Wednesday, December 29, 2010

FOREVER





   For a while now ive been trying to understand rap music. It seems to me to consist of a serious of ideologies and themes all of which are a direct consequence of the cultural revolution of the 1960s and the subsequent emergence of postmodernism. Well, actually it consists of more than that but these aspects interest me most. Three of these seem to me to be: The problems of masculinity. The problems of the "real". And the problem of the self in a dehumanizing society (system). First lets start with the first one.

   Ok so our contemporary notion of masculinity has gone through the same sorts of changes that every social and cultural value has gone through in liberal first world societies. The notions that once defined masculinity have been inverted and disconnected from their objects. Once masculinity was identified as an aspect of manhood. Literally if you had reached puberty and had a penis you where expected to behave in a masculine way. Simultaneously if you had reached puberty and had a vagina you where expected to act feminine. As well if you where black you where meant to act black and if white to act white and so on. However after the cultural revolution of the late 1960s and 70s this paradigm changed. Suddenly (and it was sudden) White men where meant to integrate with black men. Women to integrate with men, and so on. Previously held symbol/object relationships where broken down (here we see postmodernism). Masculinity (symbol) was no longer necessarily a product of having a penis (object). Suddenly women could be masculine. Men could be feminine. Blacks had the same rights as whites and so on. All of the old symbol/object values where rearranged and left in a new order. This, in a way, dethroned white male masculinity and "equalized" its symbolic values. Note here that postmodernism was not a way of literally turning black into white or women into men, it simply changed the symbol/value relationship in society at large. In the same way that the white man was dethroned the black man was dethroned as well. No longer was it the place of black men to be subservient and out of sight. Now he was expected to integrate with white society. Understand that this is just as difficult for the white cultural power structure as it is for black cultural power structures at the time. Martin luther king was rebelling against white and black power structures. Reconciliation between peoples who had been enemies (in a way) for so long is not something that happens easily.

   Anyway so equality and the cultural revolution realigned but did not define these new social/cultural values. So though women could now be masculine they could never in reality be men. The avenue of the symbolic meaning was open yet the "real" was still closed. White cannot become black or black white simply through force of will alone (michael jackson not withstanding). This subversion of symbol relationships and the denaturing of the object values is still carrying on today. We see this in rap music. It is my contention that rap musics popularity is in part because of an attempt to reclaim the place of male masculinity. That is to say a masculinity that excludes women. I think this is borne out by the popularity of rap music with suburban middle class white male kids. Ostensibly they shouldnt be able to relate to this music at all. They didnt grow up poor, or black, they dont have any "street cred" but this, all this thug super hero stuff, is just surface ornament. The underlying message is a reclaiming of the connection of masculinity with men. After all, who has felt more severely the imposition of the cultural revolution if not the male children of the white middle class and young impoverished black men? Rappers (in nearly every song) address these issues. What is "real"? What is a man? What is masculinity? They attempt to reconcile the inherit structural conflicts between the utopian notion of equality and the undeniable reality of an unequal "real" world.

   Its strange to me to think how all of todays popular rappers, from snoop to puff dady to jay-z or whoever, made the millions they brag about mainly off middle class white kids buying their records. In a strange way its as if rappers have formulated the perfect fantasy land for middle class white kids to live in. A magical world (truely) A world in which the old symbol/object relationships still exist. Men are men, women are bitches. You keep it "real" on the street. Money is actually money, connected to actual work. A world in which symbols and objects have actual connections. A reality with actual consequences. A "real" world, that is to say, a postmodern fantasy. I think rappers acknowledge this fantasy aspect. They even refer to rapping as "the game". Moreover anyone who has actually had to spend any time around junkies, anyone who has ever actually stepped foot in, or god forbid, lived, in a ghetto knows its horrible shit. Its not cool, thug life, hard knock life, even most "gangster" rappers acknowledge they dont like it. In the words of jay-z:

"I don’t be in the project hallway, talkin’ bout how I be in the project all day. That sounds stupid to me" 

This also reminds me of a line by zizek:

"Is not the ultimate figure of the passion for the Real the option we get on hardcore (porn) websites to observe the inside of a vagina from the vantage point of a tiny camera at the top of the penetrating dildo? At this extreme point, a shift occurs: when we get too close to the desired object, erotic fascination turns into disgust at the Real of the bare flesh."

   Nobody really wants to be poor or shot at or harassed by police or get beat down for being on the wrong block. Never the less this high stakes fantasy is infinitely intriguing, particularly if you have never actually lived it. It is this supposition of "real" life that is so intriguing. One of the many effects of the disassociation of symbol/object values during postmodernism has been a denaturing of the reality of objects and a consequent, endless, search for the real. Again the language bares witness to this. "keeping it real" "real nigga talk" and so on. What need would there even be to keep it real if the world wasnt fake? Full of subverted values, meaningless objects, irrelevant narratives and so on.

   It is then a strange thing that we have going on in rap music. The same postmodern changes that enabled (socially) the appreciation and "integration" of rap music by white americans where the same change that made rap music possible. It also however, caused many of the problems rap music attempts to deal with. The denaturing of masculinity, the denaturing of the "real" and the place of black americans in american society and culture at large. Its interesting that rap music is hugely popular beyond the shores of america and this seems to be rarely mentioned in rap music. This is not just an aesthetic and ideological struggle for suburban white kids and impoverished black kids from america. It is as well a music for marginalized people around the world. Whether because of economic or racial or ideological circumstance. As it is not just in america that we feel the effects of postmodernism but in fact in every liberal democratic nation in the world.

Tuesday, December 28, 2010

MORE NOTES ON BLACK SWAN

When is it my turn to be the swan queen?












Ok so Ive seen black swan about four times now. I was going to write a big essay thing about it but now im just kind of getting bored of it. Its sad how things lose their magic with repeat viewing. Its like porn, or looking at your new haircut in the mirror. Anyway, I still havnt actually read any reviews for the movie, that might clear some stuff up. Im just going to post the notes I wrote so I can "put this baby to bed":

- I dont get, it natalie is playing the white swan and the black swan but the blacks swan steals the prince from the white swan then the white swan kills herself. So natalie steals the prince from herself and kills herself because she has had the prince stolen? That doesnt make any sense. This is just the story of a psychotic ballerina girl who kills herself I dont accept the metaphoric pretext of this story

- So natalitie thinks she is and or wants to be wynona ryder but once she (thinks) she realizes what kind of relationship vincent wants to have with her she runs back and returns wynonas things. Rejecting the persona she was taking on because she realizes how hard it is to be at the 'top" like wynona was and have everyone "after" for her. Or something like that.

- Several scenes seem a little out of place. the scene with the doctor poking her in the chest and then another where she is being taught to do that flapping things with her arms. They feel like scenes from a documentary or some kind of behind the scenes making of the movie. The more I think about this the more it irritates me.

- Variously throughout the film vincent tells natalie to "let go" and he "wants passion". Perfection and the stifling of passion is then natalies passion it seems to me. Also I think this is a sophomoric statement, as if you just magically "let go" and everything becomes perfect. After all nothing comes of bloodless toil.

- Im sure aronofsky is trying to say something with the connection between winona ryder and natalie portman, but, forgive me for this caprice but, I dont really care. It just doesnt seem compelling. For instance im sure there is some connection symbolically with the things of wynonas that she steasl but, well I dont really want to worry about it. Tt seems like such an accessory to the film. Gory face stabbing not withstanding. I really think wynonas character must of been left over from some earlier draft or something and then just stayed on in the film so they could throw in the face stabbing thing.

- I really think that in this film, there is no black swan. The black swan is just a notion. It doesnt stand to scrutiny or reason, even the notion of it is enigmatic in the film. This is why we see so many contradictory depictions of the swan as alternately evil or seductive or powerful or liberating etc.etc.

- Mila kunis was never really going to be the black swan. It was a farce all along. A fear of natalies. The stick in this carrot and stick paradigm

- I love how this movie is completely fucking psycho from the very beginning

- Natalie stealing wynonas make up? Total psycho move.

- Why is it that darren aronophsky always does these little "technical" montage sort of scenes. Like the ballet dancers putting their shoes on and so on? It looks cool, dont get me wrong, its just so blatantly ornamental. Its like he is trying to sell me ballet shoes or something. It strikes me also as the type of thing you see in a documentary

- In the film natalie sees her face in the face of others numerous times. Often as the black swan but sometimes as in the opening in the face of an anonymous women.  Even receiving a phone call just as she does. Is she watching herself as someone else? I dont understand this. This effect in the film doesnt really seem consistent to me.

- The doppelganger, the black swan(?), her own alternate self (alternate reality?). Who is the black swan? Who is the doppelganger? "She is!" The movie implies again and again, but this answer does not satisfy me. It strikes me that natalie is constantly horrified of this other self and yet it does nothing and seems to be capable of doing nothing to her physically and yet she is viscerally terrified. Contrast this with the way she harms herself again and again throughout the film. She is, physically, much more of a harm and terror to herself than any doppelganger. This has a strange way of abstracting the horror. Making it intangible. Imagine the scene in which wynona stabs her own face with the nail file. What, if we imagine, would be the most horrible thing someone could do with a nail file? Stab you someplace in the face or genitals right? And yet this kind of violent physical attack is in a way, too primal, almost empowering in its physicality. The enemy I can come to grips with physically is the enemy I have a fighting chance against. If on the other hand we think how it transpires in the film. Wynona stabes not natalies face but her own and in doing so natalie is incapable of doing anything to stop the horror. It overflows in a cacophany. Removing all power she might have. She is frozen in horror. Incapable. Incapacitated. Outside herself in the horror she is witnessing. The layers compound then. As the horror of this stabbing transpires not out side of her but in fact in her mind. In her mind she assults wynona and yet she is still incapable of confrontation with this monster (herself). She is stabbing wynona in the face not to destroy wynonas face but to destroy the wynona inside herself?

- The mother is really the only tangible horror in the film. Vincents character is just a mild manned pervert by comparison.

- Why does she steal winonas things? To take on her aura? This seems like an over simplification

- Aso id like to say natalie looks great with that super dark lipstick ("all dolled up"). I guess im a sucker for that "not a whore pretending to be a whore" look. (go figure)

- Natalie is just this empty husk of a person the entire film. At first this struck me as an inadequacy. No real character progression. Then though, after thinking about it, I realized there was progression, and more importantly, a more real, unstereotyped, inevitable progression. She is completely psycho from the very beginning and just gets deeper and deeper into herself as the film goes on. The white swan is the complete lunatic and mila kunis, a completely normal girl who goes out and drinks and meets guys on a friday night is, for natalie, the complete seductive whore. Only for someone completely subsumed in there own emotional fantasy land could this be the case. Every other scene is natalie misunderstanding a look or phrase and assuming it is some attack or intrigue. There is (almost) nothing "in" her but self critical insecurity and paranoia.


- When she is masturbating in the bathtub and her fingers come up bloody is that her breaking her hymen? Or just more of her imagining blood?

- I mean seriously I dont really know if this is good acting or just natalie being natalie but her face does everything perfect in this movie. the eyebrows, the voice, THE VOICE. The ways she cracks at the beginning of sentances. Perfect. Too perfect. Because its really her, isnt it?

- Also that fucking scene where the eyes on the painting move. Fucking christ, more creepy than the winkies guy, for me anyway.

- The black swan is the "evil" twin but who is really seduced here? Nobody is seduced by the black swan. Nobody seduces anyone in the entire film save for mila seducing natalie (in her fantasy). Also I guess the white swan seduced natalie from the very beginning.

- Also there are mirrors in like every fucking scene. Not just one or in one plane of vision even but mirrors looking into mirror, mirrors reflecting nothing. All over the place. Like literally almost every other scene. Id count them but I dont care to know that much.


Anyway so, now I have to watch perfect blue again. I loved it to death when I first saw it. Thinking about it makes me remember how I saw it like ten years ago or something. And that just makes me sick.

Monday, December 20, 2010

NOTES ON BLACK SWAN

Turns out, im the black swan!


Ok so, I just got done watching "BLACK SWAN" I cant actually be arsed to make a real review because it is one in the morning so ill just reduce it to bullet points. Spoilers incoming(?):

-Who would of guessed swan lake was really the story of a young psychotic ballerina girl who cant get laid and so, learns how to masturbate.

- David lynch, nuff said.

- I dont really like mila kunis.

- Goddamnit meg!

- I dont really like natalie portman(???)

- That dude who plays the ballet instructor was in this movie called "The messenger" about joan of ark. Ive seen that movie a million times and couldnt get it out of my head. Thanks TCM!

- This movie had far too many women in it, no homo.

- Im not going to be able to cut my fingernails for like a month, thanks a lot darren aronofsky.

- I like wynona ryder.

- I dont like the music from swan lake. Im just going to go ahead and say I categorically do not like "ballet" music (take that nineteenth century!)

- The set dressing seemed kind of forced. Everything was black and white. Yeah I get it, white swan/black swan. Its in the title of the film, you dont need to beat me over the head with it.

- She was the black swan all along. The white swan was what she could not become. Eventually she casts off the false identity via suicide and, hey presto, black swan.

- Too many bitches, not enough ballets.

- Too much drama, not enough absurdity. No im not going to qualify that.

- Anorexia is pretty gross

- I guess it was a pretty alright movie.

- Jump cuts should be banned.

- What happened to wynona ryder? She never does anything anymore.

- It just feels like, natalie portman was a really great child actor but never matured. Its like she is on autopilot. 

- I just cant look at her without thinking "I am looking at natalie portman" maybe thats my fault.

- I mean like, contrast her with naomi watts in mulholland drive.

- Natalie portman plays natalie portman in a movie about natalie portman starring natalie portman. Alright ill quit.

- I love ballet.

- Anorexia can be pretty hot.

- Seriously, the fucking fingernail shit. Worse than /b/. 

- I just cant quantify it but I didnt really love this movie. It hits all the right notes but just falls flat and that is funny because that, in part, is what the movie was about. In fact id make that same statement about every darren aronofsky movie ever and every natalie portman ever.

- Natalie Portman, there I said it.

- Expressionism is strangely underused in popular films. It seems to me a perfect fit for the medium.

- If there is one genre of film that I think most accurately depicts reality, it would be, black comedy, or psychological horror.

- So many girls in the theater I saw it in. Did they think this was going to be a girl movie? Is this a girl movie? Is there a market for psychological horror films directed at women no one has yet tapped into?

- Tina fey? What are you doing here? Why yes have a seat!

- Wait, this is the aesthetic isnt it? This is the teen girl angst thing. You are right, totally a teen girl angst flick.

- Total boner killer with mom in the bedroom while you masturbate.

- In fact this entire film was a boner killer. Getting this much sex and this much nervousness all in one go is just, well, difficult.

- I guess this was a girl movie after all.

- Perfect blue, see it.

- I sometimes scratch myself in my sleep and wake up with strange cuts. I know! Gross, huh!

- No! Im the black swan!

- P.S. natalie portman, please dont kill yourself.

- FIN

Friday, December 17, 2010

IM LISTINING TO LADY IN RED RIGHT NOW, GET IT?


Dont you love being on hold? There is nothing quite like sitting there for twenty minuets listening to light rock through your underwater telephone. I can even blog while I do it. I was thinking, while I sit here: if the institution of marriage did not exist would it be necessary to invent it?

Sunday, December 12, 2010

NO ONE MAN SHOULD HAVE ALL THIS POWER



I know everyone and their goddamn mother has been mouthing off about julian assange and wikileaks and so on but this is a blog so, well, you know, every day is repost day!

Its been completely fascinating to watch this thing in action. The flailing desperation with which the governments of the world have responded with has been at times hilarious and frightening. The fact that this whole thing went completely non-sequiter immediately after the story broke seem to have escaped notice by the media. I dont need to retell the story here but lets remember, at least for a moment. A private in the US army leaks a shit ton of documents to some website hosted by some angry austrailian, i.e. julian assange. In response the US government, in part with support but  also through coercion from foreign governments, does everything it can to coerce several US based companies to do everything they can to harass and attack assanges website on which theses documents where leaked. Now, I really cannot fathom this. First off, shutting down donations to wikileaks does nothing to mitigate any documents that may of been leaked and may be leaked in the future. Wikileaks is a name alone. Julian assange is a messenger. This army private could of leaked the documents dozens of ways, he could of torrented them, set up his own blog, mailed them out to newspapers around the world, sold them to the iranians, dozens of ways. But he, in his infinite wisdom, passes them to assange. Where is the outrage about this? Assange is vilified and accused of terrorism and whatever else but all he did was host the documents. The private in question "stole" them (dont even get me started on this semantic game of "stolen"). And the private is subject to whatever kind of justice the military meets out. Is he a terrorist? Is he seeking the destruction of the US government? Is he staging a kind of protest? It is rumored he is gay and this is some kind of payback for "dont ask dont tell". Why isnt sarah palin dragging his name through the mud? Why isnt he the center of our media scrutiny? Assange is quite specifically not important to the story, he is only the medium.

I am struck by the incredible fear the governments of the world have shown in reaction to assange. It is not the leaks they fear in this case. They where, by all admissions, more or less harmless. And it is not the insecurity of state secrets. Ive heard nothing about any kind of reforms within the military to stop this sort of thing from happening. It is at assange solely that they fire back. They seems enraged not at any actual consequence of the leaks but at the existential threat that this kind of free proliferation of information poses. It occurs to me that this kind of threat was the same kind that saddam hussain and iraq posed before our second war there. It was not so much any physical threat but the existential threat that drove us to war. The notion that no one man should have all that power. The power to laugh in the face of the most powerful nations of the world and air their (occasionally hilarious) dirty laundry. Seriously though, these leaks are inconsequential jokes compared to the pentagon papers of the vietnam era. The pentagon papers where a substantive intelligent critique of US foreign policy and the war effort. These wiki leaks are just masterclass trolling by comparison. And yet such as in all good comedy, the kernel of truth at the heart of the joke cuts deeper than any other measured and reasoned critique. The problem for the ruling aristocracy is not that these leaks (and information of this type) will destabilize or destroy a government but ever worse, that they bear witness to the falsity of the dominant ideologies and images these ruling powers promote. Moammar kadafi isnt a james bond villain, he is just some twat etc etc. Spy on your fellow citizens in the wal-mart parking lot but in the name of all that is good and holy dont scrutinize us. Foreign policy is not a reasoned game of titanic seriousness and importance, but instead, it is revealed to be just old ladies gossiping in the hair salon. We tuned in expecting charlie rose and got TMZ.

After these leaks we had the counter attack. Presumably political pressure was put on amazon to drop wiki leaks from servers they owned. Pay pal blocked donations to the site. Visa blocked credit card charges going to the site. This might be understandable (almost) if doing these things actually forwarded national security or stopped these "secret" documents from being leaked but even this transparent ploy is shown to be just that. Blocking wikileaks donations wont do shit. The internet is forever. There is a law of diminishing returns at work on the internet. The harder you try to clamp down on the free communication of information, the less return you get on your investment. Assange has not even been charged with anything, because he has done nothing illegal.

After these blocks and political coercions then came of course, anonymous. Full admission on my part, ive done quite a bit of internet. I saw the threads about operation payback and just ignored them. Raids have become so common I dont even care about them. I figured if they really pulled off ddosing VISA id hear about it on the news and if not I didnt really care. So low and behold a day or two later katie couric is going off about "INTERNET ANARCHIST HACKTIVISTS ARE ATTACKING VISA AND PAYPAL!". "Well fuck the little faggots pulled it off" I thought. The ensuing cacophony of inane obfuscation however really fucking blew me away. Some how it came out that assange was "trying to destroy the US government" (or some such) and "anonymous" ddosing VISA was somehow the same "thing". The paranoid shitstorm fallout from this literally is making me sick, hold up, pull the car over

ahem.

So then the last few days ive seen every idiot talking head on the news spouting off about how internet anarchists are laying just beyond the margin ready to attack. As they said in Batman: The Dark Night "some people just want to watch the world burn". More like waiting at the margin ready to subject you to invasive TSA screening procedures . . . anyway. Never mind the fact that these people obviously dont have any clue what they are talking about, this is always my assumption anyway. But at this point they are missing an absolutely critical point. This is not hacktivism. Its activism. These are not attacks. These are protests. This is about freedom of speech and the notion of net neutrality, not bringing down the government or anarchism or some other masturbatory fantasy they have while they sit in their ivory towers. Incidentally, isnt it always funny how the people at the top of the food chain fantasize about falling to the bottom while the people at the bottom fantasize about climbing to the top? Calling this "anarchism" or whatever other nonsense enables them to simply deny that the ideologies of the people making these protests might have some validity. They deny that any ideology exists at all to this behavior. If they actually questioned why someone might be protesting the government violating notions of free speech, if they had any notion of what net neutrality is and, by extension, if they had any idea what the internet was, they would be required to engage in the kind of introspective self criticism which would obviate the need for the protest in the first place.

Moreover, no consideration is given to assange and why he may or may not of leaked what he did. No consideration is given to the army private and why he may or may not of "stole" these documents. No consideration is given to the (apparently) incredible insecurity of US military secrets.  Instead the interest is with defacing the ideology of those who are opposed to your own ideology. Julian assange "hates america" and this alone is enough deny him the freedoms that would be protected for any news paper or media outlet in the US.

Thursday, December 2, 2010

FROM THE VAULT



"At one point I had a wine cellar.

Well, to be fair it was a wine basement.

OK... a small, otherwise disused wine closet in a basement... but I digress...

Five times every two months I would go down to it and turn the bottles, having no more response from the cheaper ones than the cold glass against my skin. On the more expensive ones I remember watching the grape silt upended in the bottle like a viticultural snow globe. It was beautiful. I'd have done it even if I never planned to taste the wine.
"

About Me

My photo
Sentence fragments and word blips