A resurgence of Southern Gothic themes in contemporary fiction has been identified in the work of figures like Barry Hannah — ,  Joe R. Lansdale b.
- Le Parrain et le Rabbin!
- ROMW vs. RAMB Reveals God Adam and Creation: What Would Grandma and Grandpa Adam, and Eve say? ….If They Could See us now: Simeon W. Johnson?
- Aïe Aïe Aïe !.
A number of films and television programs are also described as being part of the Southern Gothic genre. Some prominent examples are:. The genre shares thematic connections with the Southern Gothic genre of literature, and indeed the parameters of what makes something Gothic Americana appears to have more in common with literary genres than traditional musical ones.
Songs often examine poverty, criminal behavior, religious imagery, death, ghosts, family, lost love, alcohol, murder, the devil and betrayal. The images of Great Depression photographer Walker Evans are frequently seen to evoke the visual depiction of the Southern Gothic; Evans claimed: "I can understand why Southerners are haunted by their own landscape".
Another noted Southern Gothic photographer was surrealist , Clarence John Laughlin , who photographed cemeteries, plantations , and other abandoned places throughout the American South primarily Louisiana for nearly 40 years. William Gibson took an ironic look at the cult of "Southernness" in his novel Virtual Light. The northern owner says he finds Rydell unsuitable: "What we offer people here is a certain vision , Mr.
A certain darkness as well. A Gothic quality The Mind of the South. A fever dream of sensuality". Put out by finding himself not southern enough for this New Englander , "'Lady,' Rydell said carefully, 'I think you're crazier than a sack full of assholes. The brooding verbal polychromes of an almost unthinkably advanced decay. From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. For other uses, see Southern Gothic disambiguation. This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed.
Main page: Category:Southern Gothic films. Alternative rock American folk music blues country music. By devoting itself to being a universal, administrative service in the form of a conspiracy, WikiLeaks is not only a historic innovation — it also runs a great risk. Art philosopher Boris Groys sees the art installation as a way of making hidden reality visible.
The ambiguous meaning of the notion of freedom that Groys observes in our democratic order is also present in the contemporary art installation. This can be exposed by examining it and analysing the role of the artist and the curator. The public space created by the installation, and by the biennial, is the model for a new political world order.
In communicative capitalism, the whole concept of the relation between openness and democracy radically changed. Not only does Assange assume that reliable, symbolically effective information is the basis of democracy, he also does not recognize that information overkill is a greater handicap than too little information, and that he himself is part of the spectacle that is diverting attention from political issues.
Jodi Dean is the author of numerous books and articles. Her most recent book is Crowds and Party, published by Verso in Marco Scotini is the curator of the ongoing Disobedience Archive project, a video station and discussion platform that focuses on the relationship between artistic practices and political action. In this text, Scotini focuses on the Autonomia movement of and the Italian underground filmmaker Alberto Grifi, who is considered a cinema pioneer who anticipated contemporary disobedience cinema. Marco Scotini is an independent curator and art critic based in Milan.
He is Editor-in-Chief of the magazine No Order. His most recent exhibition was Disobedience Archive The Republic for the Castello di Rivoli Turin and he is currently working on an exhibition project dedicated to the art from Eastern Europe, to be opened in January in Bologna. Maurizio Lazzarato is a sociologist and member of the editorial staff of the magazine Multitudes. He lives and works in Paris. The brain is a work, and we do not know it. We are its subjects, authors and producers at once — and we do not know it. DAI is an internationally orientated MA Art Praxis focusing on art, but explicitly granting attention to the crossings and interactions with other domains, disciplines and knowledges.
As a partner of DAI , Open! You can find links to the results of the previous year below. This year our study group questioned the state of the mind and brain under conditions of cognitive capitalism. Mainly from the perspective of the humanities and political aesthetics, we focused on current notions of the brain in our global capitalist societies.
We asked after how far the brain can be ideologically infiltrated or resist that infiltration. We learned how neuro-scientific conceptions of the brain can be appropriated by cognitive capitalism and charted possibilities to subvert the instrumentalization of our brains. Through seminars and in conversation with generous guest tutors and by studying texts and other resources, we entered the brain. He urged us to find a new rhythm between the relation of the brain and the chaos of the infosphere. Alongside all this the Open!
COOP Academy participants developed their individual image essays and experimental writings, guided by the Open! As a collaborative exercise in thinking and writing they also created a playful image-text lexicon in relation to the overarching subject matter and the issues at stake, so as to break open concepts and create new relationships among them. It can be considered as a continuation and actualization of the Hybrid Space issue of the Open!
Since then Web 2. A series of articles will be released on Open! The emergent techno-sensuous spatial order of Affect Space is characterized by three constitutive elements: the massive presence of self-produced media forms, the context of occupied urban public spaces and the deep permeation of affective intensity in these media forms and urban spaces. This striking pattern of sudden collective mobilization and dissolution in public space is not limited to these protest gatherings, and cannot be explained exclusively by the aide of technology in their coming into being.
Nor can it be reduced to the contested political, ideological and economic issues at stake. The diversity of context, incitement and participants is simply too great to hold accountable for the recurrence of this pattern.
- It Is No Secret (What God Can Do)!
- The Search for Truth about Islam: A Christian Pastor Separates Fact from Fiction.
- How to Make it Small in the Music Business - The survival guide for the beginning band.
- The Gift of Righteousness: Exploring Issues in Righteousness.
- A Diamond In The Rough.
It went viral, generating enormous traffic and mass media attention. In reaction to the seemingly immanent public order disturbance local authorities organized a massive police response.
Sport in Films: Symbolism versus Verismo. A France-United States Comparative Analysis
A national investigation produced a thorough report. They concluded that the crowd build-up was incited almost exclusively via social media channels. Mass media exposure had a negligible influence. So how do we account for these remarkable phenomena? The use of mobile and wireless media changes the nature of public space dramatically. Ever- tighter feedback loops of the physical and the mediated are generated, turning streets and squares into media channels and platforms in near real-time.
As wireless networks speed up, the speed of these feedback loops is only intensified Wi-fi, 3G , 4G , et cetera. The physical and mediated feedback loop precipitates affect-related forms of communication and exchange. There is a rich repository of engagements with the implicit and explicit orderings of public spaces, ranging from psychogeographic procedures developed by the Situationists, to critical theories and practices in architectural and urban design, information architecture, and geo-locative arts and design, as well as within social movements, community arts, and media theory and activism.
By the late twentieth century, our time, a mythic time, we are all chimeras, theorized and fabricated hybrids of machine and organism; in short, we are cyborgs. For posthuman theory, the subject is a transversal entity, fully immersed in and immanent to a network of non-human animal, vegetable, viral relations. As a partner of DAI Open! You can find the results of last year's Publishing Class here. In questioning the central position of the human, critical posthumanism also involves the issue of the animal other, the inhuman, neo-materialism and the anthropocene.
It is engaged in rethinking modernist dualisms between nature and culture, matter and mind, man and woman, man and machine, the human and the inhuman. In a series of seminars with guest tutors and the Open! COOP Academy Publishing Class has been exploring and discussing critical posthumanism — its ethics, politics and aesthetics. Between and Beyond — A Posthuman Bestiary considers and represents new relationships and entanglements, questions old hierarchies, crosses boundaries and introduces new subjectivities and narratives. Alongside the bestiary the student-participants developed image essays related to the main subject matter, but grounded in their individual interests and ways of working.
This has resulted in a rich and heterogenous body of texts in which aspects of the posthuman appear without assigning it a fixed identity. These contributions will be published on Open! From its inception, Open! The commons certainly is not lacking in those who hype the cause, nor in vehement detractors. And is the excitement in some art world circles however marginal they may be for forms of commoning, or at least the rhetoric of commoning, not deeply suspicious? Nonetheless, we would not have pursued Commonist Aesthetics if we agreed that commons discourse is completely bankrupt and utterly irredeemable.
Later this year, the whole Commonist Aesthetics project will be rounded off by a book publication. For Common Conflict , we have confronted a number of authors with a series of questions, some or many of which may be leading questions. Is the notion of the commons subject to an ontological essentialization?
Is dehistoricization tantamount to depoliticization? The resurgence of the commons is clearly linked to the decline of the public sector, at least in Europe. Is commonism tacitly complicit with the ever further dismantling of the state and the public? Does the state need to be reclaimed? How does, or should, commonist self-organization around specific issues relate to more general antagonisms and struggles?
Does the theory lag behind the most cogent practices? Is it often a substitute for actual commoning practices at specific sites for struggles? Can problematic, partial or blocked attempts at commoning be as valid as seemingly successful and exemplary endeavours? Does the all too familiar critique of art institutions need to be followed by an active commoning of institutions?
How to proceed with this? Does the art world focus overly on low-tech forms of commons and commoning, unduly neglecting the digital commons? How can and should online and offline impact each other? Do we see the beginnings of a commonist aesthetic practice in a more fundamental sense, involving forms of sensuous activity that challenge and go beyond established notions of art and existing institutional forms? Does aesthetic practice allow us to refocus all of the above questions?
The theme Culture of Control , which Open! A brief look back:. The first issue of Open , on which I worked as editor-in-chief, appeared still in printed form in and had as its theme and title, In Security. The individual and the community are demanding maximum security for the public space and for themselves, and ever more control over the other. There seems to be a veritable obsession with security. The issue explored this obsession from the vantage points of architecture, art, philosophy and politics. It discussed global and local fears, occupation, surveillance, power, control and in security, as well as activist and cultural strategies for opposing this.
In the Netherlands, we witnessed the murders of the right-wing populist politician Pim Fortuyn 6 May and the film director Theo van Gogh 2 November In , an issue of Open was devoted to the loss of our sense of privacy , seen in light of the political events of previous years, but also in relation to the rise of the Web 2. From that editorial:. In the globalized network cultures, visibility, transparency, accessibility and connectivity are what count.
Are alternative subjectivities and rights emerging that are considered more important in the twenty-first century? Are new strategies and tactics being mobilized to safeguard personal autonomy and to escape forms of institutional biopower? From the editorial: This issue… examines transparency as an ideology, the ideal of the free flow of information versus the fight over access to information and the intrinsic connection between publicity and secrecy.
Among other things, the issue also discussed the extent to which transparency contains within it aspects of concealment and control. The present research theme, Culture of Control , continues along this vein. It critically discusses how the primacy of control and security has further developed in recent years — partly under the pressures of a credit crisis, terrorism, revolutions and hordes of refugees — and how it is manifested in public and urban space, in our communities and individual lives.
What are our new fears or the new instruments and mechanisms of control? She looks at the secret not only as it figures in current affairs but also in artworks by Trevor Paglen and Jill Magid. Michael Seeman, the author of Digital Tailspin. Ten Rules for the Internet After Snowden , describes in his new essay, The Kontrollverlust of the Nation State and The Rise of the Platforms , how the nation states are losing control over their citizens, while digital platforms like Facebook and Google are increasingly getting a grip on them.
What about the aesthetics and politics of affect? Can affect be defined as a critical departure point for curatorial and artistic practices? Precisely because it is about movement and therefore about change and becoming, affect has a political dimension: affect can govern a transition. It makes thought-felt different capacities for existence, different life potentials, different forms of life, without immediately imposing either a choice — or a compromise — between them.
These could include amateur images as well as news images and artistic images — ranging from photos of Abu Ghraib to the ISIS videos or images of public art works. We focused on how these images conceal ideological layers and produce affect. Gradually, however, we also became interested in technological or digital interfaces and their affect. Realizing that we are continually in and around the media in our daily lives and that we have developed a symbiotic relationship with technology, we focused on the interface, that ubiquitous and largely hidden layer between human and machine that permanently shapes our view of the material, the social, the political and the technological.
You have made a transition, however slight. You have stepped over a threshold. Affect is this passing of a threshold, seen from the point of view of the change in capacity. How do interfaces shape, transform and transmit affect? In what ways does the experiencing of affect, mediated through an interface, work upon our daily lives?
This symposium is entirely curated by the DAI students. As part of the course, the students also worked on individual contributions about image, interface and affect that in the coming period will be published on Open!
- Other Bahá’í Sites.
- Wing Chun Kung Fu: Weapons Training;
- Heal With Essential Oil: Natures Medicine Cabinet (Over 125 Recipes For Treating Common Ailments Using Eight of the Most Powerful Essential Oils in Aromatherapy);
Together however, and in relation to each other, they provide provocative insights and questions concerning the subject matter. Besides, in November Open! In response to the protests and occupations that have rocked universities and art schools from Montreal and Toronto to Amsterdam and London, Open! We request your patience, as we continue to revise and digitise the archived images and texts.
The Open! Under Timeline, you can easily browse through the chapters of any article you are reading. If you still prefer reading in an analogue format, you can simply download texts as PDF s. Since Open! A donation would be highly appreciated. Recently Open! Stay up-to-date on our latest publications by subscribing to our newsletter. This Open is exceptional in several respects: as a result of radical government cutbacks on art and culture in the netherlands, it is out of sheer necessity the last issue to be published by SKOR Foundation for Art and Public Domain and nAi Publishers — SKOR will cease to exist in its present form as of 1 January Starting with the premise that parliamentary democracy is under pressure in the globalized society, they asked themselves how a democratic politics can function more optimally, and what the role of art is within that.
The politics of things thus has a political-philosophic dimension in which power, for example, is investigated as an effect of networks of connections and interactions between people and things, and space is given to things and issues that are seldom represented in connection with democracy. This Open is about what a thing like art does in democracy, how art makes publics, and is a thing that interacts with other things and people and influences them. Open 24 includes an introduction to the current Politics of Things and considerations on art and public space through a Politics of Things lens, such as the essay by Peter Peters and Ruth Benschop reconsidering the renowned public art work Tilted Arc by Richard Serra, or the text by Peter-Paul Verbeek on how art can examine the political role of Things — and implicitly, the article by Mariska van den Berg on artistic practices for the city.
The contributions in this issue also show new perspectives on the public and democratizing effect of art. The introductory essays by Boomgaard and Doruff give a clear picture of how the Politics of Things offers purchase for actual practice and prompts more abstract, philosophical reflections.
These qualities converge in the essays by Noortje Marres and Fiona Candlin, who both discuss the politics of technology, things and issues, but from different points of view. It only remains for me to say thanks to SKOR and NA i Publishers for the collaboration from to , and also to the authors and readers and all who have made Open possible.
Hopefully we will meet again through Open! In many Western states, not lastly in the former subsidy paradise of the Netherlands, huge cutbacks are taking place in governmental budgets for the arts and culture, in addition to equally drastic financial measures in the public sector and social services, in health care, education, the environment and developmental aid.
Not only is there a question of national economic, social and political crises, which here and there are coupled with a rise of populism, but there is also a euro crisis and a global free market crisis. What's more, a wave of revolution is going on in the Arab world which is bringing about new local and global relationships. All of this compels a drastic revision of national and international positions and the interests of nations, parties, institutions and citizens in relation to one another, to authority and also to the communal and the shared. That a concept like autonomy comes into this, and that it would be put forward in an issue of Open as a topic of thought and investigation, would seem both obvious and surprising, or even dubious: it seems inevitable that this notion would be reconsidered and probablematized at a time when people and things are being thrown more upon their own resources; but at the same time, a number of its connotations evidently run directly counter to the urgent call for new forms of involvement and participation that is resounding everywhere — witness the rise of the Occupy movement.
In the arts, certainly, the term is often directly related to Clement Greenberg's sterile notion of autonomy, in which the art object must in the first place refer to itself and its own formal characteristics. According to Greenberg, a work of art must try to avoid dependence on every order of experience that is not inherent to the most essentially construed nature of its medium. This modernist art theory is miles apart from the political thinking of the Italian Autonomia movement in the s, which was about the autonomy of the working class, of immaterial labour, biopolitics, precarity, the 'multitude' and the 'commons'; topics that tellingly enough are currently in the spotlight again.
Where does the call for engagement and performativity, which in the arts in particular has been frequently made over the last few years, converge with the desire for autonomy, broadly seen as the urge to take the helm oneself and have a significance that is separate from old structures? Doesn't engagement actually spring from a desire for autonomy?
During the symposium, the Occupy movement manifested itself at various places in the world; this became an important topic of debate in the Van Abbemuseum, and is also reflected in this issue.
Oh no, there's been an error
Furthermore, in Eindhoven there were contributions by, among others, Peter Osborne, Gerald Raunig, Franco Berardi, Hito Steyerl, Thomas Hirschhorn and Joost de Bloois, each of whom also has a voice in Open 23 with either a new contribution or an adapted or extended version of their lecture. Steven ten Thije investigates the underlying motivation for The Autonomy Project. In Open 23, autonomy is regarded from the viewpoints of art, art history, philosophy, political theory and cultural criticism, a variety of artillery that is necessary in order to break open the concept and give it new meaning.
The friction between these different discourses and disciplines and between theory and practice is precisely what allows perspectives to emerge for an 'engaged autonomy', a compound term that Charles Esche, director of the Van Abbemuseum, coined in order to escape the limitations of thinking in terms of engagement on the one hand and autonomy on the other.
Reflecting upon Anonymous, the activist Internet movement that can be anyone and that has no leader or external management, the following question comes to mind: could autonomy and anonymity perhaps have something to do with each other, in thinking about new forms of critical art and culture? The advent of the so-called autonomous subject in the modern age was specifically coupled with the naming of that subject and with a rational process of individualization.
Distinctive identities cannot be ascertained from anonymous subjects, or at least not without difficulty: the anonymous subject, which is in fact a contradiction in terms, undermines the logic and culture of the autonomous subject, in that it does not let itself be controlled just like that. From the perspective of these modern ideological conceptions, anonymity and autonomy would thus appear to be mutually exclusive. One can immediately qualify this, however. For instance, you can assert that a condition and situation of anonymity in fact also implies a degree of autonomy in the sense of freedom and the room to move with respect to the dominant system.
Not being able to be identified because of a voluntary, self-chosen anonymity, an act of resistance, has its advantages and offers new operational perspectives. But in our society, anonymity can also stem from a directly or indirectly imposed status of not being heard or seen, as a result of not being identifiable according to the system, an exclusion and exceptionalness that actually attacks personal autonomy. Under laws made by others, the individual then cannot follow those laws — a bizarre condition of illegality. At the same time, you can wonder what the unique identity of the subject still comprises, if anything, in an era when identities are more makeable, fluid and reproducible than ever, and can no longer be pinned down in time and space.
On the Internet, anonymous cultures and anonymous information exchanges flourish, and autonomy arises from a game of non- identities and collective desires instead of from the manifestation of a singular absolute identity and its free will. And then we are back to Anonymous, whereby unidentified persons agitate to protect the free exchange of information on the Internet, and who have become famous and infamous for their DD o S attacks and Operation Avenge Assange.
Anonymous sees itself as a spontaneous collective of people who serve a common goal, and in that sense is comparable with Occupy, which does not work with obvious leaders or representatives either, and likewise campaigns on behalf of and for everyone without unequivocally sanctioned principles. This is not about the private interest of a specific group or the injustice done to it or to another, nor is it about finding a consensus.
And so it is about a different group in society which speaks for the entire society because their actions concern everyone. A stimulating proposition in every way. However, the movement does not have any membership structure; everyone can carry out activities in the name of Anonymous. Taking WikiLeaks as an illustrative example, Open 22 investigates how transparency and secrecy relate to one another, to the public and to publicity in our computerized visual cultures. This issue continues to explore what for Open are fundamental themes such as privatization, mediatization and the demand for the communal.
In the more general sense, it examines transparency as an ideology, the ideal of the free flow of information versus the fight over access to information and the intrinsic connection between publicity and secrecy. It also tries to come to grips with the social and political implications of the phenomenon of WikiLeaks, which, with the illustrious Julian Assange as front man, produces an effect on a global scale.
While most people would agree that WikiLeaks has started something that is unstoppable; there is hardly any consensus on its morality, effectiveness or strategy, neither in conservative nor in progressive circles. And whereas people often consider secrecy within the public sphere to be inadmissible and clandestine, transparency is associated with democracy, participation and accessibility. But does transparency only work in a liberating way? Can it not equally have a concealing or controlling effect?
In any case, with their capacity to immediately reproduce and disseminate information, the media play a crucial role in the social process of displaying and disclosing. But on behalf of whom are they doing this, and for whom? Do they not increasingly form an abstract power? Two introductory essays explore political and social notions of transparency and secrecy.
Media theorist Felix Stalder searches for a form of transparency that is not employed as a means of power and control, such as in neoliberal market thinking, but that can express and strengthen social solidarity. Stefan Nowotny, philosopher, goes into publicity and openness as a modern myth in relation to the production of affects and the exercise of power, and finds that secrecy and publicity are intertwined more than ever. Other pieces directly examine WikiLeaks and its implications.
In the column, Jorinde Seijdel wonders where WikiLeaks and Facebook converge, seeing as both avow transparency as their ideology but apparently out of very different motives. Transparency and secrecy are also relevant concepts in art and architecture. The art historian Roel Griffioen posits that, analogous to social developments, the ideal of the glass house in modern and contemporary architecture has made way for the house of one-way glass, in which concealing has become just as important as displaying. The work of Amsterdam-based American artist Zachary Formwalt, who also made a special visual contribution to this issue, is one example of this.
Illustrations of a project by designer Floor Koomen and graphic design students of the Rietveld Academie in Amsterdam can be found throughout this issue. The assignment consisted of selecting a leak from the WikiLeaks website and editing and designing it for a print-on-demand publication, thus providing us with a critical look at WikiLeaks as a medium and the current position of journalism.
At first, this might seem inappropriate, because of the apparently fundamentally different premises and divergent social, economic and political views of these super-topical digital platforms: Facebook as an ultra-capitalistic billion-dollar company versus WikiLeaks as an activist, non-profit organization; Facebook as a social network for the exchange of personal information versus WikiLeaks as a whistle-blower site for anonymous revelations of public interest; Facebook as commercial purloiner and trader of information versus WikiLeaks as altruistic provider of information. There are also many similarities, however: both Facebook and WikiLeaks are to a large degree products of an increased societal desire for disclosure.
Last but not least, both claim a significant role as stoker of the revolutions in the Middle East. Be that as it may, somewhere in the shining clarity of radical transparency there is an acute black hole, a dark spot where Facebook and WikiLeaks meet. The question is: At that frightful point of convergence, what happens with the first resumed differences?
But who or what is being served, and if this is a cult, what is being worshiped or celebrated? In this immense transparent bliss, the communal is then celebrated and claimed, as one big discourse and a democratic exchange, whereby an immaterial, intangible service is provided to the populus , a service that it carries out itself, as a higher specimen of Do-It-Yourself. And so this concerns a service to visibility and openness just as much as to secrecy. The core of the communal and public can thus never be situated purely in the visible and transparent, but is equally present in the hidden and opaque.
In this light, it is understandable that the central focus in the new reality programmes, such as Secret Story, is on keeping a secret, instead of exacting extreme transparency from the participants. Thus the contrived search for a point of convergence between Facebook and WikiLeaks as a small thought experiment at any rate results in the realization that, despite their differing ideologies and objectives, the paradigms underlying these two organizations are not essentially different. On the contrary, it is precisely together that they manifest the dominant paradigm to which the demand for transparency belongs in optima forma.
They equally well demonstrate together, as counterparts of one another, that the philosophy of transparency and its logistic or performative system not only makes the communal visible but also makes it evaporate and lets it escape. This issue came into being in collaboration with guest editor Eric Kluitenberg, a media theorist, writer and organizer of projects concentrating on culture and technology. The festival took place in several international cities simultaneously and was streamed live on the Internet.
Sustainability and ecology is merely one dimension of mobility as a social question. In the light of globalization, the new technology and sociopolitical developments on the local and global levels, it is equally about mobility versus immobility in terms of people, data, capital and products. It is also about mobility privileges and the freedom of movement, or lack thereof, of population groups and individuals, about incessant flows of data, the enticements of capital and free commodity markets.
This issue of Open explores the internal contradictions of prevailing mobility regimes and their effects on social and physical space. Advanced communications technology, rather than revealing itself to be a clean alternative for physical movement from place to place, seems to pave the way for an increase of physical and motorized mobility.
The accelerating flows of data and commodities stand in sharp contrast to the elbowroom afforded to the biological body, which in fact is forced to a standstill. In short, on the one hand there is a question of an uncurbed and uncontrolled increase of mobility, while on the other, segregating filtrations are taking place.
Kluitenberg explores the contradictory regimes of im mobility in his introductory essay and searches for a perspective of intervention. Following the example of Saskia Sassen, he concludes by turning to the local as a context from which effective counterforces can be generated on the global level. From another line of approach, namely the rhizomatics of Deleuze and Guattari, philosopher and jurist Marc Schuilenburg argues for connectivity with the local, introducing a new term in this regard: terroir , a contextualized approach to place and identity in which the emphasis lies on the dynamic relation between objects and people.
Lebbe analyses how the external borders of the Schengen Area are being more and more strictly guarded with the help of new digital techniques, in order to regulate mobility. She sees the rise of a dispositif surveillance, the Ban-opticon. John Thackara, design critic, reflects upon the limitations of mobility as a challenge for designers, who ought to seek new ways of using space and time. Through a problematization of the mobility of food and its tracking, media theorist Tatiana Goryucheva investigates the preconditions for a democratic design of technology. Architect Nerea Calvillo expounds upon the project In the Air , which focuses on collecting data to visualize invisible elements in the urban atmosphere and aims at being a tool for increasing the awareness and participation of city inhabitants.
The contribution by design and research collective Metahaven is about the mobility of money. In Mobile Money , they envisage new forms of money and capital. Last but not least, in the column, media theorist Joss Hands, whose is for Activism: Dissent, Resistance and Rebellion in a Digital Culture recently appeared, discusses the mobilizing capacity of social media in the recent events in the Middle East, and how they can trespass on space, time, movement and personal will.
If we want to take populism seriously as a political force, we must above all consider it in the light of these aspects. At the same time, we must ask ourselves the difficult question of why our own politics no longer can appeal to the imagination. He is also the editor of www. Perhaps someone of his generation is precisely the one who should pose this urgent question about politics and the imagination, someone who can go beyond the moral, rational and politically correct standpoints of traditional criticism, and far beyond the protest generation of , in considering and questioning the current populist spectacle.
In the Netherlands, the formation of a new cabinet has been going on for months at the time of this writing, not lastly because of the prominent position that populist Geert Wilders and his Party for Freedom PVV have acquired in the formation process. However, this issue of Open is not specifically about populism in the Netherlands, but also about its current manifestations in the USA the Tea Party and Italy Berlusconi and the Lega Nord , and about the success of left-wing populism in Latin America.
The contributions steer clear of the often all-too-easy moral evaluations of populist party programmes, or of passing judgments on populist leaders. Reviving an earlier tactic, On the Passage pairs a blank white screen with the claim that an attack on social organisation requires a corresponding disavowal of all forms of language utilised by that organisation, which, of course, is accomplished through the recurrent insertion of pure absence onto the image track of the film.
Often, though, it is impossible to determine which way the relationship goes or whether there might in fact be no difference between the two models. The revolutionary force of this tactic rests in its bringing together images, sounds or texts that remain separate through the normal functioning of spectacle. Theory is nothing until historically realised in a concrete practice such as this, that at once destabilises both aesthetic and political propriety. Diametrically opposed to quotation, which attempts to preserve a text by abstracting it from its historical existence yet keeping it essentially at a distance, detournement — as a sort of subset of plagiarism — brings new, indeterminate meaning to cultural artifacts by juxtaposing them in violent and deliberately incoherent ways.
Where an image of antagonism between, say, bureaucratic i. Detournement is always already there, latent in the mass production of the spectacular economy. Like Marx, Debord wants to show precisely how capitalism paradoxically designs its own reversal. It might here be worth developing another sort of analogy between war and cinema, wherein the visual-aural space of the theatre becomes the site of confrontation between the spectacular image and its own inbuilt negation.
We recognise our existence to be one oversaturated by capital-cum-image, here detourned both synchronically by the voiceover critique and diachronically by the next, no longer unrelated, image , in an unpredictable movement that constructs a new, diagonal axis as it unfolds. This sort of plagiarism — so much more than mere replication — further justifies itself on economic grounds, as an essential device in the movement towards a true literary communism. Everything one might need for the creation of revolutionary art is already there; there is no reason to produce more textual or filmic artifacts in a world so filled with material waste; the human energies involved in such productions could be better applied elsewhere in the name of historical transformation.
Detourned scenes from Johnny Guitar in Society of the Spectacle , for example, evoke a middle-of-nowhere sensation of smooth space or the mysteriousness of love. We should, however, not be taken aback by this rhetorical mode, for his strategy here is again one of detournement, bringing abstract categories of classical thought into contact with a current historical situation at the tipping point of revolution.
And as we move away from old uses of those reified categories, so too are we encouraged to reconsider our current terms of film analysis, moving away from synchrony and diachrony to a cinema that cuts diagonally across these traditionally separate axes. Segueing from cinema audience to classroom, Debord explicates the similar function of both spaces in the identity construction of the spectacular subject. The opening presents a photographic representation of a cinema audience; the spectator sees herself as though the screen has become a mirror, and, so mirroring its own audience, the film denotes spectatorship in general as the very object of its critique.
Its aim will be nothing short of the stylistic negation of the spectacular subject.
Inundated with images of spectacular ideology in the form of advertisements, newsreels, bourgeois home life, filmic commodities etc. The Letterist and Situationist practice of the psychogeographic derive — in which participants drift aimlessly through a stratified city-space guided only by subspectacular proclivities for passion and adventure — similarly deconstructs the ideological subject of capital. These concerns are given their most articulate expression in In girum , which is, for all intents and purposes, a film primarily of and about space s , spacing s and general spatiality — of and about the dynamic tension between smooth and striated spaces and the perpetual movement from on to the other.
As the film continues, Debord depicts, via detournement, countless examples of territorialisations-in-process: the cavalry in Charge of the Light Brigade , infantrymen at Normandy from D-Day newsreels; American westward expansion as made possible by railroad technology. Cut into the film at a number of points are maps of Paris that present an urban space primed for smoothing, hinted at by repeated tracking shots that imag in e a flight by water from the trappings of city walls this time those of Venice.
Though each city is a singularity that must be escaped in a way that corresponds to its own peculiar spatial construction, the end result of the derive, no matter its vehicle, remains the same — a burst of liberation, a newfound temporality, and a negation of spatial striation. The two chapters of Society of the Spectacle that are least read today are perhaps the two most directly relevant to any discussion of cinematic counter- production. The spectacle maintains itself by divesting time of its qualitative attributes and converting it into quantitative, exchangeable segments, abstracting it, rendering it newly fit for consumption.
Cinematic convention paradigmatically embodies such spectacular time; it adopts the irreversible time of capitalist production with its unending supply of mechanistically form-fitting film commodities and emphasises pseudocyclical time as it perpetually inscribes the movie house as a liminal space from which the spectator can return to the public sphere with a perpetually renewed passivity. Each authentic experience of and in time and here Debord admittedly sounds strangely similar to Heidegger marks a little death in the heart of the spectacle.
Revolution, in a nutshell, can be defined by the moment of absolute anticipation in which anything is possible — the complete appropriation of temporality from capitalist production. And it is only fitting that Debord culminates his filmic oeuvre with a long tracking shot through the rigidly striated space of a Venice canal out to the smooth space of open water, with the deteriorating city of Venice — which is in fact literally eroding — fading fast in the distance.
You are commenting using your WordPress. You are commenting using your Google account. You are commenting using your Twitter account. You are commenting using your Facebook account.