Print

Print


>>While it's certainly possible that works like EBN can be dangerous to
>>"hegemony", I wonder how this might happen, given that the very kind of
>>viewing which they encourage is associated with privilege.
>
>This seems reductive to me: if to view with irony is "associated with
>privilege," what kind of viewing *would* be revolutionary for the masses --
>literalistic?  If, when seeking to find or formulate anti-hegemonic arts,
>we must eschew all modes of consumption/production associated with
>privilege, it seems to me we'd be left with a pretty bare pallate.
>
>On the other hand (to agree with you partially), I think many academic
>marxists, feminists, and other activists have an overblown concept of how
>muh damage what they're doing inflicts upon 'the system.'  In fact, by
>producing principally papers, conferences, and academic books, many of
>these would-be revolutionaries are fitting *into* the system just as neatly
>as their more conservative counterparts.  Something *more* is needed, and
>to me the EBN project is at least a potential indicator of what that *more*
>might be ....
>
> russell a. potter
 
I think some would say that you are right about what kind of viewing is
revolutionary. Wasn't socialist film and theatre in the Soviet Union (and
everywhere else) in the beginning of this century extremely, er, unsubtle
in it's presentation? They seemed to think that it was the best way to
reach the masses.
As for academic revolutionaries, I'm with you. The most revolutionary work
they can do is teach, the rest only satisfies themselves.
 
Curtis
 
 
_________________________               _____________________
Never Get Out of the Boat       |       [log in to unmask]