Speaking of Zizek
I just got an email from Christopher Lydon, with a link to his audio interview with Slavoj Zizek, the Slovenian post-Marxist philosopher and Lacanian scholar whose monologues are as refreshing as they are exposing.
This is all just the same bullshit...The true message to Republican voters is: you have the right not to understand what is going on. What fascinating me about Palin. Did you notice how until now feminist politicians played the phallic game. Up to and including Hillary Clinton. Here it's a different phenomenon. Sarah Palin proudly displays her femininity. She wins over men by mobilizing this typical feminine sarcastic undermining of male authority. Community organizers...ha ha ha.
the latest
latest episodes
Lydon's 'Radio Open Source' is like BoingBoing Radio. So many of the shows and ideas are formed by the community before air.
Very glad to see you link him here.
> Th tr mssg t Rpblcn vtrs s: y hv th rght nt t ndrstnd wht s gng n.
Rmmbr whn Bng Bng ws " Drctry f Wndrfl Thngs", bck bfr t bcm 50% cndscndng n-sdd pltcl rntng?
Gd, cn't wt fr Nvmbr 5th - Bng Bng wll b ntrstng gn.
@2 I find this interview to be a wonderful thing!
Then again, i AM a blue mutant.
But really though...
Agree TJIC. And it's a wonder you weren't disemvoweled.
Yeah, the ice cream will be twice as free on Nov 5th!
> @2 I find this interview to be a wonderful thing!
I think that links to political material can be dandy, and I even like links to political material I disagree with.
I just think that it's best if it's presented in a way that isn't rabidly partisan.
And, of course, a nod towards evenhandedness is always a good thing.
I don't object, for example, to pointing out that member X of party Y took a lot of campaign donations and then passed legislation that was favorable to Z ... as long as we also get the links about member Q or party R ... etc.
as long as we also get the links about member Q or party R ... etc.
Those very links are available! and for just as free! I hear there are free ways to tell other people about what you've found there too! Your wish can come true!
This is good.. A lot of Americans criticize the Chinese for not having a true open market, but look at what we do? We basically have an indentureship to a commu-capitalist state.. we can't survive unless we prop up the risk takers who fail? It's insane.
MDH, I laughed aloud at that one. A few years ago somebody injected the word "bias" into the American Lexicon. Now everybody is a media watchdog.
If you don't like it leave, this isn't CNN.
"She wins over men by mobilizing this typical feminine sarcastic undermining of male authority."
...Not to mention she's h4wt. Oh the places lipstick can go...
I think Republican men like (admire?) Palin because she is portrayed as a woman who has achieved power without being a shrew. I'm not saying that's correct, I'm just trying to give some insight.
I disagree with the description of this--S.Z.'s comments are enlightening? I don't exactly see how Clinton's playing the "phallus game" any more or less than Palin. One good reason for that is that I don't think that the phrase "phallus game" has any actual meaning. But hey! Just check this! It's just as easy to say that Pallin is playing the phallus game while Clinton (and all other previous "feminist politicians") were busy being too vaginal or something:
Palin shoots guns, battles corruption and is a 'rugged outdoorsperson'. As opposed, of course, to Clinton who cries on the campaign trail and complains about sexism. S.Z. seems to have his point already in mind and then look around for evidence to support it.
S.Z. is a fraud, guys. Marxism and Freud are both dead. Don't bother!
I wish less of this showed up on my BB.
Of course Palin wearing a dress instead of a pant suit works. It says, "I'm a woman, and I'm in power." The pant suit says, "I'm dressing like a guy, so respect me like one." One is a costume, and the other isn't. Implicitly, it says, "I'm not a bitch."
Some may view that as sexist, but it's true.
One point maybe dressing up in what are essentially men's clothes (NPR had a thing on this earlier this week, about how the typical business suits don't fit women.) was what was needed, but do we still need this, and more importantly, is keeping this idea holding women back? Maybe.
There's a misconception that "evenhandedness" means "equal time". The fact is, if one side of a debate is responsible for a greater share of misinformation or problematic statements than the other, then they are necessarily going to get the lion's share of critical press.
Just because some media outlet isn't criticizing the other side, that doesn't mean they are being unfair. It could just mean that the other side isn't being as ridiculous.
The Onion has a hilarious story about Hillary tonight that I only wish were true. Here's an excerpt:
WASHINGTON— In a blatant show of disgust and indifference toward her senatorial duties, Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-NY) repeatedly yelled "boring" from her seat Wednesday, interrupting New Mexico senator Jeff Bingaman's speech in support of S. 3125, a bill that would extend certain expiring provisions of the Internal Tax Revenue Code of 1986.
..."Shut up," a visibly exasperated Clinton said in a forceful monotone when Sen. Bingaman attempted to resume his speech. "Shut up. Shut up. Shut up."
... Despite suggestions from nearby legislators that she keep her voice down, Clinton once again interrupted Bingaman before the conclusion of his speech when she began a slow, exaggerated clap for her colleague in an apparent attempt to get him to leave the podium. When Bingaman tried to speak above the clapping, Clinton addressed him with pointed sarcasm, saying, "Great speech, Jeff. Just great. Really brought the house down."
http://www.theonion.com/content/news/boring_hillary_clinton_shouts_from
TJIC wrote:
Rmmbr whn Bng Bng ws " Drctry f Wndrfl Thngs", bck bfr t bcm 50% cndscndng n-sdd pltcl rntng?
Gd, cn't wt fr Nvmbr 5th - Bng Bng wll b ntrstng gn.
Unless something additional was deleted along with the disemvoweling, I cannot understand what just happened here - are we not allowed to criticize Boing Boing? It might be on the strong side, but it doesn't read like a troll post to me...
thnk th dsmvwlztn s wk rgrdlss f th mssg. wnt t hr dssnt. f smn s trll bn thm bt dssntng pnn shld b hrd. Dsmvwlng s vry shky mdrtng tl t bgn wth, mv n.
Can I come to your house and rip you a new asshole because your furniture is hideous? No? Then why would any adult human being think that it's okay to come to someone's blog and do that?
#18: Okay but be gentle, its my first time.
BB: chaotic/neutral good. Palin etc.: lawful evil
You figure it out.
You know, TJIC may be a whiner, but really, there was absolutely nothing offensive about that.
But it just seems pretty lame and petty, especially since it's not bigoted. Simply saying "[Y]ou shouldn't throw in mentions of presidential candidates unless they're mentioned in the main entry or are highly relevant to it. This rule will apply until the next president is elected," is just specious.
First, #2 didn't say anything about a presidential candidate, it talk about BoingBoing and an apparent bias. (I happen to agree that there is a bias, even if that bias is in favor of my views. And yes, I dislike the bias as well.)
Second, The post specifically brought up political parties (which was mentioned in the comment), which makes the rule moot.
Three, diemvowelling just reinforces the TIJC's point.
Of course I fully expect to be disemvowelled for this post, and I welcome it. (Welcome back Teresa! Glad you're feeling better, but can't say your capricious moderating has been missed.)
Sometimes the mods have a -5 CHR Ring of Fire. A burning ring of fire.
Discussing Lacan is probably the one thing that could break my self-imposed internet exile. And it saddens me I have no access to sound, so cannot listen to the interview in full.
Now first of all, festivemanb, as you may or may not be aware--although when you say the phrase 'has no meaning' I can only assume you aren't--'phallus' is used here as a technical psychoanalytical term, more or less describing a phase in infantile sexual development. That's fair enough: it's certainly one of the most misunderstood terms, and I sincerely doubt my ability to elucidate it here. Suffice it to say it isn't particularly, for Lacan, opposed to vaginal--where Lacanian psychoanalysis is concerned 'phallus' has less to do with the penis--, but rather represents a relation to the subject. It is not anatomical so much as it a symbol of power, and strange though it may sound, in psychoanalysis the infants first experience of the phallus is being the phallus of the mother, the symbol of her power. I expect in the interview Zizek explains it much better, but I would agree that Clinton 'plays the phallus game' in so much as she seeks traditional chauvenistic (spelling is not my strength) power, similar to Thatcher. I've had girlfriends on either side of the Atlantic say that for all their faults, these two women were role models for doing it 'just like men'. With Palin--and I can't claim to pay attention to this species of crap--one must take Zizek's point: we've seen this in any number of fifties films: the girl who runs with the guys when all she really wants is to fall into one of their arms. She is, in other words, the castrated woman. At any rate, if you think psychoanalysis or marxism are dead, I sort of wonder what you've been doing with your weird life, or at least, is it nice and cool in that cave you live in? Just because it isn't on the news doesn't mean it isn't happening.
Now I don't spend money on anything, but I recently bought 'For they know not what they do: enjoyment as a political factor' from Vertigo, and I can't put it down. Too many people think of S.Z. as the man with the funny accent wot thinks too much about cinema, when actually he neatly and authoritatively summarises a hundred years or more of critical marxist philosophy. Was lucky enough to catch a series of lectures he gave at Birkbeck a few years ago. As funny as he is thought provoking.
And as far as the disemvowelling goes, I was riding my bike to work today when I was almost killed by a crazy lady who first of all cuts in front of me, then pulls off a hairpin turn about a foot in front of me into a parking lot without signalling. 'What the #$%(*^ were you thinking,' I scream at her. 'Sorry! Wasn't thinking' she replies. I suspect if confronted as to why they left an insipid comment on a post not only discussing politics, but a serious, widely read philosopher, and one of the only intellectual 'celebrities' in the English speaking world, our banal friends would offer much the same reply, which surely proofs Zizek's point: that some people will ardently defend above anything else their right not to know. Good luck with that.
Rushkov, haven't been commenting, but really enjoying your guestblogging so far. eagerly anticipating what you throw us next.
@18, Of course, this is a public forum that's only purpose is to solicit comments from readers, not a private residence that doesn't invite people in and asking them for comments. A fairer comparison would be putting a sign on your lawn saying, "come in and comment on my new couch! All welcome!," and then throwing out everyone that said the couch was ugly.
(Don't even try and bring up that "this is privately funded!", you lose the moral high ground when you allow anyone to register and post, and you kind of lose that when you're a forum that rants about free speech.)
@#12 FestiveManB: I think taking...let's see...two words, out of seven lines, of a transcribed full-length oral interview with a man who is, like most writers and philosophers, vastly more articulate in print, is hardly grounds upon which to call him a "fraud". Or to claim that he's making a dishonestly motivated and poorly structured argument, though that at least is a coherent criticism, rather than name-calling.
Also, he's not especially Freud- or Marx-focused, except insofar as both are largely inescapable in the modern interplay of philosophy, psychoanalysis, literature, etc. Reading the "post-Marxist" adjective and having enough cultural literacy to know that "Lacanian" refers to a psychoanalytic thinker is not a substitute for knowing anything about Zizek - or Lacan.
Also, @Scotfree: Hear, hear! As shocking as it may be to some Boingers, philosophers and their arguments are at least as complex, background-dependent, and worthy of consideration as the news and arguments related to technology and politics-of-the-everyday that are more common here.
And can it please be noted that Richard Dawkins and Ayn Rand are not philosophers, much less the face of philosophy? Contrary to apparent popular belief.
Pln jst gvs gd hd. nd s ds bm.
So, what proportion of the rabid complainers here actually listened to the interview? The criticisms I'm seeing seem to be directed at the 7-sentence excerpt, and Rushkoff's 1-sentence synopsis.
At least follow the link and make a comment on the thing itself, please.
@23 posted by scottfree,
Your ability in that post accorded perfectly with my need.
And if anyone liked "Zizek!" Astra Taylor has a new film out called "Examined Life" featuring interviews with K. Anthony Appiah, Judith Butler, Michael Hardt, Martha Nussbaum, Avital Ronell, Peter Singer, Sunaura Taylor, Cornel West, and Slavoj Zizek.
Sunaura Taylor is Astra's sister and an amazing painter who focuses on all sorts of issues having to do with disability, military pollution and factory farming.
OK, so I'm only 20 minutes in - it's an hour long (!), but it's great. Dry, witty, and brazen.
There's also a fantastic quote, around 17:50:
"And this will annoy my leftist friends -- I like to be hated by everyone, no?"
But yes, it's fairly Marxist in its outlook, and slightly more critical of the Repubs than the Dems, but that's entirely besides the point. What it is is deep political analysis, something which seems to get lost in the buzz of electioneering.
Zizek is an extremely entertaining and thought-provoking speaker. To me, this interview is as captivating as a Herzog movie.
I didn't quote those portions as an attack on the female VP candidate. To make sure it wouldn't be taken that way, I found a section where he was attacking Hillary as well. I quoted them to show the kinds of things he says, and the direct way he expresses them.
Zizek hates the Democrats, too, and makes it amply clear that they are equally responsible. It's the parenting part that was more interesting to me, though - regression and transference.
I get the Republican talking points email as well as the Democrats one, though. And they do tell their media reps to claim Palin is being attacked whenever someone mentions her. Seems like that strategy is becoming contagious.
I like it when people post rants without vowels, funny leet spelling, all caps, etc. It lets you know that you don't have to bother reading that post. I hate it when I get halfway through a post before I realize they're wasting my time.
Boing X, the posts without vowels were not posted that way; that's the Boing Boing moderaters deciding the post is a troll and "disemvowling it". Although, I note, it's being used rather capriciously lately, saying something like, "I like McCain", seems to be disemvolwing worthy.
Here's a challenge, post a troll using only vowels! Or only punctuation!
Antinous, you know some people get paid to do that sort of thing? What would P.S. be without its rough trade boys? So much less charming, I imagine.
"Can I come to your house and rip you a new asshole because your furniture is hideous? No? Then why would any adult human being think that it's okay to come to someone's blog and do that?"
Isnt the point of blogging and comments so that you can hear other people's opinions and have your opinions heard? Politics can be acrimonious and when you post something political in nature, you can expect some harsh responses.
Redmonkey - The ice cream here is free. Nobody wants to hear about how much better other peoples free ice cream is.
To MDH:
But my free icecream comes with sprinkles...
...but the sprinkles contain sodium benzoate.
1up, as tjic figured out, when you have a point to make you get left alone to make it.
When your point is 'this place sucks' (which was his first point), you get dmv'd. Is this rocket science?
redmonkey - mine comes with jimmies.
('jimmy fund' people, not 'jim crow')