BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Underground > Head Shop >

Media

  
 
creation
00:55 / 15.02.03
Hello. This is my Maiden post. From what i have read, the inttelectual 'stock' Here is far beyong my own. So please be Gentle.. ;-P For my first post i would like to present an essay/article i create on behalf of a marxist crtique on media. I used some influences such as Marcusse to elaborate my understanding. But my technical venacular is far less potent that some of you here. So please can you reccomend sites and readings to further my understandings and consolidate a clearer more cohereant argument than the one i am presenting.

Thank you.

The March Of Regression

A Homogenised work force wakes up to the call of the capital, the Orwellian nightmare, no longer a thought but reality. A fatalistic prophecy fulfils itself. Workers working toward a material goal, believing that a superficial existence will do. Slaves not knowing they are so. A pluralistic society where assumptions and doctrination are main themes, which govern social policy, the once touted and over used theory of meritocracy has died with those who thought existed. People work for most of their lives contributing to the wealth of the fat cats at the top.

Marketing gurus become the deities of worship. A fresh crop of children born day by day, waiting for the souls to be harvested by their soulless master: Television. Greed, corruption and female degradation are the values the new gods of today teach our children. An androgynous physical chassis has become the ideal body, no more the mind or metaphysical but a primordial quest for perverse body beautiful. Children become the prey of the gluttonous bosses feeding on the children’s dreams and nightmares with fur and Technicolor. Bright flashes meaningless words are the content which feature in the cesspool of children’s TV.

Reality TV has created a new breed of incompetents, who are compelled to vote for someone on TV, Not realising by making that phone call they are further aiding their masters, who in turn whip them into the assimilated roles they take in life. The colourful bombardment of flesh and visceral imaging appeals to the masses, mothers’ daughters’ fathers sons all opening their eyelids to let the corporate mind-rape happen in the comfort of their own homes. The innocent minds of children being ravaged by distorted perceptions of reality. Setting aspirations within them to become otiose entities. Being a ‘clebrity’ has become the desiderata of perspicacity. Core moralities have been jilted, replaced by values which wouldn’t seem out of place in Dante’s inferno.

People buy magazines to read what happens to the puppets of the TV world ‘get up to’ magazine upon magazine gloss and more gloss, the coprophiliac mother of three buys, and reads and reads. Gratifying her fetish by feeding on the faeces fed by the marketing gurus and network bosses. The poison gas of celebrity hits the living room floor and begins to kill the neurons of thought and spirituality, which may aid a conscience fight against this cycle of degeneration.

A culture out of culture has been bred: People have become reliant on the weekly supply of ‘showbiz’, a distorted world of demented reality. The ‘foolish’ masses read Heat and the Star, to feel that they have more knowledge of celebrity than the other. The quest for intellectual enlightenment has been sacrificed for ‘What Jade Did Next’ the mechanised mass living off mass hysteria, living out their hopeless lives in the hope that they too might win the lottery out of the capitalist culture they support. The fact that 6 million people voted by phone for pop-idol is one extreme example of the extreme stupidity of those who did so. The grand illusion is being accepted by wider society.

The ticket of fame has become engrained in the minds of children. The greed and narcissism of capitalism becomes inherent in the mind of the young. Such ideals; being branded on their brains, young minds are pimped now to the highest bidder by the government. Children become soldiers for Nike, Nokia and Sony, all representing their products with high esteem. Disney becomes the cultural teacher, teaching children the imperialist views of the ‘savage’ and foreign cultures.
Artistic integrity becomes a by-gone ideal, as the record companies force the music upon children, repetitious melodies and plagiarised lyrics all aiding the onset of complete enslavement. Media become the primary socialising aid, enforcing capitalist agendas from the day perception is present. Rights and wrongs, good and evil. The mind is being moulded for the lives of monotony that lay ahead.

The worth of a commodity is doctored by the sate, a false economy is the result of this there is no real value anymore, and nothing represents the actual value. The taxation duty and the heinous profits deform and distort the given value of a product.

Designers retail a shirt for £100.00 when the material value of it is 50pence, blind idiots, so called fashion conscious males/females buy without batting an eyelid. Ascribing to the thought that they are better than someone, because of their purchase the capitals whore’s handbooks, Cosmopolitan and FHM, both guides to the world of pretty post-modernist campaigns to empty the bank accounts of the damned idiots who read them.

Intelligent propaganda, which instigates a pure system of slavery. The money people earn, is taken from all angles as fore mentioned to build tents, and to give refuge to ‘crack whores’ and ‘smack heads’ of whom the state creates in the first place. Improper education abusive parents and teachers, all of whom themselves transgress the weakness of the state. A self-destroying society where people believe the only way to have fun is to experiment with substances used to kill vermin in the wars of yesterday. Neo capitalist structures have been well and truly established. Television programming consists of more advertising than ever before. Advertising is in schools churches and hospitals, from the womb to the grave. The capital owns you. The very term mortgage (Till death) is an instance of the language and pessimism in this world of ‘amazing’ progress. As Herbert Marcuse once said :-

‘Most of prevailing needs to relax, to have fun, to behave and consume in accordance with advertisements, to love and hate what others love and hate belong in this category of false needs’

Herbert Marcuse 1964 (One Dimensional Man)

So in conclusion what can be said? A consumerist society has casualties, but the proximity of these casualties are over boundary lines. The complacent self-righteous greed, in the capital shows no care or need to change the way its people are being exploited by the tyranny of globalisation and commercialism, the state opens its gates for companies with business practices more corrupt than any criminal you could meet on the street. Ford have become a family name, trusted by millions and loved alike, how many of those owners know of the Pinto? For those who buy Gap how many know of the human rights violations they have impeaded. The public have no clue, as the people who create these problems are not on the hierarchal list of news, which we are, force-fed.

Globalisation and capitalism have one of the most successful forms of assimilation in all human existence, they have created a system where they can control and exploit without the victim knowing. The very reason your reading this article is a clear statement to how the capital works, they believe that voices such as mine and millions of other will drown under the heavy marketing capitalism. However, let hope remain, as that is all we have.

Can we really sleep knowing that 80% of the world’s wealth is being consumed by 20% of its population? The fact that when you sleep 2.5 billion people have nowhere to sleep. One in three people are in dire poverty. All because of the greed of capitalism and its vices. You and I play apart in this machine of suppression. However, know of the system you support and when enough people do, revolution may come!
 
 
Neville Barker
08:00 / 15.02.03
Wow. An excellant essay Creation. I will have to print this out and read over it a few more times before I can comment on everything I want to comment on, but just a few inital responses.
I stand with You.
I HATE Television. Everytime I watch anything besides the simpsons or an occasional conan or letterman I feel as though someone is talking to me as if I was an idiot child. Commercials especially. Everytime I see a tv ad I literally get insulted. I can see through the lines and see that they are talking to us as the cattle they consider us.
Little things I do to help:
I boycot nike
I boycot mcdonalds
I boycot tv
I read
I respect others
I ignore fashion as if it were a leper
one thing I can truely say scares me is the thought of being just another consumer. But we all consume. We all have weaknesses.
I would love to give up meat, but I won't.
So I cut back. It ebbs and flows, You know?
Thats the fucked up thing about our world culture (and yeah, in the end it is my fault and I blame no one else for my shortcomings, but we all have been programmed. I was raised on hamburgers, so they are something I love to eat now and then) we are so surrounded and bombarded and fenced in by products to consume. Ever just wake up and WANT TO SPEND MONEY? So You go to buy a DVD or CD or whatever. And it makes Your day?
Another thing You mention is the role of degrading Women in our society. If I could destroy and stop publication of every glamour, teen, vanity and whatever I would. Women are taught from age 0 that Barbie is HOT. Thin, big tits, long legs, etc etc. Bullshit. But as a guy I've been taught this too. Yeah, if a buddy has a FHM or whatever and there is a smoking girl on the cover, You better believe I look through it. But these magazines are the reason girls will trade health and life to be thin. It truely makes me want to cry when I think about it.
And as far as living vicariously through celebs, I agree with You and I think all these stupid fucking shows like access hoolywood and extra should be boycotted as well. Why does that mother of three want to know who Alec Baldwin is banging this week, or whatever? Because she accepted the role she was prepped for ('your a girl, find a man, get married and raise a family')from age 3, never giving herself a chance to maybe do what she really wanted to. Paint? Sing? who knows, not even her anymore, so she 'lives' through the 'beautiful people'. Perfect example, look at all those sad people who spent days lined up morning Princess Di.....WHY?????????????????????????????????????? SHE'S A FUCKING PERSON, JUST LIKE yOU AND ME!? This is how we are programmed. 'Oh, the pope is the only man who can talk to god'
Boycot the fucking pope.
so waht can we do to wake up? Creation, I would like for You to read some Grant morrison or Peter Carroll (that is, if You havent already).
Things I work at:
thinking around the limitations of the language virus (first and foremost am, be, is and their various forms, which somethimes seem unavoidable).
Letting people talk to me without interrupting them with my opinoins (which can be hard, for as You see, I get quite wordy and passionate)
Combatting ignorance without resorting to it (very hard)
I would like to know more about Your ideas, and hear more of Your thoughts.
Sorry bout the length, Just needed to vent a bit after getting stirred up.
 
 
creation
11:26 / 15.02.03
Thank you very much for the kind words. And I really do apreciate your response. I am so glad that you chose to make a 'wordy; response. But it isnt long or time staking. Infact I find it to cover everything i would wish to ask you. So for that I thank you very much.

Yes I too have the urge, as this morning to go and buy something. I am not saying this for the sake of this thread. But in woke up feeling that I need to collect the whol series` of Star Trek TNG. *Blushes* Then reasoned with my own feeling for a while before i made the trip to my door, and then decided that I *really* dont need it. It is as Marcusse said, we have false comodity need, as that clearly would have been. And as Marx said commodity Fetishism. Maybe i want to substantiate the time i work with Material wealth. But after analysing and reading your reply, I chose otherwise (Thank you )

I think the post modern advertising used today is very intelligent, It appeals to inner human desire, as Freud described the ocean of human desire has become has become consumerism. We can buy and gain anything but freedom. In a close environment at least. I too cannot stop looking at the cover of FHM and the pictures like a child i too can succomb to the visceral imaging used on the 'gloss' But i class this is a research of the marxist ;-)

Using Fashion as a facade to raise commodity value is unacceptable. That is why I am boycotting any major brand which has heinous profit margins. I think the dominant psyche in all humans will show with the money they gain. When someone buys a Diamond, should they know, that the purchase of that Diamond could have aided the death of many people. And with the potentail wealtth they posses, you would expect better behaviour. But its the need to sublimate the creator, labour masachism, i would call it, is what makes the potential buyer purchase something they know had taken man hours to create.

This then leads to my 'own', On luxury consummersim. I would like to point out that, I am not sure if this theory has been mentioned else where if it is please do tell me. But this is something I created from my collection thoughts through what i have read. But I cant say that I have read all relavent readings toward the subject I speak of.

I think there is an inherent feeling / need to feel dominance over the creator of a given commodity. It has given way to the words we are so used to coming across with more expensive products across the spectrum of products we have. I.e with Clothing's its 'Hand Made' and comments such as 'Cotton Grown in fair trade areas' All of thse 'claims' pushing the value of a Noraml tee-shirt to £100 or $157, with a designers name on it, everyone feels the compulsion to buy such a product, and in their distorted view, they feel they are helping the world with their mention of 'Fair trade' when infact the cotton they harvested to make this shirt, has been multiplied by value 100's of times. Tell this to the cotton farmers and see how they respond.

I feel that when something is handmade or taken allot of labour hours people feel less constrained to hand their money over. But do they realise the underlaying meaning of their purchases? When something is 'hand made' consumers feel an affinity with the product, as if they created themselves through the hand of another, by providing the creator with the financial goal in which to create such a product.

This represents to me the dominance master / slave relation. When you come to think of wider effects of this. When corporations say withour our customers we are nothing, they are saying without your money we cannot sublimate the children of thirdworld countries, to do your work for you.

This transgression of function elays through society, when you get on a Taxi, you know that your money is paying for you to get from point A to B. Same with all travel. You are paying for the pilots children and wives. This kind of progressive relativism with, knowing we own each other is the glue in my eyes which keeps capitalism progressing. For knowing that you are contributing to someone elses live. Detracts from your own misery, knowing that you are in fact sublimating you, as you are being sublimated.

My theory may be far stretched but this is something which has been in my mind since I was a child. Then later consolidated by the 'kick' one gets when ordering a lapdance. You are assimilating the dancer through your demand on their person to make seductive movements. (*blushes* about going to lapdance*) This feeling of being a master over something gives us a feeling of control. False control which we fail to realise. But non the less keeps us in the track of continual open slavery. Of course, I cannot generalise to the whole of society. But It is applicable to the 'general' mass.

This is just a brief outline of my theory, which is still in progress, as i am trying to find relavent studies and research in such an area.

Here are some other threads of thought I am thinking of presenting in the future:-

Globalisation - Cultural Imperialsim
Propoganda - Consensus creation through modern media
Education - Gaps

NB: Thank you for reading
 
 
Our Lady of The Two Towers
11:22 / 21.02.03
Nice, though I always prefer something a bit more filling than hyperbole about the ephemeral nature of society and how everyone's a whore if they vote for who they want kicked out of the Big Brother house. And what does Being a ‘clebrity’ has become the desiderata of perspicacity actually mean?

Where do those people/organisations that use the media for good fit into your theory? I'm thinking of NGO's like Oxfam, Amnesty, and groups like Indymedia.

But otherwise, good first post.
 
 
creation
08:01 / 24.02.03
‘clebrity’ has become the desiderata of perspicacity

sorry if this sounds condecending but here are the dictionary equviv~

n. pl. de·sid·er·a·ta (-t)
Something considered necessary or highly desirable: “The point is not that the artist has ‘penetrated the character’ of his sitter, that commonplace desideratum of portraiture” (Robert Hughes).


r`spi*cac"i*ty\, n. perspicacitas: cf. F. perspicacit['e]. See Perspicacious.] The te of being perspicacious; acuteness of sight or of intelligenceute discernment. --Sir T. Browne

So a level in which to exist in?

re do those people/organisations that use the media for good fit into your theory? I'm thinking of NGO's like Oxfam, Amnesty, and groups like Indymedia.

I am not sure of the commercial success they gain through advertising, as from what I know the highest revenue is raised through personal fund-raising events they hold around the world. Someone in my family is involved in two NGOs in India and Africa, and They do not advertise on any medium besides their own newsletters et al. However I did mention that my attack was against the celebrity culture. I am not too fond of the culture that is being bred on the lives that these idiots live. Maybe its just me, but can distanced vouyerism account for anything good?
 
 
primate
02:07 / 27.02.03
media reminds me of those realistic looking chocolate bunnies you used to get for easter. pretty candy eyes, textured fur, buck teeth and a bow-tied ribbon. the first time i got one i was real young and was thoroughly stoked at the prospect of having such a huge, ornate piece of chocalote to munch on for days. but when i took that first nibble of the ear, i was shocked and disappointed to discover that what i had thought to be a solid chocolate sculpture was nothing but a hollow skin. and the quality of the chocolate was atrocious! dry, powdery, too much sugar and not enough cocoa. but most consumers don't have or don't take the time to notice the lack of content and flavor. the image dazzles the eye and is consumed with a quickness, leaving the eater hungry for the next hollow bunny.

core moralities, values, character, integrity are more like a plain slab of the finest, dark chocolate. rough on the eyes but exquisite to the pallette. intensely satisfying and lasting. the average consumer is more concerned with the image so this sweet delicacy isn't given a second thought.

so many people who prefer the plain slab are ridiculously talented writers, artists, musicians, etc. what we need is the proper marketing! there's an elitism among intellectuals that turns many 'common' folks off. we need to be able to adapt. to appeal to the masses instead of creating things that simply re-affirm our already existing ideals. we need to conduct ourselves like a corporate business. now i would apply this only in the areas of television and music but it is also a relevant idea in regards to our face to face interactions with others. i try to dress pretty 'normal'. i'm no fashion plate but i'm not a one man psychadelic circus freak show either. i try to blend in. i guess what i'm saying is if you look like an outsider then you will be treated as such. even with my moderate fashion sense i still get comments about my sideburns. ben franklin wore chops for chrissakes!

point being, similar tribal markings will make 'radical' ideas more digestable. the movie the matrix comes to mind. we can use all the same slick tricks the media is now using to advertise and sell our philosophies. fill the empty chocolate bunny with delicious fudge and crunchy almonds.

i rap every now and then so i plan on putting an album out that sounds musically just like all the pop rap nursery rhyme hook b.s. only with ill lyrics that drop mad knowledge, yo. i also have a public access show in the works. mtv style editing, quick cuts, flashy lights and colors only with actual content. i don't know if any of this will work but i think it's worth a shot. comments and criticisms, please.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
07:56 / 27.02.03
You're constructing a false dichotomy, with "media" on one side and "core moralities, values, character, integrity" on the other. Since media are means of communicating information and the second half of the dichotomy are abstract properties attributed to human beings, this is already problematic.

Also, the idea that the Matrix is a shining example of a successful insertion of "mad knowledge" into the minds of the "mass" is a common one among the common mass of those who claim esoteric knowledge, but doesn't really hold up terribly well. The phenomenology of the Matrix was jumbled and stupid, the iconography painfully obvious and meaningless, but it had some very cool fight scenes. The Matrix is a very good example of a product created for a specific audience, that is people who like cool fight scenes. It happened also, rather brilliantly, to have marketing hooks relevant to people who represent themselves as being far too clever just to like cool fight scenes. The ability to flatter each member of the audience into believing that they are part of an exclusive minority getting the special secret messages that the makers of the product have included in the "mass appeal" vehicle is a much-desired one in marketing.

So far, this thread seems to have much lamenting of the fact that the participants are so much cleverer than the passive consumers of "bad" media, mingled with uncritical acceptance of their own entitlement to draw lines of "bad" and "good" media. Creation started this off with his jeremiad about reality TV, while apparently uncritically admitting his desire for Star Trek: The Next Generation, and seeing the only problem with that in the capitalistic means by which he might obtain it. To complain in the same passage that "the quest for intellectual enlightenment" is being derailed by Heat and Big Brother seems at best incomplete and at worst incoherent.

Except, of course, that Star Trek is *good* media. Ahem.

Am I missing something, or are the series of rambling explanations of what a trial it is being better than normal people dominating this thread revealing a certain absence of self-examination?

(P.S. Creation - the "desiderata of perspicacity" is still making no sense to me. Perspicacity is an abstract noun describing a certain capacity of a certain capability. It does not have desires, and certainly does not generally have the desire to become a celebrity. Do you mean that perspicacious people now want to become celebrities, where their perspicacity will be wasted, rather than, say, philosophers?)
 
 
primate
14:29 / 08.03.03
sorry you got the false impression that i was creating a dichotomy. i agree that media is a means of sharing information it's just that most pop media is devoid of substance.

if the iconography of the matrix is 'painfully obvious' then how could they be special secret messages for a select minority? and i certainly don't think that people who like cool fight scenes are a small market. are pleasantville, waking life, requiem for a dream and american beauty more along the lines of your personal tastes? i just chose the matrix because so many people saw it.

and again i apologize for my failure to express myself clearly. i never claimed to be better than most people and do not complain about what a trail it is. quite the opposite. i am tired of intellectual wankers circle jerking about how smart they are and how they have all the solutions yet do nothing. i am actually physically doing something. coming up with a code of ethics or a philosophy for life is good and all but it means nothing if you don't do something. setting an example through actions is what i'm all about. the aesthetics don't matter to me. i am not trying to make "good" music that will only be heard by a select few. media is a tool. and i am trying to use it to share different perspectives with as many people as possible.
 
 
Lurid Archive
15:23 / 08.03.03
i just chose the matrix because so many people saw it.

Actually, I think it was the claim that The Matrix somehow presented radical ideas that was contentious. Personally I loved the film, but it is one of the most shallow pieces I have ever seen. Fight scenes and pvc. cool.

Back to the main topic, I think there is a point to analysing the media and its use of information and the potential distortion arising from manipulating interests. That said, I think the tone of so many of the posts above rather undermines (what I assume to be intended as) the radical left wing ideas.

For a start, the patronising comments about the "masses" have a strangely elitist quality to them. Almost as if it is being suggested that the problem with the system isn't mass manipulation, but that this manipulation is being carried out by "them" rather than "us".

Also, the adoption of some positions on this thread smacks of, ironically, parrotting the fashionably radical. Not that I disagree with everything here, more that the quick steps between condemnation of the celebrity culture, television in general, global capitalism, all monetary exchange and advertising seem to rely too much on black and white divisions.
 
 
Our Lady of The Two Towers
18:26 / 09.03.03
primate if the iconography of the matrix is 'painfully obvious' then how could they be special secret messages for a select minority?

I think that if you'll re-read you'll find that Haus is suggesting that the film made people think they were part of a select minority receiving special secret messages.
 
 
The Return Of Rothkoid
22:21 / 09.03.03
I think there's distinctions to be made between different types of media: magazine TV is not the same as print mags, is not the same as newsprint, is not the same as online media. Scale it back if you're going to attack the fourth estate and get a bit more specific. I work in mass-market women's magazines, and it seems to me that you're making blanket assumptions about the media and putting them on the other side to morals and taste - as Haus pointed out - which is somewhat erroneous. Where do you fit on the idea that magazines fill a need, not create it, say? The simple fact of publishing life, no matter what the medium is that if you don't give the reader for your publication what they want, your publication will die. Unless you have a very generous or very stupid benefactor. This indicates to my mind that there's more discrete processes in effect than just the MEDIA BAD! paradigm. While I'm not wanting to be an apologist, as some strands of the media are woeful, there is a certain element of the business that people don't like to look at because it satisfies a desire in themselves.

As Flowers suggests, the hyperbole could be shelved and brass tacks dug out. I think it would be helpful to unpack a little more here.
 
 
creation
08:16 / 10.03.03
"no matter what the medium is that if you don't give the reader for your publication what they want"

Yes. That is the primary reason and logic behind media. I do read allot of material through publications which I read. Amid those are magazines which intend to make the reader purchase certain things. The potential buyer of a magazine is indeed buying it for a reason, wheter to be exposed to new ideas or to see the newest collection of clothes by Lungerfeld. Some of the magazines I read can be thought of as 'left-wing' the style of it is what appeals to me. Thus me purchasing it i.e New Internaionalist or Prospect. They reflect some of the beliefs that I have about science and politics, this affirmation and mutual agreement on terms of the logic that I agree with form the function of my enjoyment of the context of the magazine.

It would be thus hippocritical of me to infer that FHM for example is a unequal magazine in comparison, as they both do advocate consummerism. Whether it be through suggesting to the reader the essential purchase of the new books and press or reccomending to the reader new fashions, Each of the magazines do contain allot of advertising on which the way the magazine is managed. But my argument is against the substance of the magazines and media as a whole. There is a void in the press. The unashamed fetishism around celebrity is something that I find very hard to accept. But this as you say is a personal moral stance. But I see it as apart of another form escapism, in which the reader is elayed from their own worries by part-taking in someone else's life. I see it as a opiate which controls the people. This maybe a cynical and far-fetched view, and assumes the potentail readership to be worried and troubled people.

If everyone new the world they live in would they still behave the same? would they still by an issue of 'OK' if the new everything wasnt so rosy, Maybe they do have a better understanding of society and through that seek escapist forms of entertainment. I cannot conclude that. I know this sounds like a 'high-horse' kind of a statement, but this is what I feel of the current stuation, regarding media in a broader sense.

/CR
 
 
Our Lady of The Two Towers
12:29 / 10.03.03
But if you work in a supermarket for 10 hours a day, 7 days a week, what's wrong if you like to read about your favourite soaps in your breaktimes for a little light relief? Or, to put it in a less cliched way, how is your New Internationalist any better than Hello?
 
 
Sax
15:55 / 13.03.03
I think a lot of people know full well the world is shit. And many of them don't care, or read OK! to take the mind off the unbearable weight of the shit for half an hour. And they might see a dress they'd like to buy to wear for the next night out. So it isn't too bad, is it?

Quick question, Creation: do you not read any consumer-led literature at all, whether TV-releated guides, entertainments magazines, Sunday supplements?
 
 
primate
13:50 / 17.03.03
yes. it's much better to accept a stable, predictable, routine life spiced with the occasional consumption of escapist products than to become a producer yourself. i don't know why i get these strange urges to create and share. it's obviously extremely unnatural. besides, anything i would do could never compare to anything else that's out there. i mean, NO ONE can be as good as 50 cent or andy warhol right? why should i bother? guess i need to refill my scrip of paxil and prozac. thanks for bringing me back down to earth peoples!
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
14:20 / 17.03.03
Ok - what happens here in the Head Shop, primate, is that people talk about things. So,etimes they disagree with each other. If you can't deal with the idea of having your opinions questioned, or respond in a relevant fashion rather than shouting and stamping your foot at imaginary rebuttlas, then I very strongly suggest that you avoid this forum, at least until the dawn of the glorious non-debate future. If you want to carry on playing, take a deep breath and perhaps 5 milligrams of notallaboutyou.

Now, I don't see anyone saying that it is better to live a stable, predictable, routine life than to create. What Sax said was that many people might actually realise that the world is not a wonderful place and that, although dealing with the angst brought about by this realisation by purchase and consumption may be in the broader scheme of things a bad idea, is it entirely humane to decry and deny the people for the impulses that have been inculcated in them?

You are constructing another false dichotomy (a dichotomy is a sharp division into two. It is precisely what you did in your first post with the hollow fake chocolate "media", and the rich dark slab of "core moralities, values, character, integrity") in which those who do not support your arguments are in the camp opposed to creativity and you are thus in the camp of creativity, neither of which is entirely relevant to the question of consumption or media.

If media themselves are bad, because capitalistic, as Creation seems broadly to be arguing, then to compare yourself to 50 cent or Andy Warhol is clearly unwise, since if you go down the path of actually asking for money for your music you are just perpetuating the system in which people have to go through the unequal and oppressive process of selling their labour in order to get the resources to consume your product. That's if, as Creation seems to be suggesting but not have reconciled entirely, the media of a capitalist structure are inevitably mechanisms of capitalist oppression - both continuing the system and acting as opiate within it. Yes?

If, one the other hand, the creation and distribution of some media are good, even if those mechanisms are capitalistic, then how does one tell? Your contention that the Matrix was a valuable communicator of esoteric memes has been challenged, sugesting that dissent is possible in what constitutes worthwhile media. Creation, IIRC, has not yet established whehter Star Trek the Next generation is by definition a guilty pleasure, or only by its implication in the capitalist system by which it has been produced, from which it could notionally be severed...

Can "core moralities, values, character, integrity" only be communicated by methods that stand outside "media", and if so how does one go about it? By acting as a griot or shope, going from town to town busting mad rhymes according to your abilities and receiving remuneration according to your needs and their abilities, that is perhaps food or transportation to the next town? Or is there a school of good media that can be distinguished from "bad media" by its content or "soul" (its concentration of cocoa solids, to use your metaphor) but is in terms of process identical to "bad" media?
 
 
The Natural Way
14:27 / 17.03.03
Anecdotal: yeah, Haus, yeah, but experience of people who've never thought along Matrix-y lines prior to seeing the film and subsequent chats with them afterwards leads me to think that there might be something in the 'weird ideas disseminated' thing. A bunch of caner/raver lads I know were suddenly talking like Marxist Buddhists after viddying the flick. It's easy when you and yr mates are really familiar with some of the ideas found in the film to poo-poo it, but well...y'know... Prolly (read 'certainly') not a foolproof way of spreading countercultural memes, but it played its part.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
14:41 / 17.03.03
Dude, when I left "Die Another Day" I was suddenly expert in diamond trading and felt personally able to drive a Jaguar into an ice palace. I don't think that "media can commmunicate mimeses" is particularly at issue. More "Are the mimeses communicated by media ever valuable, and does the relationship of medium to capital compromise its 'purity' or 'validity'?."
 
 
The Natural Way
14:57 / 17.03.03
Well, mmm, yeah, the ravercaners in question DID then start to go on about "but are you sure this is real?" and "how do you know?"

It became deafening.
 
 
primate
01:32 / 18.03.03
sorry. even a vaguely implied approval of the purchase of gossip rags is enough to send me over the edge. my sis is under the spell of pop music, talk shows, etc and it sickens me. deep breath taken, aaaaannnnd, exhale.

snot bout purchase an consumption. snot bout good er bad. mor bout vailability n vriety. in a capitalist society, media that makes the most money survives. so it tends to flo twards the direction of "what elements shall we throw in the pot to increase profit margins" as opposed to originality or creativity. and "they" (dun dun dunnnn!) know not what they do. but we all know what combinations of images, words and sounds can do right?

the hollow bunny bit was more bout marketing the media. the image of the media. it lacks content. it's formulaic. predictable. good guy vs bad guy, verse/chorus/verse/chorus to a 4/4 etc. the image is just that, an image. any one can fulfill the image. it's easy. look a certain way. what is being said and done is independent from what it looks like though. images are very powerful and most of us use them irresponsibly unawares of the power we all have.
 
 
Thjatsi
06:28 / 18.03.03
we all know what combinations of images, words and sounds can do right?

Well I understand the general idea behind these three concepts, but I'm not quite clear on the point you are making here.
 
 
The Return Of Rothkoid
10:10 / 18.03.03
images are very powerful and most of us use them irresponsibly unawares of the power we all have.

Keep going, then. Show me. If you're suggesting that this amorphous media blob is responsible for all this vacuum-packed crap, then surely we don't have this huge power? Surely only people like Murdoch or Packer have them? You can't have it both ways; how is it?
 
 
primate
20:16 / 19.03.03
images, words, sounds, things we create, become a part of our environment. it alters the environment. kinda like magick. the environment has a powerful influence on us humans. everything you do and say has a tremendous impact. if you are unaware of this, you might do and say some things that have an undesired effect on you, your environment and others living in it.

we all have the power to create, some choose not to use it. for whatever reason they become passive consumers. media is not an amorphous blob, it's just that most see themselves as being seperate from the media. how many times have you heard someone say, or perhaps said yourself, "i wish i could play an instrument, write a novel, paint, act, direct a movie," etc. as if they actually gave it the good ol' college try? instead, we live vicariously through the media stars.

as far as whether the memes communicated through media are of value or not, i would say that value is subjective. while i find the childish antics of adam sandler to be, well childish, someone else may find it to be humorous and informative.

does the relationship of medium to capitol compromise it's "purity" or "validity"? i think it can, but not always. you need capitol to continue creating and distributing media so there's a fine line. it's not by default though. it's up to the creator(s) to decide whether to compromise for the sake of filthy lucre. i mean, if you are trying to spread your ideas to as many people as possible, you need money, but if the only way to get more money is to alter your ideas then you're losing sight of your original intent. there are other ways to get money.

we are the one's responsible for all the vacuum-packed crap. people like murdoch and packer are simply aware of their power and have the finances to make their images, words and sounds available to massive amounts of people.
 
 
ONLY NICE THINGS
21:09 / 19.03.03
So, everyone has the power to create. Those who do not create become passsive consumers. Those who do create are presumably either not consumers at all or are "active consumers", that is people who are responding to the media they receive by creating more media.

Fair dos.

But you seem to want both to have "good" and "bad" media - the evils of "gossip rags", "vaccuum-packed crap" - but also say that the value of media is subjective.

Now, either that is contradictory, or more probably we need to think more about the relationship of media and capital, or of passive and active consumption. At present you are seeing capital as a means of producing the resources to support the creation of media, but also believe it has its own editorial vision, and thus that there are "good" relationships between creator and capital and "bad" relationships. Might be worth trying to look at that in a different way. The other option may be that there is a difference between media products designed for active or passive consumption, but that's tricky given your magnanimity re: Adam Sandler. There's also the question of how media product and didactic product interact. Your use of "instructive", and your earlier claim that the Matrix and your own tunes contained enlightening messages suggest that you believe there to be one, but it remains unexamined, and this may help to explain the inconsistencies in the argument...
 
 
primate
02:23 / 22.03.03
i see no inconsitencies. my view of tabloids and adam sandler's "work" is subjective. i borrowed "vacuum-packed crap" from rothkoid. i assume his view is subjective as well.

i don't recall calling the matrix or my "songs", if you can call them that, enlightening. if i did, please forgive me. i myself am no where near enlightened so i doubt i could help anyone else. i can say, however, that the things i do present a different perspective, or rather, attempts to encourage others to see things from another perspective.

there are no good or bad relationships between media and capitol. it's all for the production and distribution of media. again, it's up to the creators to decide. they have a choice. either way they are using the capitol and media to acheive whatever goals they set be it artistic integrity or maximum profit. however, i think there is a happy "medium". the matrix for example. :]

actually, i suppose a better example would be The Invisibles.
 
  
Add Your Reply