Nights like these make me realise why I find myself so attracted to Adorno’s writing/philosophy
IM JUST A PESSIMIST MIDDLE CLASS BLOKE WITH PRETENSIONS TOWARDS BEING A “PESSIMIST ARISTOCRAT” (Jacques Attali’s words)
currently reading (or was I?)
Reblogging just to say that I bloody well love the cover art for a lot of Pelican releases from this period. Also that I have a bit of a Pelican/Penguin fetish and regularly trawl secondhand bookstores looking for them.
Also this cover is kinda trippy, no?
Witch house seems to me, based on my admittedly limited experience, to be extremely reliant on visuals and aesthetics, and Mater Suspiria Vision seem to be a prime example of this: the music isn’t really anything much to shout about—it’d probably be good listening while stoned, but yeah, almost anything is, isn’t it?—but I’m not even sure if that’s a problem, seeing as how it’s almost impossible to try and separate the music and the visuals; the two are halves of a whole, and in this case, I do think that they add up to create something greater than the sum of its parts. Mater Suspiria Vision might actually invert the usual relationship between a song and its video: watching a music video without sound often results in the video making no sense at all, but I’m almost tempted to say that, in this particular case, it’s the opposite: listening to the music alone, without any sort of music video, might actually make little to no sense (of course, this might just be because I don’t really get witch house, but hey).
Is it good? I don’t know. Do I like it? I’m not sure. But it has piqued my interest.
Fifth chapter of Joyce’s “A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man”
whoa whoa whoa whoa AESTHETICS!
Burma’s Punk Scene Fights Repression Underground
Despite signs of greater openness, Burma’s government continues to wield an iron fist. Among its targets is the punk scene, whose bands are forced to play and practice in secret to avoid harsh punishments. Here, punk isn’t a lifestyle. It is an act of genuine rebellion.
The punk band Rebel Riot stands on a makeshift stage in an abandoned restaurant on the outskirts of downtown Rangoon, Burma’s largest city. They wear their hair spiked straight up and studded leather jackets. “Saida! Saida! Saida!” singer Kyaw Kyaw barks into the microphone, “Resistance! Resistance! Resistance!” The drummer pounds away at his set while the guitars reverberate through the room. “No fear! No indecision! Rage against the system of the oppressors!” Kyaw Kyaw howls.
Meanwhile, about 50 fellow punks, none much older than 25, are romping around in front of the stage wearing T-shirts that say “Fuck Capitalism” or “Sex Pistols.” They jump around wildly and fling themselves to the ground. The air is hot and sticky. The entire crowd sings along: “Resistance! Resistance! Resistance!”
In Burma, punk is far more than just a superficial copy of its Western counterpart. Here, what is probably the most rebellious of all subcultures in the Southeast Asian country is going up against one of the world’s most authoritarian regimes. Punk gives young Burmese a chance to symbolically spit in the face of the hated government, which took power in 2010 in the wake of what was widely considered a fraudulent election. Although the government has show initial signs of greater open-mindedness, which included the released of political prisoners in recent months, Burma is still far from a state that embraces the rule of law.
“We young people in Burma have become punks to protest against the political and economic situation in our country,” Kyaw Kyaw says. He says there are about 200 punks in Rangoon and perhaps another hundred in Mandalay, the country’s second-largest city.
Poverty, Frustration and Hatred
A few days after the concert, Kyaw Kyaw is at home. Wearing a Ramones T-shirt and tight jeans, he is sitting on a battered plastic chair in the room he shares with his parents and two siblings. Behind a partition is the pallet the entire family sleeps on. The roof is made of corrugated metal, and they prepare meals in a brick fireplace. The 24-year-old works at a textile factory, where he earns the equivalent of €50 ($65) a month. Pointing to his studded leather jacket, he says, “For this, I had to save for an entire year.”
Living in poverty is frustrating enough for Burmese like Kyaw Kyaw. But it becomes unbearable when they learn about the indulgent lifestyles of the ruling elites who park their luxurious SUVs in front of cream-colored villas in the sealed-off capital of Naypyidaw.
“The government keeps the people in poverty,” says a 30-year-old who goes by the name of Scum, spitting on the ground. “It’s a daily struggle just to get by.” Protests are rarely possible, he says. Scum is one of the leaders of Rangoon’s punk scene. He is sitting on a tattered sofa, the only piece of furniture in his narrow one-room apartment. Dirty dishes are piled up on the floor. In the corner, there’s a box with English-language books. Scum studied literature, but now he makes a paltry income selling tickets for an illegal lottery. He refuses to have a legal job because he says it “would only be supporting the government.”
Scum wears combat boots and tight leather pants. His upper body is covered in tattoos. “This one,” he says, pointing the word “hatred” inked onto his stomach, “stands for my hatred of the regime.”
A Victim of Power
Scum is not impressed by the country’s recent transfer of power to a civil government after almost five decades of iron-fisted military rule. After all, he says, the new government is mostly made up of members of the former ruling junta. Scum slumps back into the sofa, “There are secret police everywhere here,” he says. “When they learn that I’ve spoken about politics, they’ll put a sack over my head and take me away.”
Scum is not to be cowed. He hates the regime more than he fears it. Until two years ago, he sat behind bars at Rangoon’s notorious Insein Prison, a dismal brick building left over from British colonial times. Its cells are narrow, dirty and swarming with vermin. There’s little more than trash to eat.
His mother was allowed to visit every few months. In the beginning, his girlfriend also came. But, before long, she had written him off and stopped visiting. “People in Burma say that a person has little chance of surviving a prison sentence longer than five years,” Scum says. But he survived six.
Police officially arrested Scum for carrying a bag of marijuana. But it was just a pretext for locking away a troublemaker. In prison, Scum became a heroin addict, buying drugs from corrupt guards. Though he’s out of prison now, he hasn’t been able to get off the drugs. He still tries to suppress the memories.
“I wasted the best years of my life behind bars,” Scum says. “What more can they do to me? They can’t stop me from talking about freedom.”
‘In Burma , Punk Is Not a Game’
“If we just accept what’s going on here, nothing will change,” says Kyaw Kyaw, as he plugs an electric guitar into an amplifier. “I’m doing everything I can to shake people up.” That’s why he founded Rebel Riot in 2007. It happened during the period when the military junta cracked down on the so-called “Saffron Revolution” launched by Buddhist monks. Thousands of demonstrators were arrested then, and soldiers were ordered to shoot upon their own people. People in Burma are still deeply shocked by these events. None of the punks believe that the new government is serious about its newfound political openness. “Only a revolution can change the system,” Kyaw Kyaw says.
Rebel Riot holds regular practice sessions in out-of-the-way buildings along the railroad tracks. To keep noise from escaping and giving them away, they line the walls with Styrofoam. Kyaw Kyaw’s singing is backed by a drummer, guitarist and bass guitarist. “We are poor, hungry and have no chance,” Kyaw Kyaw sings into the microphone. “Human rights don’t apply to us. We are victims, victims, victims.”
Every few months, Rebel Riot gets together with other punk bands to play in what are usually abandoned buildings around Rangoon. Though the gigs are only open to members of the punk scene, they are still dangerous. Anyone in the crowd could turn out to be a government informer.
Ko Nyan organizes most of these punk concerts. The 38-year-old makes a living selling punk T-shirts and CDs at a market stand in Rangoon. He is also one of Burma’s original punks. In the mid 1990s, he read an article about the Sex Pistols, the legendary British punk band, in a music magazine he fished out of the British Embassy’s garbage. Ko and his friends try to imitate the look of the musicians they saw, which comes as a shock to their countrymen. “When we walk through the market, everyone just stops and stares at us,” he says. “They have no idea what punk is and just think we are crazy.”
Sailors brought the first punk tapes to Burma from their travels to the West. “They were the only ones allowed to leave,” Ko says. “They were the ones who brought punk to Burma.”
Though it is a bit easier to leave the country these days, he still doesn’t trust the regime. “We live in a damn police state in which we’re risking our lives,” Ko says. “In Burma, punk is not a game. It’s a way of life — and for that we deserve respect.” He then closes up his shop and steps out into the streets of Rangoon, a city where punk is an act of genuine rebellion.
Interesting article, and it’s got me thinking…
I’ve always found rhetoric about “making punk a threat again”, especially from punks who are in relatively more comfortable positions in comparison to these Burmese punks (for whom I feel a certain admiration) to be particularly problematic, particularly because it doesn’t seem to strike a lot of them that, for something to be seen as a threat, it requires not just the existence those who might wish to be seen as a threat, but also the existence of those who would see the former as a threat. It seems particularly sad that “making punk a threat again” seems to mean, I dunno, just putting on more shows, releasing more zines, that sort of thing: none of this can threaten an established order that does not see the existence of punk itself as a threat.
Looking at punk in light of the the two-way (dialectcal?) relationship that’s involved in something being seen as—or elevated to the level of—a threat, one begins to doubt whether punk is inherently political (as in, politically radical, a challenge to the established order, etc). I think the problem for a lot of punks [1], and the stumbling block when it comes to “making punk a threat again” is the assumption that, by simply being a punk, adhering to the modes of dress, rhetoric and ideology (or, occasionally, lack thereof) of punk (and so on), one is being politically active, fighting for a particular cause, or something of the sort. Rebellion/resistance as an end in itself doesn’t lead anywhere, I don’t think.
Perhaps, in a lot of places, the only people who can really make punk a threat again are the individuals and organisations that in power.
[1] I’m writing this post based on my experience of the Malaysian scene, and while I admit to not being very—if at all—familiar with scenes in other parts of the world, I do think that, with particular exceptions (such as these Burmese punks), this is something of a common tendency amongst punks in countries that aren’t entirely repressive etc.
(Source: newdirectionfest, via brosephstalin)
Schoenberg and Royal Stout
POSTMODERN
My sister attempted to play a cruel joke on me. Knowing the pride I take in maintaining my bookshelves, she thought this one would slip right on by me. Nevertheless, I did think it was pretty funny…but disrespectful.
This photo can only remind me of Bloom’s article originally published in the Wall Street Journal. Particularly delicious are the insights that the middle-class in Harry Potter is the place of all “mean and selfish”; the series mind-numbingly distracts itself with sports-viewing; and that, “[Rowling’s] prose style, heavy on cliche, makes no demands upon her readers”.
The shelf above is devoid of any literature; its owner would be one of the millions of, in Bloom’s brilliant phrase, “reader non-readers”. Bloom’s final sentence seems to me a particularly perspicacious prognostication: “The cultural critics will, soon enough, introduce Harry Potter into their college curriculum, and The New York Times will go on celebrating another confirmation of the dumbing-down it leads and exemplifies”. Twelve years on we know this to be precisely what has occurred.
“Reader non-readers” is such a brilliant phrase. No shit.
Also, Ayn Rand and Palahniuk on the same shelf? ffffffffffffffffffffffuck
But art is in any case not a relation to a thing, it is a relation between men, between artist and audience, and the art work is only like a machine which they must both grasp as part of the process. The commercialisation of art may revolt the sincere artist, but the tragedy is that he revolts against it still within the limitations of bourgeois culture. He attempts to forget the market completely and concentrate on his relation to the art work, which now becomes further hypostatized as an entity-in-itself. Because the art work is now completely an end-in-itself, and even the market is forgotten, the art process becomes an extremely individualistic relation. The social values inherent in the art form, such as syntax, tradition, rules, technique, form, accepted tonal scale, now seem to have little value, for the art work more and more exists for the individial alone.
Christopher Caudwell, The Concept of Freedom
Allegedly the passage, acc. Kyle Gann, that convinced Cornelius Cardew to become a Marxist-Leninist. I greatly admire Cardew and will hopefully eventually do a radio special on him, but, despite being (as a couple of my friends and I like to say) ‘some kinda Marxist’, I think his variety is pretty gross/fundamentalist. Still, I think this passage is particularly interesting and I was struck by it, especially as it seems like a direct response to Adorno’s theories of the autonomous artist, which I am pretty skeptical of (perhaps the weirdest and surreally funniest moment of my published writing career was when someone tried to tell me that I wasn’t allowed to question Lil B’s artistic intent based [wink] on that theory.) There is something weirdly counterintuitive about the way that attempts to shield oneself from mass culture and the corrupting effects of commerce end up making one’s art ever more elitist and ‘bourgeois’. I don’t like the way this dilemma has been traditionally handled (which in Cardew’s case, was writing a bunch of really pretty but absolutely over-the-top-ly-didactic pop songs, including lines such as ‘Marxist-Leninist theory will be our guiding star’ — in what is otherwise a Bowiesque descending-chord-piano-anthem) and a friend of mine nearly convinced me recently that, beyond the most obvious socialist-realist art, even realist art or un-selfconscious art, is pretty much worthless. I tend to agree with this. I don’t, per Arendt, believe that domains of society (political, social, economic, artistic) can truly be considered autonomous, but I think art is pretty far separated from the others — most people, when they are aware of the political views or meaning of lyrical content, simply brush it off if they don’t agree with it (my dad is a moderate libertarian; his favorite musicians are Miles Davis, Bruce Springsteen and the Clash and he is well aware of the slight irony and says that art is simply separate from politics. Which, of course, it can never literally be but it might as well be if people consciously act as if it is.) So I think works that are radical in form/structure/music probably have as good a chance of effecting change in the world as works that contain radical lyrics or discuss political topics at all — viz., not much. That said, I think the ideal of art deliberately made in total isolation from the world (as Schoenberg expressed it) is both a) an obvious chimera and b) a stupid ideal. Be independent and critical, not ignorant, I guess.
(via whenyrlivinginafascistdream)
Adorno’s attempts to argue that Beckett and/or Schoenberg’s uncompromising (and radical) formalism manages to “arouse the fear which existentialism merely talks about” [1] and, in doing so, “compels the change of attitude which committed works [i.e. “works that contain radical lyrics or discuss political topics at all”] merely demand” [2] is one of his more ridiculous turns. The interesting thing with Adorno, though, is that he himself put forth one of the most cutting criticisms of his own views when he wrote that “the purity of bourgeois art, hypostatized as a realm of freedom contrasting to material praxis, was bought from the outset with the exclusion of the lower class” [3]; unfortunately, though, he then somehow manages to reach the conclusion that it’s this very exclusion that lends art its power, so to speak: “art keeps faith with the cause of that class, the true universal, precisely by freeing itself from the purposes of the false.” [4]
I guess that, in a sense, I can go along with Adorno (or at least see what he’s trying to reach towards): by refusing to feed the commodity-market, the economy of spectacle, autonomous art “keeps the faith”, for lack of a better term. But the question then becomes, to me at least: how so? How is this hypostatization in the interests of the working class? Besides, and I’m sure Adorno himself was very much aware of this, the culture industry can turn even the most radical work of art into “just another segment of the culture industry, … something that can be purchased in a store”, [5] resulting in the atonality of a Schoenberg piece, for instance, then, being limited to only the work itself, and not at all present in any form of relation between the piece and society at large.
At the same time, of course, Adorno did have a point when he wrote that
[H]ostility to anything alien or alienating can accommodate itself much more easily to literary realism [or, in this case, “conventional”, tonal music] … even if it proclaims itself critical or socialist, than to works which swear no political slogans, but whose mere guise is enough to disrupt the whole system of rigid coordinates that governs authoritarian personalities. [6]
This is, I guess, how individuals can easily separate art from politics; if the music is palatable, to hell with the politics, etc. Of course, there’s also the flipside: “this music is horribly difficult to listen to, so it’s political!”
Which is, of course, just as problematic (and, okay, shitty).
Despite all of Adorno’s arguments in defence of avant-garde art (which I used to treat as gospel in trying to justify my tendencies towards avant-garde music/film/literature, tendencies borne out of, yeah, privilege and economic capital and etc… trying to not veer of into Bordieu now), however, I get the feeling that what he’s really trying to say—or, at the very least, what is somehow being implied throughout his writings—is, to put it simply, that we’re all fucked. Yes, art included. I don’t claim to be an expert, or to have read all of his writings, but you really only get a sense of this deep-rooted pessimism, his ever-present self-consciousness/self-awareness of the role of the cultural critic (and so on), when you’ve read a lot of his writing. If I may be allowed to get a bit personal, I have to admit that reading Adorno does tend to make my head hurt, does make me a bit depressed, does make me want to scream “SO WHAT THE FUCK ARE WE SUPPOSED TO DO?” out loud… but at the same time, I dunno, I find myself attracted to Adorno for these exact same reasons. And yeah, because, despite his flaws, he was a bloody good writer. Mixed emotions, I guess.
[1] Theodor W. Adorno, “Commitment”, in Aesthetics and Politics (London: Verso, 2007), 191.
[2] Ibid.
[3] Theodor W. Adorno and Max Horkheimer, Dialectic of Enlightenment, ed. Gunzelin Schmid Noerr, trans. Edmund Jephcott (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 2002), 107.
[4] Ibid.
[5] Justin Vicari, “The Films of Michael Haneke”, Jump Cut 48 (2006), http://www.ejumpcut.org/archive/jc48.2006/Haneke/index.html
[6] Adorno, “Commitment”, 179.
As an additional note, I actually wrote an essay about this, which some/most of this post is based upon; in the essay I also attempt to argue for Brecht’s idea(s) of realism as a far more fruitful avenue for political art than Adorno’s staunch modernism, but I never really got around to fleshing out the second half of the essay and I kindof left it to gather dust. Maybe I should pick it back up and actually finish it. Of course, if we, and art, are indeed fucked then I’m not sure what the point would be anyway, so.
The project of the ‘seizure of the means of production’ finds itself blocked, or faced with the absurd prospect of collectivizing Wal-Mart or Apple, workplaces so penetrated to their very core by the commodity-form that they solicit nothing less than total destruction.
“The Double Barricade and the Glass Floor” - Jasper Bernes; Communization and Its Discontents: Contestation, Critique, and Contemporary Struggle
Communism i can get behind: makin’ total destroy
(via effusionofbiopower)
I hadn’t actually thought of it this way…
But yeah. “Makin’ total destroy” indeed.
(via autochthones)
Jamie Oliver finds Joy Division and New Order master tapes in restaurant basement
I dunno about you guys, but I think that Tapes, Guns and Gold would be a really good title for a hip-hop album or something.
And no, I am not going to comment on Joy Division, New Order, or Jamie Oliver.
I should stop obsessively trawling through secondhand bookstores and clearance sales
I have added 10 books to my “to read” pile in two days.
But hey finally got a hold of a copy of Julio Cortazar’s Hopscotch, and for really cheap too, so yeah.
I seem to have developed a distaste for talking/writing about politics
Because I realise that I’m just too pessimistic, too angsty, too disillusioned and too lazy to actually do anything and the hypocrisy is starting to make me feel like killing myself.
Talking Knots: The Origin of Negative Dialectics, how I melt
Toulouse-Lautrec, “La Goulue Dancing”
de la Susan Buck-Morss et son livre The Origin of Negative Dialectics:
“Vividly, in the layout of the bourgeois theater, Adorno claimed one could see the structure and attributes of class relations: the physical arrangement of seats provided a…
