>> VP debate:
> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>> "Cheney found a more primitive way to bluff with a bad
hand...
> >In a
> >> >>>>>>>> culture of blatherers, Cheney intimidates with his silences,
his
> >> >>>>>>>> stingers, and above all his awesome capacity to stare down
> > > >>>>>>>>the evidence
> >> >>>>>>>> and assert that black is white."
> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>> Despite the fact that this week, the administration's own
Paul
> >Bremer,
> >> >>>>>>>> Don Rumsfeld, and the weapons investigator Charles Duelfer
have
> >all
> >> >>>>>>>> declared the reason's for going to war were deeply flawed,
as
> >well as
> >> >>>>>>>> the so called follow-up plan, Bush and Cheney not only stand
> >their
> >> >>>>>>>> ground, the tighten their tenuous grip on a fictional
narrative
> >> >>>>>>>> designed to disguise their true ambition to control the
> >> >>>>>>>>oil-rich middle
> >> >>>>>>>> east.
> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>> The real issue in this election though, is America going to
wake
> >up to
> >> >>>>>>>> the dream (or nightmare) it finds itself in? Can we lift the
> >> >>>>>>>>veil on the
> >> >>>>>>>> disinformation pouring out of the White House. Can we take
> >command of
> >> >>>>>>> > our own reality?
> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>> Or has America's reality been permanently hijacked by the
> >Republicans
> >> >>>>>>>> and their media propaganda machine?
> >> >>>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>>_______________________________________________
> >> >>>>>>>empyre forum
> >> >>>>>>>empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
> >> >>>>>>>http://www.subtle.net/empyre
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>_______________________________________________
> >> >>>>>>empyre forum
> >> >>>>>>empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
> >> >>>>>>http://www.subtle.net/empyre
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>_______________________________________________
> >> >>>>>empyre forum
> >> >>>>>empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
> >> >>>>>http://www.subtle.net/empyre
> >> >>>
> >> >>>_______________________________________________
> >> >>>empyre forum
> >> >>>empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
> >> >>>http://www.subtle.net/empyre
> >> >>
> >> >>_______________________________________________
> >> >>empyre forum
> >> >>empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
> >> >>http://www.subtle.net/empyre
> >> >>
> >> >
> >> >_______________________________________________
> >> >empyre forum
> >> >empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
> >> >http://www.subtle.net/empyre
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> empyre forum
> >> empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
> >> http://www.subtle.net/empyre
> >>
> >
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >empyre forum
> >empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
> >http://www.subtle.net/empyre
>
> _______________________________________________
> empyre forum
> empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
> http://www.subtle.net/empyre
>
This archive was generated by a fusion of
Pipermail 0.09 (Mailman edition) and
MHonArc 2.6.8.