Comments for marxism and cultural studies

Comment on Proposal: Inventing situations by writing machines » Project outline: punk and cyberpunk

writing machines » Project outline: punk and cyberpunk — Tue, 30 Mar 2010 23:03:37 +0000

[...] a lot of this is building off research I did last semester, it might be helpful to check out my original project proposal for my Marxism and Cultural Studies term paper, and the subsequent revised [...]

Comment on Just a last minute addition. by erin

erin — Tue, 15 Dec 2009 08:16:35 +0000

I just have to say that I love the guy crammed at the end of the table who interrupts Lessig at the end of this clip, stating that he can’t understand why Lessig and Keen keep “blathering on.” You go, angry interrupter guy. You may be placed at the end of the table like an afterthought, but you can be important in debates about copyright, too…

Comment on A Twist on Marxism by Casey by Rose

Rose — Mon, 14 Dec 2009 16:21:09 +0000

It seems like the issue isn’t that people don’t know what it stands for as that it stands for something different for different people. For some, the symbol is completely disconnected from the historical reality of Che as a human being, whereas for others it is only the negative reality of his life (i.e. his murderous qualities). But it seems like Casey is first exploring all the components of the image and the potential influences each has, then he is finding that people have very specific associations with the image. The comparison with the Fairey image is interesting. Maybe in both cases people have a general affinity to these images and have some vague sense of their representing something having to do with change or revolution or justice. On the other hand, I think Casey’s book is about how people actually each have a specific meaning. Nobody just wears the image, though everyone may wear it for a different reason. The reason it’s appealing is because it’s never neutral. I’m not sure if the same can be said of the Fairey image. I think that is because every possible version of Che is at least a complete symbol. For example, the guerilla fighter was a moral, disciplined person who can be taken as a hero to be emulated. On the other hand, the Fairey image is only representative of Obama’s polital persona, which is not nearly as definitive as Che’s guerilla persona. Che may represent many things, but each of those things is concrete. Obama represents many things as well, but they are all jumbled up and mixed together is some “yes we can” quote that means nothing or everything, but never one thing in particular.

Comment on Quick note on Jenkins… by Rose

Rose — Mon, 14 Dec 2009 16:10:29 +0000

I was interested in how Jenkins paints fans as doing something subversive, and specifically the fact that they analyze non-canonical works with the attention usually given to canonical literature seems relevant to the idea of giving power to “the people.” In other words, if we are taught how to read academic and canonical literature, then fan culture is subversive in its refusal to read the “right” books in the “right” way. For example, most of us have been taught to read “The Great Gatsby” as having to do with “The Death of the American Dream,” etc. The thing is, it’s very nice to talk about fan culture as an act of subversion, but it seems a little condescending to make somebody’s interest or hobby into a big ideological statement when it could just be something somebody likes to do. Also, the whole subversion thing is thrown into question given that people are still using the same analytical strategies, just on “low-brow” content.

Comment on Capitalist Casey? by Rachel

Rachel — Sun, 13 Dec 2009 11:16:11 +0000

Bravo, Erin! Thanks for articulating the way I feel about, well, more or less everything right now.

I agree that theory is only ever useful in relation to practice, and that all the big-picture stuff can seem pointless and exhausting without corroborating evidence. But if there’s one idea that’s really been hammered down in this class, it’s that everything you’re doing right now has practical consequences, and with some knowledge of the big-picture consequences of your mundane choices, and the limits within which your mundane choices are made, it becomes evident that the mundanity of said choices is totally relative. (The president thinks: “Today I will drink coffee, read the paper, and authorize an air strike in Afghanistan.”)

Perhaps you find that knowledge paralyzing, but you can’t not choose, because not choosing is also a choice. Dig? Subjective agency and all that.

Comment on Che photo as art by Rachel

Rachel — Sun, 13 Dec 2009 10:32:09 +0000

Qwerty, you’re spot on. I would add that there are so many mediating factors involved in photography–the framing of the shot, the type of film, distortion of the lens, etc. etc.–that in any context the ‘realism’ of photography is dubious at best.

While the Korda photo was indeed the result of a photochemical process triggered by light reflected off of Ernesto ‘Che’ Guevara’s actual face, it’s ultimately hard to argue that it’s a more ‘real’ or less-constructed version of Che than the stylized two-tone graphic mass-produced on t-shirts across the globe.

However, the fact that the two types of images (abstract icon vs. ‘realistic’ photo) continue to be treated and circulated very differently is worth addressing. So, more to the point of Cal’s post, every image serves an ideological purpose.

Comment on contextual poachers by stella44

stella44 — Thu, 10 Dec 2009 05:23:24 +0000

I think that your comment that fan culture is essentially just “over consuming mass media to the point of its logical end” was very interesting. That is a unique way of looking at it but one that does make sense.

Comment on Fanfiction…THE…final frontier. by stella44

stella44 — Thu, 10 Dec 2009 05:19:51 +0000

I found your analysis of LOST to be very interesting and a new idea. I had never thought about how the show’s divergence from character development into this sci-fi type show played a huge role in its decreasing popularity.

Comment on Che photo as art by stella44

stella44 — Wed, 09 Dec 2009 23:00:24 +0000

I think that your mentioning the fact that the image of Che is in fact cropped is very interesting. In class you pointed out that you actually liked the uncropped version more and I would be interested in knowing how the legacy of the image would have changed had it not been formatted like it was.

Comment on A Twist on Marxism by Casey by stella44

stella44 — Wed, 09 Dec 2009 22:58:02 +0000

I found your interpretation of Casey’s analysis of Che to be very interesting. I was especially intrigued by your mention of the fact that many people who wear his image are unaware of what it really stands for. This reminded me of the Shephard Fairey image of Obama in that people wear this image and claim to support what it stands for but in reality, what does the image even represent? Yes We Can…what? I think that the popularity of the image plays a bigger role than what it actually means and people support it because it is trendy.