the potential in music

While Baudrillard would contend that the rapid acceleration of images overwhelmes us creating a culutre of apathy and non-reflection, I disagree. It is true that we are overwhelmed with images, but as our zine project has clearly shown, a positive, albiet provisional, political moment is possible in the midst of the bombardment, and reflection is possible. Perhaps a new type of reflection, one in which the usage of multiple images and mediums as its strength, is a postmodern tool. Through the disarticulation of raw materials (Kipnis), tactile shock (Benjamin) can be achieved and be an innovative method of inspiring change. Hegemonic discourse seems daunting and untouchable at times, however through the ideological problematic (White), cracks and fissures are exposed providing opportunities for an oppositional discourse (Kipnis).
Personally, I see music as the medium holding the most potential in using bombardment as a tool to induce a new type of reflection. Sound can be a sense riddled with multi-layered and overwhelming components, politically and emotionally inspiring as well as extremely personal. In a way, asocial conteplation is one of music's strenghts, for although it is a mass cultural product, it is exremely private, provide a perfect political atmosphere. Because of these characteristics, music has immeasurable strength insofar as it can express numerous ideas, actions, information(s) and emotions simultaneously. It has far reaching effects in that while many people say they political does not interest them, everyone loves music. A possible way of utilizing this into pop cultural practice would be to leave blank cd's/mixed tapes in random places on campus and around the city.

hmmm.....

I have been working on a paper in my Sexuality class for awhile now, and I have been trying to think of a way to politicize religious art in a way that is not offensive. Is that possible? Is religion too touchy to touch? It reminds me of how people will argue with anyone except their family, when it seems most obvious that if anyone is going to listen to you, it should be the people who you know best. Religion is much like heterosexuality in that it constantly is reinforcing itself through social control and reminding people of its importance when really, if it was so all-knowing, powerful and natural shouldn't it be confident enough to shut the fuck up and not condemn anything that appears to deviate from it? There is a quote from a book that I wrote down in my journal a few years ago that I go back to every once and awhile:

"There are always those who take it upon themselves to defend God, as if Ultimate Reality, as if the sustaining frame of existence were something weak and helpless...they should direct anger at themselves. For evil in the open is but evil from within that has been let out. The main battlefield for good is not the open ground of the public arena but the small clearing of each heart. Meanwhile, the lot of widows and homeless children is very hard, and it is to their defense, not God's, that the self righteous should rush." - Life of Pi

Anyways, apparently I am a preacher at heart, but my point is that it is so difficult to make people see beyond what they base their entire life upon. How do you disarticulate something that millions of people would die for? I mean, riots were started over cartoons in a newspaper last year...this is serious shit to fuck with. But I honestly think it still has to be fucked with because so many problems stem from it. I found one example of what I think successfully refunctions religious doctrine in regards to a specific issue, and it is funny as hell. Check it out. Sorry about the sermon guys.
Oh, something else interesting that I found in my travels, apparently Ted Haggard, the president of the NEA (National Evangelical Association) which has over 30 million followers, and a congregation in Colorado of 14,000 members just resigned. He is a real prize...he wanted a cultural war on homosexuals and abortion rights and believes in biblical inerrancy and biblical literalism (is that not the most terrifying thing you have EVER heard??!?). Anyway, he stepped down because his male prostitute who he has been paying to have sex with him for the last three years just came forward. After denying it for awhile, then failing a polygraph he admitted that he was guilty of 'sexual immorality'. Oh, sweet irony.

poop food?

Zine culture has massive potential in regards to underground politics, it is unfortunate that most people have not even heard of them. Coming from a small town, I'm sure that most people who I went to school with (or were taught by) would have trouble seeing the possibility of a revolutionary moment in zine culture, but then again most of them think that something happened to homosexuals at a young age to 'make them that way' and that Ralph Klein and George Bush are the kind of fellows we should be thankful are in charge (Oh lordisa, that is some scary ass shit). Ok, so obviously I have some unharboured bitterness towards my town that has nothing to do with the theory in this course, but that i feel the need to share anyway.
I enjoy the fact that in zine culture, everyone can be a writer/expert as Benjamin states. It is unfortunate that zines could be seen as a hipster fad taken up by emo kids who need yet another outlet for their angsty poetry about their white middle class oppression (ex: you weren't there dad. you fucker. i had to walk three blocks home from band practice carrying my $700 guitar. its heavy. and my ipod ran out of batteries on the way. woe is me. no one sees just how deep i am. and that hurts.). I believe that this usage of zine culture takes away from the politics of the movement, resulting in an all around disrespect of all zines in general. The personal has the capacity to make the most political impact, for if someone relates to what you are saying they are more likely to act. However, it is complicated to ensure that politics remain entwined in the personal and does not become self indulgent and irrelavent to wider 'society'. Nevertheless, beings political moments are provisional and constantly in the process of being resignified, the politicization of art has far reaching albiet momentary effects in zine culture.
For me the most difficult aspect of the zine assignment is bridging the gap between theory and practice, or academics and the mainstream even in regards to the content. Are we supposed to only assume our audience is the 30 people in our class, or aim for them to have further reaching effects?

nucking futz i say...

The other night shortly after getting home from the midterm, my girlfriend came over distraught and frustrated over an advertisement she had seen in the lrt station. Apparently, Pro-Life Edmonton has huge posters up across the traintracks at university station. I suppose it makes sense beings funding is still being given generously to the christian religious right, but still, it prompted a conversation about action regarding this issue. I looked online and was unsuccessful at finding a Pro-Choice coalition in edmonton, but I very well may have not been looking hard enough. We racked our brains thinking of some way to refunction this irritating poster, in order to at least let it be known to those who are unaware that there is indeed opposition to this movement (it never occurred to me that that may be an issue, but at dinner the other night I brought up the posters and someone at the table said, "Pro-Life...what the hell is that?? I'M SO HAPPY TO BE ALIVE???"...I was like, umm no it's actually about abortion...). And this was not a person who I consider to be uneducated or unaware at all; needless to say I was shocked. Anyways, I have been schemeing in my head about a stealthy culture jamming adventure that may need to take place...I suppose it isn't the most genius thing for me to announce my criminal aspirations in such a public space, but i'm just so pissed off. It feels like we are regressing, and it depresses me that I'm not clever/ambitious enough to really do anything about it. I don't think I am artistic enough to politicize aesthetics really...my immeditate solution was to spray paint 'are you fucking kidding me?' beside the poster, but I would prefer my act of refunctioning to be slightly more intellectual and more appreciated than something a 12 year old punk could do when drunk for the first time. Plus, how would I get across the tracks? I don't have a death wish. Haha. So...if anyone has any input on this issue it would be awesome to hear it, even if it's just sharing a moment of frustration. That is my rant. Enjoy.

mimi, oh mimi

In Mimi White's article she continually speaks of a conflict and tension within the hegemonic discourse, or an 'ideological problematic'. This slipperiness of meaning allows for a range of voices to be heard (through advertising for example). However, is the 'range of voices' actually representative of those from oppositional discourses, or is it simply the predominant ideology commodifying other viewpoints, or worse, paying lip service to other perspectives in order to squelch any growing resistance? Also, despite the fact that White insists we do have agency, it seems to me that change seems more difficult than ever considering the uneven development. If there are so many traces from the future and the past here in the present social formation, and we (obviously) are not one giant homogenous population, where can change begin? Clearly I am having a glass half-empty day here, because Baudrillard seems to be making the most sense to me- and that is pretty fucked. I cannot help but feel that the constant bombardment of images hinders our ability to take any clear action...and that even if action is taken its purpose can always be twisted into something reverse discourse-esque thereby making it reinforce the very thing we were fighting. Blah. Yes, that was a full sentence.
I suppose that is where provisionality comes in. Re-fuctioning is not an attmept to get 'outside' of ideology, but to rework the raw materials that we are given. Even a momentary disruption is better than none at all. The glass is filling up folks. Oh- and I thought I had an idea of what a conscious subject was, but perhaps I have no idea. Maybe I was being too practical and just thought of the conscious subject as a more provisional identity...like...oh, I just read a stop sign that read "STOP RAPE" and it sort of jolted me out of my monotonous leisure-less unquestioning life...therefore i was 'conscious' for a moment. That sounds a lot stupider than it sounded in my head, but does that makes sense? If anyone could fill me in that would be grand.