Oppressive Strategies

See also: [Art Talk, by Cindy Nemser [Towards a Post-Modern Psuedo Feminist Tradtion] -[Feminism]- On this page: {Intro} {Feminist Art} {Gay Art} {References - OpCite {The Usual Suspects}

Oppressive Strategies: Intro

In order to destroy, enslave, or merely denigrate (NB) some one - the first step is to make from people into THINGS.

Case Study

The GigaOm show. Source file: http://videos.revision3.com/gigaom/0007/gigaom--0007--digital--large.h264.mov http://videos.revision3.com/gigaom/0007/gigaom--0007--digitral-high.mp3 -[
]- All content for Voices is selected by, and/or solicited by, the editors of All Things Digital. We do not publish unsolicited or over-the-transom submissions. -[]- Shameless promotion...? or just not "over the transom" ? -[My new song]- -[]- -[]- -[]- -[]- -[]-

The Usual Suspects

See also:
Nancy Spero () (Documentarian: Violence against women

The Usual Suspects

Judy Chicago Jenny Holzer Cindy Sherman Nancy Spero -^_6


?time? Goddess creates the universe.


(this section only)
[1] Earlier in Isaak's text, she gives a quote by Holzer: TO write a quality cliche you have to come up with something new. [as quoted in Isaak, P. 32] But, then what IS a clice? All language is pattern - and if we take the work of the Brother's Grimm and Sausure as read - we know that the language can not change any faster than the people using it can adjust. [There is a bril short SF story by Robert Sheckley where language (on a alien planet) changes not only constantly, but consistently).] Regardless, we recognise words a quaint when we know of them but no longer use them frequently. I would go so far as to say that this is where the word is just about to pass out of usage entirely (or possibly to mutate into a differenent or more restricted usage). For example in the SF film "Superman", the character "Clark Kent" (portrayed by the late, great Christophere Reeves) uses the word "Nifty" to which the character "Lois Lane" (Kidder ??name??) replies, "You know most people don't feel comfortable using the word "nifty" these days" - not an exact quote. This brings up two points: The use of such value judgements to "put someone down" (ie, to derrogate, denigrate, etc) - language as social weapon; ie, as weapon to socially marginialise another person or peson(s), groups, ethnic or otherwise - and this doesn't even bring gesture, imitation, mockery, etc into the picture. Also, the use of such antiquated language as a marker of the person. This goes back to Shaw's whole point in "Pygmallian" - "she condemns herself with every word that she utters" - possibly not an exact quote. But, then we come to pun and cliche. A pun is slightly "less" than the cliche (although certainly puns may evolve (devolve?) into cliches). But, the cliche has at its heart a witty observation - and of course being so, and easy to remember (eg, "All men are dogs"), it will no doubt "bear repetition" as Twain comments concerning new and viable words (in "The Diaries of Adam and Eve", as I recall). Thus, we are imbedded into a world that is almost completely artificial and constructed by not only verbal and visual cliches but by the very structure of language and its usage with our (their? any?) culture. Thus, we (and i think this pretty obvious - nothing new here) - we create our reality out of thise little un-examined snippets of cliche: And we don't even recognise them for what they are. When we reflect back on Marshall McCluan's ??sp?? seemingly contradticion of defining "hot" and "cool" media (tv is cool, newspapers are hot). We begin to understand what we have inherrited in the post-Guttenberg generation. TV (radio, cd's, pod-cast's, etc) all program us without (for the most part) any conscious editting of the information as it comes in. [Again, there is an excellent episode of "The Prisoner" (entitled "The General" as i recall) to this effect. Thus, ALL of us (even the movers and shakers) are embedded in this text of things that is constantly not only re-programming but more importantly re-enforcing our "view" of the world. We "see" the world not only in terms of high speed images that go directly into the quite primitive visual cortices of the brain - who no more "know" what they are seeing than the proverbial Adamsian tealeaf knows the history of the East India Company. When we see a violent film (thinking of "A Clockwork Orange" by Anthtony Burgess, with a fairly faithful rendition into film by Stanley Kubrick here), then our brain is processing this as REAL violence; and hence the purported (supported by stat evidence) that we become desensitised to violence, etc, etc. So, what of text? Especially (these days) spoken text? Again, we see that written text (hot) is superceeded by spoken text (cool) - i really wish McCluan had (like Franklin) reversed his notation. But, i think that the point is clear: We create our own reality by choosing what input to put into the old 3-pound universe (ie, "the brain"). Part of this is cultural: In the aftermath of 9/11 a tribe of Africans presented the people of New York with a small herd of cattle - in an interview, they said that they couldn't imagine a building so tall that if you fell out of a window, you would actually be killed. We can choose the programming to do this; but, often we find it easier to turn on the "boob tube" (genus, species, Optico Monstroso) and just let it fill our tiny little hominid brain with whatever tripe is pouring out. On a personal note of having (specifically) observed feminists in general, they tend to NOT just turn on the tube and take the rubbish as is. This also turns out to be true of poets, writers, and various other odd balls that *clearly* should be rounded up for re-education. In closing, from the (fairly badly rendered even for a sequel - i hate cliches like the plague!;) film "Adams Family 2", when the kids are to be indoctrinated they are put in the "happy hut" and Wednesday ??name?? sez: "Don't wach Pugsley!!" to which he ??actor-name?? replies, "But, they're Disney". Beware the mouse - and that's just the part of the matrix that you CAN see. (Whereupon, the left leaning, and almost always inebriated nehr-do-well, "artist" - you call THAT art? - decided to get up and see what could be patched togehter from the almost always empty cupboards in the way of a "meal"). nite all; and tips towel three times to Liz Story where-ever she might be: This essay was made possible by the following inputs: a) A black enameled folding chair with an extra pillow for support, b) A rather ratty lap top of which the (-^_6) keys do not work - i have to cut and past them in each time!, c) A rahter shakey book case with the shelves removed, which serves as the "current Editor's Desk", d) a cup of Dollar General brand "cola with caffiene", 5) A paperback copy of "Feminism & Contemporary Art" which i found on the bargain shelf. and f) Liz Story's "Toy Soldiers" on infinite repeat. Peace to all, Frank. No iconospheres, ducks, or text objects were injured during the production of the current work. BEGIN EXIT DANSE JH sez: "Exceptional people deserve special concessions". Which i have always remembered as "... special consideration". To which i can think will *surely* apply to me: considerations such as prison, torture, or worse.... but suddenly, a pair of ducks nestled down under some shrubbery and the wind began to blow UN-believably. Yep even the twister wanted nothting to do with the like of me: "Duck and Cover". (fade to tuesday) END DANSE? NEVER! {Return back to the TEXT}

References - OpCite

(Latin Work(s) sighted)

[Ferguson 1986], P. 113]

Ferguson, Bruce. 1986. "Wordsmith: An Interview with Jenny Holzer". in "Art in America". No. 74: 108-115. -^_6 -^_6


Jameson, Fredric. 1972. The Prision House of Language: A Critical Account of Structuralism and Russian Formalism. Princeton, NewJersey, Terra. Princeton Univ. Press. I have often wondered what passes for *Itallics* in Korean? Additional refs: -^_6 -[>SF (genre)]- -[>SF (genre)]- Need entry: literature/jameson-fredric.html" ... etc Note: Please use the BACK key on your browser to return to the TEXT. END BLOCK QUOTE