Yes, Alex, I agree. There is a strange logic to the parasite. Subverting a program has the vexing requirement of relying on the very program which is to be subverted. Probably you're right and it is better just to pay this sort of thing no mind and get on with the more important business at hand.
The problem, I guess, is that ignoring Bush won't make him go away (for another 3 years or so, at least.) Of course, paying attention won't make him go away either, so I'm sort of stuck there. And worse, even when he does go away, there's somebody else just like him to step in.
I used to read a lot of this woman, Avital Ronell, and she was involved with this problem of trying to go beyond mere subversion. She thought (I think) that we need a radical break, a rupture, in order to move beyond this "reactive, mimetic, and regressive posturing" which I think is something like the problem you are referring to.
"A thinker" Flaubert said, "should have neither religion nor fatherland nor even any social conviction. Absolute scepticism."
Still, my emotions often seem to over ride my better judgement, and probably that's not always bad. I'm no democrat (or republican) but I'll most likely continue to take a small laugh at G.W.B.'s expense when I get the chance. Not that her story was particularly funny, but I could see the image of him standing there with that mask-like campaign look plastered on his face while saying something nasty under his breath. That's good for a chuckle. If he didn't look so much like Alfred E. Neuman when I picture him in my mind the whole thing might even serve to humanize him a bit.
Maybe humor can be a mini-rupture which allows you to subvert without getting caught up?
Can I still get a res at Gylany? 8:30?
Damn strange, last night I had a dream in which I met George W. Bush and told him that I thought he was doing a lousy job as president. I think remember that I called him a dope.
OK, I admit it, Madame Bovary is me.
But I do think this is a "big idea". It's still inchoate, maybe more a vision than an idea. That's why we can only see a rupture, rather than a path from here to there. Still, we gotta try. I was taught the subversive strategy in art school, and you can be sure that once it's reached that point, it's over. What started as a formal observation of the way in which art styles change became a prescription, demanding constant change, even if based on nothing but reaction. The result was a lot of really boring, academic art, which lead to a real reaction, which produced even worse art. Much the same with politics. Marx's critique rings as true as ever, but the prescription derived from it failed. At least in the art world not so many people get killed in the process.
I believe in humor, but the funniest jokes are always at our own expense.
|
The problem, I guess, is that ignoring Bush won't make him go away (for another 3 years or so, at least.) Of course, paying attention won't make him go away either, so I'm sort of stuck there. And worse, even when he does go away, there's somebody else just like him to step in.
I used to read a lot of this woman, Avital Ronell, and she was involved with this problem of trying to go beyond mere subversion. She thought (I think) that we need a radical break, a rupture, in order to move beyond this "reactive, mimetic, and regressive posturing" which I think is something like the problem you are referring to.
Still, my emotions often seem to over ride my better judgement, and probably that's not always bad. I'm no democrat (or republican) but I'll most likely continue to take a small laugh at G.W.B.'s expense when I get the chance. Not that her story was particularly funny, but I could see the image of him standing there with that mask-like campaign look plastered on his face while saying something nasty under his breath. That's good for a chuckle. If he didn't look so much like Alfred E. Neuman when I picture him in my mind the whole thing might even serve to humanize him a bit.
Maybe humor can be a mini-rupture which allows you to subvert without getting caught up?
Can I still get a res at Gylany? 8:30?
- jim 7-20-2001 12:08 am
Damn strange, last night I had a dream in which I met George W. Bush and told him that I thought he was doing a lousy job as president. I think remember that I called him a dope.
- steve 7-20-2001 12:18 am [add a comment]
i think youre having al gores dreams. was tipper there?
- dave 7-20-2001 12:22 am [add a comment]
OK, I admit it, Madame Bovary is me.
But I do think this is a "big idea". It's still inchoate, maybe more a vision than an idea. That's why we can only see a rupture, rather than a path from here to there. Still, we gotta try. I was taught the subversive strategy in art school, and you can be sure that once it's reached that point, it's over. What started as a formal observation of the way in which art styles change became a prescription, demanding constant change, even if based on nothing but reaction. The result was a lot of really boring, academic art, which lead to a real reaction, which produced even worse art. Much the same with politics. Marx's critique rings as true as ever, but the prescription derived from it failed. At least in the art world not so many people get killed in the process.
I believe in humor, but the funniest jokes are always at our own expense.
- alex 7-20-2001 12:59 am [add a comment]