You are viewing imomus

click opera - The camera is mightier than the rock
February 2010
 
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
 
 
 
 
 
 
Page 1 of 2
[1] [2]
Sun, Aug. 3rd, 2008 06:52 am
The camera is mightier than the rock

hello Momus, I was reading an article about hipsters in Adbusters, thought it interesting enough, some good points. Was wondering, if you've read it, what you may think. b, richmond, va

Hello, B. Yes, I read Douglas Haddow's piece in Adbusters. Joe and Emma were talking about it as they surfed through their blogrolls and newsfeeds. We discussed it on our way out to an art opening. Emma said Adbusters was in danger of insulting its own readers, and Joe wondered why they didn't pick one of the million-and-one things much worse wrong with the world

I have to say Haddow comes across as a satirical character, someone like Dan Ashcroft in Nathan Barley. In the first episode we find Dan writing "Rise of the Idiots", an article which insults the readers of SugarApe, and yet is destined to make them laud and worship him for his cynical vitriol even more than they already do. Dan lacks the talent to cross over from his style mag world to something more adult and substantive. "He knows the idiots are idiots, but unlike them, he suspects he's one too," as Chris Morris and Charlie Booker put it. Like Dan, their series ended up appealing only to the people who recognised themselves in its satirical targets. It preached hellfire, in other words, only to the converted.



Haddow comes over all purple, all 6th form apocalyptic: "The half-built condos tower above us like foreboding monoliths of our yuppie futures. I take a look at one of the girls wearing a bright pink keffiyah and carrying a Polaroid camera and think, “If only we carried rocks instead of cameras, we’d look like revolutionaries.” But instead we ignore the weapons that lie at our feet – oblivious to our own impending demise.



"We are a lost generation, desperately clinging to anything that feels real, but too afraid to become it ourselves. We are a defeated generation, resigned to the hypocrisy of those before us, who once sang songs of rebellion and now sell them back to us. We are the last generation, a culmination of all previous things, destroyed by the vapidity that surrounds us. The hipster represents the end of Western civilization – a culture so detached and disconnected that it has stopped giving birth to anything new."

Haddow seriously seems to be suggesting that carrying rocks rather than cameras would make these kids better and more advanced, rather than worse and more neanderthal. Smashing things is apparently what we're put on the planet to do. "Each successive decade of the post-war era has seen it smash social standards, riot and fight to revolutionize every aspect of music, art, government and civil society." Oh really? Is that why we're still mostly wearing jeans and listening to rock music, just like people fifty years ago? Maybe this "smashing" has always been mostly gestural. Maybe it's a blood-red herring, and maybe glorifying it is a kind of pointless machismo.

Hip subcultures have come into existence, it seems to me, mostly for the purpose of creating art, and of getting the more creative kids in any generation laid (the geeky ones tend to be the ones who need to rely on culture rather than mere nature when it comes to luring attractive partners into bed). Unfortunately, Haddow fails to get down to the serious business of art criticsm -- to tell us whether Dash Snow is better than Terence Koh, and whether Ryan McGinley is more interesting than Ryan McGinness, and why. You cannot dismiss a whole culture based on one sketchy description of a DJ mix. But the Catch-22 is that as soon as you start talking about how skulls are dull, or how Koh is better than Snow, you're basically carrying on the conversation the subculture carries on with itself on a daily basis. Jeremiads are therefore a safer option for the naysayer than prac crit.

Then we come to the apparently-damning argument that the hip subculture can be marketed to. "Hipsterdom is the first “counterculture” to be born under the advertising industry’s microscope, leaving it open to constant manipulation but also forcing its participants to continually shift their interests and affiliations," Haddow writes. "Less a subculture, the hipster is a consumer group."

In an age where anyone can be marketed to, this isn't particularly damning. I'm sure that somewhere, as we speak, a Shining Path Maoist is being sold a Shining Path Maoist t-shirt via AdSense, thanks to a link between Shining Path Maoist keywords and Shining Path Maoist products being marketed in his area. This does not, however, invalidate the politics or philosophy of Shining Path Maoism. It just gives him the chance to proclaim what he believes in via a t-shirt, should he so desire. Let's just take it for granted that anything can and will be sold to anyone, even -- hello, Adbusters! -- the idea of things not being sold.



I agree with my former boss at Vice, Gavin McInnes, when he says that disdain of hip subculture tends to come from "chubby bloggers who aren't getting laid", people who are "just so mad at these young kids for going out and getting wasted and having fun and being fashionable".

There's derision in Haddow's article for American Apparel, but no mention of the company's non-sweatshop activities, or the fact that its advertising keeps low circulation lesbian magazines in print.

Haddow also fails to look at -- or even mention -- the centrality of skate culture to hip subculture. Skate culture is a way to hack the city, a way to turn all its hard, inhuman surfaces into an opportunity to demonstrate extraordinary human skills. Skating and street painting turns greyness into colour, and alienation into belonging, and boredom into skill. It's central to big chunks of hip subculture, and it's a political blow against one of the central evils of our time, the motor car, which would make a much more worthy target for a radical magazine.

Not only does Haddow fail to see that hip subculture is a big machine for creating sex and art, he fails to see that being hip can be a sort of code of honour, something sadly lacking in the cultural mainstream. The spiritual sloth Haddow accuses the hip subculture of is actually much more prevalent in the general population, which schlepps about in jeans and listens to shapeless, floppy music and sleepwalks through shapeless, floppy jobs. People in the hip subculture are more likely -- like chivalric aristocrats -- to pay attention to what they're wearing, to experiment, to innovate. As for the value of what they come up with, that brings us back to the hands-on prac crit the Adbusters article avoids, desperate to stay arm's-length.

Sure, the hip subculture, seen from a certain distance (like next door when you're trying to sleep and they're partying), can be frustratingly superficial, conformist, holier than thou. But think of it as something people do in their 20s, and think of 20something hipsters spreading out, in their 30s and 40s, in more and more individual directions, becoming artists, visionaries, eccentrics... or just settling down to bring up kids in a neighbourhood with an organic grocery and soya milk ice cream.

In the end, the camera is mightier than the rock.

88CommentReplyShare

stanleylieber
stanleylieber
Stanley Lieber
Sun, Aug. 3rd, 2008 05:14 am (UTC)

aye


ReplyThread
eptified
eptified
H. Duck
Sun, Aug. 3rd, 2008 06:15 am (UTC)


Hipster culture is not a monoculture - there are a million gradiations, all as full of people who are empty trendoids as they are of people who are doing genuinely interesting things. This has always been true. What's more interesting to me is that there are still hordes of people dressing and acting exactly like the 'idiots' in the nathan barlow clip three years on. This particular iteration of the subculture is becoming moribund and saturated with camp followers, and I am bored to death with the forced childishness of their music, and haven't we gotten over irony yet, and etc.

The idea that there is something especially sick about this particular generation's hipsterism is ludicrous, of course. But your "chubby bloggers who aren't getting laid" comment reminds us of how shitty hipsters can be - the combination of complacency and insecurity among those who are never quite sure they're not faking it, the nihilism, the needless cruelty and exclusiveness, the 'code of honor' (a nauseating way to put it) which privileges the wealthy, the idle and the thin...

I understand why this guy is angry, is my point. I resent the idea that there is no middle ground between being a 'shapeless, floppy' (there's body shape again) middle american and being the kind of person who is hung over until 2 PM every single day of the week. Where does it say that people my age have to act like overgrown infants in order to create art? How can a really vital subculture be so stratified in its affectations that they can be ticked off the checklist in an article like this, from keffiyeh to fixies?

Something new, please. Maybe a victorian revival! Awesome.


ReplyThread
imomus
imomus
imomus
Sun, Aug. 3rd, 2008 08:22 am (UTC)

the kind of person who is hung over until 2 PM every single day of the week. Where does it say that people my age have to act like overgrown infants in order to create art?

Are children hung over every day? Metaphorical consistency could save this generation!


ReplyThread Parent Expand







Shit, just shit - (Anonymous) Expand


you're fat - (Anonymous) Expand

suenoverde
suenoverde
suenoverde
Sun, Aug. 3rd, 2008 06:28 am (UTC)

Total agreement with this post and cargoweasel. To make this a cover article for Adbusters is ridiculous. While I will occasionally still be moved by the mag it lost my subscription when they started selling sneakers.


ReplyThread

(Anonymous)
Sun, Aug. 3rd, 2008 07:32 am (UTC)

While I agree it comes off as semi-satirical, I don't know if you're really addressing what seems to be his central point:

'The cultural zeitgeists of the past have always been sparked by furious indignation and are reactionary movements. But the hipster’s self-involved and isolated maintenance does nothing to feed cultural evolution."

Your argument seems to be something like "rocks don't help - we're just trying to get laid and have fun! Nothing's changed in the past 50 years through any of those so-called revolutionary movements anyway."

I think people buy and wear jeans because they choose not to make appearance and clothing a priority in their financial decisions. They also tend to work shit jobs because they have been doomed by systemic stagnation into having a very similar life to what their parents have had - people often don't see or realize the options available to them. Hipsterism is not really an option for the more disadvantaged of society, nor does it do anything to help them.

My feeling is that you and Haddow disagree more philsophically, on the central raison d'etre of a "cultural movement". He seems to be saying that they are a waste of resources, if they are not directly and aggressively challenging the political realities of the day, and you seem to be saying that a sufficient purpose is the expression and interrelation they create amongst their own members.

It may be that the hipster/art/fixie/indulgent aesthetic helps liberate people's viewpoints from the everyday that they are fed and most never escape, and that is an interesting way to challenge Haddow's argument on its own terms.

Personally I just can't stand attention-whoring twats, so I try and judge people based on that, as opposed to how many gears their bike has. It just seems that practically everyone with a fixie is an attention-whoring twat. C'est la vie.


ReplyThread

(Anonymous)
Wed, Dec. 31st, 2008 02:49 am (UTC)

I learned a lot from your response to the post. Thanks.


ReplyThread Parent

(Anonymous)
Sun, Aug. 3rd, 2008 08:16 am (UTC)

Hipsters are "artists" with marketing degrees.


ReplyThread
sarmoung
sarmoung
The Empire Never Ended
Sun, Aug. 3rd, 2008 09:28 am (UTC)

McInnes: “I’m dubious of these hypotheses because they always smell of an agenda.” Oh dear, what is that smell? Did someone let off an agenda...?

So it's nihilism or nothing is it?





ReplyThread
qscrisp
qscrisp
Sun, Aug. 3rd, 2008 10:00 am (UTC)

Or maybe it's nihilism and nothing.


ReplyThread Parent
yanatonage
yanatonage
love you from the heart
Sun, Aug. 3rd, 2008 12:28 pm (UTC)

This entire conversation about whether a "hipster" is good or bad is completely stupid. "Hipster" is not a a subculture, it's an epithet. It's just a word that some young white liberal arts graduates use to describe other young white liberal arts graduate whom they consider more dumb or pretentious than them. Find me one person who says that they belong to the "hipster subculture". ugh.


ReplyThread
niddrie_edge
niddrie_edge
raymond
Sun, Aug. 3rd, 2008 12:53 pm (UTC)

Yup.
..and as for the getting laid business...ughh.

Chubby blogger.


ReplyThread Parent


(Anonymous)
Sun, Aug. 3rd, 2008 01:40 pm (UTC)
hipsters??

hipsters??
oh ,so is that the word for this generation of pussies behind me?? i've always used the word pussies. anyway, the adbusters article said they don't like to be called hipsters so i'll stick with my own term for them.
not to say that if any of us had been born at this time in world history, here in the western world we'd handle the co-opt of cool by corporatism any better than they are.
it's all gonna fall folks..this whole fake f-in' world we've consumed...when?? dunno.
but it's about which side you take afterwards...and with the way things are going these pussies will be calling for martial law, curfews, 1984 style.... from their condo balconies as the rest of humanity try climbing their condo wall for something to eat.
todd


ReplyThread Parent

(no subject) - (Anonymous) Expand


(Anonymous)
Sun, Aug. 3rd, 2008 01:42 pm (UTC)
my line on hipsters

Most of the people I know that I would characterize as hipsters tend to have rather shallow cultural knowledge. For them, it's about fashion (not style) and parties. I'm more of a person who prefers to spend a quiet evening with a book, so I don't envy them their parties. But I find it odd that the hipster is seen as some arbiter of taste when your average hipster is into the same dozen shit bands as his friends, and the same pop culture inflected visual stye as everyone else.

The people on stage, and the people who pass down The Knowledge, usually tend to be shy introverted types, not these type A scenesters.

Spot on with the rest of your criticism. I just think you give the average hipster way too much credit.

ps: Livejoural support for OpenID is terrible. Doesn't work.


ReplyThread

(Anonymous)
Sun, Aug. 3rd, 2008 05:03 pm (UTC)
Re: my line on hipsters

This is pretty much what i was going to say. Well said, anonymous.

Hipsterism seems to be a lot about what you wear, how bored your expression can be, where you hang out, etc - as Charlie Brooker referred to, both in and out of Nathan Barley, whether you're a 'haircut' (see the 'Geek Pie' episode of Nathan Barley, i think it's episode 5, for the perfect slighting of an attempt at a seemingly trendy haircut).

In London, as im sure in numerous other places, it's still mostly like this - namedropping cool bands, piddling around in dalston, etc.

A huge swathe of the people taking part in this to-ing and fro-ing, contributing to their own and their peers' hype are indeed boring and uncreative when you get down to it - just spend some time having your energy sapped by them and you'll know it's true. I can't believe how grossly unimaginative so many of them are, and that many of them they get away with producing parasitic, pointess crap and calling it art. But, as Momus said, another chunk of them are genuinely doing interesting things.

Increasingly, i know that those who do the bona fide interesting things are the ones who don't need to shout about it. They have the capacity to lock themselves away, get immersed in what they're doing, and not give two shits about the scene. On weekends, or whenever they get the chance, they set about their creative work, because good stuff, unless you're touched by insane genius, takes a shitload of time, dedication, persistence and caring about challenging yourself. The people doing the really interesting, beautiful work are those who dont need to dress fashionably for attention, who dont need to go to the right shows and parties for validation, they're the ones walking away from that crowd and following their own path, come what may.

Way too many hipsters think they're doing this by co-opting the aesthetics/cultural capital of whatever has currency - and there's an awful lot which does - we've inherited decades of great stuff to plunder through and recycle. they believe they've located their rebel soul in some electrobeats or what have you, or they have a book of terry richardson photos and wow look, they take 'edgy' photos too, but when you strip away whatever they've decked themselves out in, be it music, art, clothes, posing, whatever, often the essence of their ideas is, unoriginal, vacuous, or just plain shallow.

[enter most of the output of Vice magazine...]

i can't express it any better than that, sorry...

I guess you've just got to be the judge for yourself as to the extremely subtle gradations of who and what are a 'waste of time' along the hipster spectrum. but then, that's different for everyone.

Maybe i'm just bitter. i think that creativity takes work, and kindling your imagination to produce worthwhile stuff does too, and unless you're lucky enough not to have a day job, how are you meant to get that time to do that if you're always hanging at gigs and parties? Maybe i just need a coke habit and a better ability to delude myself that i'm brilliant.


ReplyThread Parent Expand



cheapsurrealist
cheapsurrealist
Dave Nold
Sun, Aug. 3rd, 2008 05:04 pm (UTC)

In the end, the camera is mightier than the rock.

Yeah, that's the ticket.

I was just read this article in the supermarket isle last night and I thought: "I wonder what Momus thinks?"



ReplyThread
pay_option07
pay_option07
Sun, Aug. 3rd, 2008 05:08 pm (UTC)
the camera is /certain distance



Any group attracting this reaction has obvious marketing appeal.


ReplyThread

(Anonymous)
Sun, Aug. 3rd, 2008 05:28 pm (UTC)
Crack-rocks & Lomography

It may not be the best time to point out that America's arch-consumerist culture seems on the brink of collapse... This rich web of over-consumption that has bent the minds of nearly everyone in my generation, combined with the grandiose dreams of bling-bling binge hedonism, runs the risk of destroying this country. From Portland, where I sit typing this, evidence of the precariousness of our situation seems incontrovertible.

The withdrawal from addiction to consumption will prove too painful to Americans, and those who offer the junkies a quick-fix (drill, kill and spend) rather than hard realities (conserve, pay for your own mistakes, save) will sadly win here, come September.

Outfits like Vice and American Apparel are just the current generation flag-wavers for our short-sighted consumerist culture. For those few of us who aren't completely fashion/consumerist victims or living inside the cocoon of the cultural elite, these institutions are as stale and contrived as the Gap ads and yuppie culture they supplant, and ultimately, as un-sustainable.

Without going back to refresh my memory regarding your employment with Vice, let's (for your sake) assume that whatever work you did for them occurred well before their current-era transformation into a magazine-cum-ad agency for brands looking for youth-cred.

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/05_41/b3954035.htm

While Adbusters is always annoying and holier-than-thou, the fact that they are targeting the CORPORATE culture that is "hipsterism" falls right on target.

Your accord with that quote from Mr. Gavin McInnes does something to display a kind of ugly distain for anyone who would dare to criticize the current corporate paradigm... We are not fat, we get laid, we party... we just don't do it at corporate-sponsored events.

The worst part of your defense of hipsters is that you seem to miss that Hipsterism is in no way subculture at this point. The arguments about skate culture "hacking a city" seem very outmoded. I have to wonder if, upon finally becoming truly famous, you would arrogantly assume that your ideology won, rather than asking yourself if you've, instead, simply been subsumed by the corporate-dominated mainstream.


ReplyThread
desant012
||||||||||
Sun, Aug. 3rd, 2008 06:11 pm (UTC)
Re: Crack-rocks & Lomography

The "Brooklyn indie" style itself is definitely the mainstream youth culture now; I walk through my suburban NYC hometown and see kids riding fixed gear bikes, skateboarding down mainstreet wearing super tight jeans, etc. etc. It's all over MTV, usw.

But you're forgetting the other half of what people curse about "hipsterdom"--the part where its people sitting in a warehouse listening to field recordings of birds in a swamp while graphic design interpretations their friends made spin in the background. People would say "stupid hipsters pretending to be creative you phonies! you think ur so cool!!!" to that, too. But there are people who like that kind-of thing. Appreciation for old PBS documentaries is as hipster as skinny jeans if you live in a city.

The word "hipster" at this point is a very broad epithet and encompasses just about anything people do now. My friend and old roommate, a lover of old twee pop with a very young fogey dress style, would make fun of those damn hipsters all the time. I'd say to her, "you know, people are saying the same exact thing about you."


ReplyThread Parent Expand



telephoneface
telephoneface
Sun, Aug. 3rd, 2008 05:50 pm (UTC)

First off I am turned off by "Hipsterdom is the first 'counterculture' to be born under the advertising industry’s microscope" because it simultaneously promotes a generational elitism as well as a naivety of just how clever the advertising industry has been for a much longer time than the past 20 years or so.

Subcultures have been a target of marketing for much, much longer than I'm sure most people realize, because subversive and dangerous stuff is sexy, and sex sells, and by the time a subculture has been identified and labeled it is a demographic that is being directly targeted and ensnared by capitalist interests. Hipsters may be more unorthodox in their consumer choices but they are servants to the system no matter how much they may think they are above it.


ReplyThread
electricwitch
electricwitch
For anything, oh! she´ll bust her elastic
Sun, Aug. 3rd, 2008 07:25 pm (UTC)

Hipsterdom, Momus?

REALLY?!


You know what else the hip subculture is? Incredibly boring. Since Blue States Lose stopped you can't even get a decent lol out of it anymore.

Also I have a feeling hipsters stopped being the hip subculture two years ago and now it's furries.


ReplyThread





telephoneface
telephoneface
Sun, Aug. 3rd, 2008 08:28 pm (UTC)

I just started reading the original article and got to the point where he writes

“So… this is a hipster party?” I ask the girl sitting next to me.

It get worse, much worse. How does this man have a career writing articles of this caliber? The more I read the more embarrassed I feel for him..


ReplyThread
robotmummies
robotmummies
ad reinhardt
Sun, Aug. 3rd, 2008 08:59 pm (UTC)

that question is so funny


ReplyThread Parent














(Anonymous)
Sun, Aug. 3rd, 2008 09:13 pm (UTC)

yup all we need is a few more organic groceries and we'll be totally SET.

I'm sorry but art just isn't that important. We're gonna need this generation (mine) to pay attention to more than what it's wearing.

LS


ReplyThread
trickseybird
trickseybird
Bruce Springsteen, you're not the boss of me
Sun, Aug. 3rd, 2008 10:09 pm (UTC)

I read that as generation (MIME). I'd be all over that shit.


ReplyThread Parent

(Anonymous)
Sun, Aug. 3rd, 2008 09:40 pm (UTC)

"We are a lost generation, desperately clinging to anything that feels real, but too afraid to become it ourselves. We are a defeated generation, resigned to the hypocrisy of those before us, who once sang songs of rebellion and now sell them back to us. We are the last generation, a culmination of all previous things, destroyed by the vapidity that surrounds us."
Thanks, Adbusters, for your insightful and timely analysis of 20-something youth culture, and in particular, it's relation to The Real. Surely, your continued commitment to Caulfielding out the inauthenticity in 21st century late capitalism is a beacon of hope for progress to a new era - the flash of your glossy cover across the supermarket is, to me, as a lighthouse to a ship (obviously doomed and adrift in purchasable identity-components, ready to be frivolously applied to my vintage puffy ski coat like flair to a cheaply made cotton vest). Your well-designed, Helvetica-emblazoned pages peeking up at me from the toilet tank lid at that basement show last night, I saw the force of your truth, your scalpel-like insights, cutting through the lifestyle-magazine-like garb that you wear and awakening my sleeping subjectivity. I knew that THIS party, THIS night - this dancing, this dirty bathroom, these art-encrusted walls, the non-fixie bicycles chained together in the yard, the joy that I felt as surrounded by friends and strangers, the particular pulse of this beat (metering out our second-by-second revolt from hipsterism and mass culture) - THIS anti-commercial, rhizomatic counterculture that you've been so instrumental to (so deftly have we learned to dodge hipster signifiers, like a vegan dodges all-beef franks!) - is most certainly, legs spread, astride a Rocket on a direct trajectory to the Real. To true experience and subjectivity, to a place where one's lifestyle, the building blocks of ones life, the way one chooses to live, are determined by purely enlightened personal choice, freed from the governing structures of the advertisement and the almighty dollar. You are the lemon juice that cuts through the swampy aftertaste of generational hypocrisy, the buzzing neon sign outside the window of our poorly furnished apartment, reminding us that That Culture is Hella Fake, and Adbusters is Hella Real. Thanks!


ReplyThread
mrobot
mrobot
Ben
Tue, Aug. 5th, 2008 03:07 am (UTC)

thank you for this


ReplyThread Parent

(no subject) - (Anonymous) Expand

(Anonymous)
Sun, Aug. 3rd, 2008 09:56 pm (UTC)

Fadbuster, get over the Nathan Barley fixation why dontya. Ya big Hipster.


ReplyThread
kineticfactory
kineticfactory
this is not your sawtooth wave
Sun, Aug. 3rd, 2008 09:56 pm (UTC)

It depends how one defines what a "hipster" is. If it's someone who's into art, then criticisms of hipsters have a boorish, reactionary quality, not a world away from gay-bashing and religious fundamentalism.

Though at its extreme, the word "hipster", especially when used by people whom others term as "hipsters", refer to a degenerate case of this phenomenon; an inbred mutation of sorts. The vacuous, fashionable, coked-up young people, who affect a pose of being "over" everything, a sort of terminally jaded fuck-you solipsism/nihilism. They're not doing it out of any artistic fire in the belly, as such passion would be totally unhip. And once you get beneath the surface, the trendy haircuts and artistic affectations and whatever bandwagon they're jumping on, only to vacate as soon as the mainstream gets on and it loses its value as a signifier of hipness, there's nothing there; it's totally superficial.


ReplyThread
robotmummies
robotmummies
ad reinhardt
Sun, Aug. 3rd, 2008 10:00 pm (UTC)

after the end, the prt scrn key is mightier than the camera


ReplyThread

(Anonymous)
Mon, Aug. 4th, 2008 12:02 am (UTC)

The Anticoncept

Cinematochronic Argument For A Physical Phase of the Arts

Preface

Let X be the original. All art poses the elementary equation: movement of X. Progenitor of the cinematograph: movement of photography.

Emile Reynaud writes movement on the screen with photographs successively taken and projected at a given rhythm.

The Lumiere brothers simplify this process by photographing movement directly.

An art evolves by multiplying its origin by elements that are specific to it.

The evolution of the cinematograph is marked by optical variation and variation of movement and their combinations: close-ups and other shots.

In 1896, Promio gives a second dimension to movement by introducing the first travelling shots.

Thus furnished with its specific means, the cinematograph begins to express a new reality by an original stylization. It produces several masterpieces.

Then, without laying the problem to rest with the reproduction of speech, [the cinematograph] perfects its technology on the criterion of precision, to the point that it ceases to interpret in order to reproduce reality, whether real or novelistic.

The cinematograph had arrived at that stage, when in 1951 Isou destroys photography in favor of sound; and in surprise one saw a most banal fish in the sea take on an unaccustomed relief by means of a love story that unreels on the sound track.

The same year, Gil J Wolman realizes his first cinechronic film, which he calls by abbreviation and to mark the difference with the cinematograph: ATOCHRONE.

Wolman divides the second by 24; he thus renders an image autonomous, which, outside of all symbolism, becomes the element of the propagation of movement on the exterior of photography. Asynchronous, at the unreeling of the atonic narration, this new antithetical movement, counters each vocal inflection.

AND A NEW ART BEGINS.

I love you I no longer love you he loves another woman.

Beneath the mask she must be pretty she must be ugly.

THEOREM.

There is no negation that does not affirm itself elsewhere.

Negation is the transitional term to a new period.

Negation of the intrinsic, immutable, a priori concept, projects this concept outside of matter, reveals it a posteriori to an extrinsic reaction, becomes mutable by as many reactions.

THE TIME OF POETS IS FINISHED.

TODAY I'M SLEEPING.

From some website or other


ReplyThread
kubia
kubia
kubia
Mon, Aug. 4th, 2008 08:53 am (UTC)

The adbusters piece is terrible writing, even for a magazine whose editorial content relies more on the power of teenage angst than on that of any political arguments. In fact, it fits straight into that straitjacket when constantly mistaking the discontents of contemporary culture for political articulations. Sad.


ReplyThread
jaimi
jaimi
Thu, Aug. 7th, 2008 04:22 am (UTC)

I think they rely on dreadful typography more than anything. I haven't picked up that magazine in awhile, but last few issues I read, shit was barely legible. Maybe they're thinking if it looks nice, no one will notice how lame the magazine is.


ReplyThread Parent

(Anonymous)
Mon, Aug. 4th, 2008 09:44 am (UTC)

Some pretty harsh criticism here...maybe it's bec


ReplyThread

(Anonymous)
Mon, Aug. 4th, 2008 10:35 am (UTC)
Stephen Duffy

Momus, I have noticed over the years how quite a few people have compared you with Stephen Duffy. I wondered if this is soemthing you are aware of/would like to comment on.

Particularly your image, less so the music, though you were both on Creation and have both written idiosyncratic songs for beautiful Japanese women singers. Stephen D. for Sandii of Sandii & the Sunsetz.

When you were both younger, you did look quite similar, with the same pout and hairdos. You were both born in the same year, and you cite the same childhood pop and literary influences. Even your mother, judging from the picture you recently uploaded, doesn't look so disimilar to Stephen's mother (there's a picture on Duffypedia).

Musically, you both are really good at writing a catchy tune in combination with intelligent lyrics. My own POV is that the difference is that Stephen Duffy's work is more overtly romantic and nostalgic wheras you seem to be obseesed with what's happening now, or is about to happen, and the future.

I did read once that you met him with Brix Smith in Camden, or is that a myth?

Anyway, I am genuinely interested to hear your views on this pop nexus!


ReplyThread Parent

(Anonymous)
Mon, Aug. 4th, 2008 10:15 am (UTC)

ause (yes, me again, must make mental note to learn to type) most contributors (including myself) are loosely associated with hipsterism.

The article itself is silly but interesting too - anything that gets this many negative comments certainly can't be dismissed that easily.

I had to smile when I recognised hipster burnout masquerading as insight. You know, the feeling you get in your late twenties when you realise you just can't cut it anymore. That coupled with the assumption that counterculture can lead to genuine social change (isn't it the other way round?).

The only way for me to get to grips with what I feel about this article is to compare it with what was cool in my days. I'm in my early thirties and therefore a child of the rave (oddly absent from the list of alt. cultures in the article) from its first rumblings in the mid-80s to it's death by synthcore at the turn of the millenium. So what are the differences?

1. A common ideal. I know it sounds incredibly trite nowadays but we were striving for something new. It seems that all sense of this has been lost (hopefully temporarily) in many sections of society - not just the youth. Whether it's god, politics or a sense of community, nothing really binds anyone together. I've got to hand it to today's hipsters though, as they are creating a network that brings people together, however shallow the cement may be.

2. A short term relief from the corporate giants. OK, so all counter-culture gets swallowed up in the end but there's always a gap of a few years when people are out there doing it for themselves. I remember a time in the very early nineties, when all the best selling records weren't anywhere in the charts or on TV. It seems to me that there is no true undergound left, and the small loopholes created by the internet are just teeny mlicrocosms of a few people and their extended mates.

3. No cameras everywhere. I can't stand going out anymore because of the hadge of people filming the event. At parties, the cameraphone is a great way to hide boredom. Why are people afraid to experience things firsthand ?

If we assume that social change brings about new forms of counter-culture, then I wonder if it isn't preciesly lack of impetus for change on the part of many people, not only hipsters, that has led to this stagnant situation (and no I don't mean throwing rocks at shop windows). Then again, I'm rambling...thanks for posting that Dan Deacon video Kamakouji - his live sets express everything I've been trying to say here much more eloquently than I ever could (and everyone at the gigs is too busy dancing to remember that they have cameras)



ReplyThread

(Anonymous)
Mon, Aug. 4th, 2008 11:59 am (UTC)

why am i not surprised about momus reaction about that article?

having read this blog for a few months, im sad to say it becomes more boring and predictable for each day. there are some commenters, however, that really make it all a bit more interesting.

and personally, i think the adbusters article was well-needed. the aggressive response it got most of all proved that. a culture with a lot of irony, but no self-irony and self-distance, might need a wake up call.

and really, self obsession is so f-king boring.


ReplyThread Parent Expand


(Anonymous)
Mon, Aug. 4th, 2008 10:38 am (UTC)
Stephen Duffy

Momus, I have noticed over the years how quite a few people have compared you with Stephen Duffy. I wondered if this is soemthing you are aware of/would like to comment on.

I think in particular what's picked up on is the similrity of your images, less so the music, though you were both on Creation and have both written idiosyncratic songs for beautiful Japanese women singers. Stephen D. for Sandii of Sandii & the Sunsetz.

When you were both younger, you did look quite similar, with the same pout and hairdos. You were both born in the same year, and you cite the same childhood pop and literary influences. Even your mother, judging from the picture you recently uploaded, doesn't look so disimilar to Stephen's mother (there's a picture on Duffypedia).

Musically, you both are really good at writing a catchy tune in combination with intelligent lyrics. I tend to think the major difference is that Stephen Duffy's work is more overtly romantic and nostalgic wheras you seem to be obseesed with what's happening now, or is about to happen, and the future.

I did read once that you met him with Brix Smith in Camden, or is that a myth?

Anyway, I am genuinely interested to hear your views on this pop nexus!

Nan.


ReplyThread
imomus
imomus
imomus
Tue, Aug. 5th, 2008 07:20 am (UTC)
Re: Stephen Duffy

There do seem to be some similarities, Nan, yes. He's always been a bit more successful than me -- I was nearly in Josef K, he was actually in Duran Duran, my Folktronic record sold in small numbers, his Lilac Time project was rather a big seller, he womanises on a different scale, and Robbie Williams never called me for songwriting help!

I did once meet him and Brix Smith in a dressing room somewhere, they talked about leylines at Malvern and I pretty much kept silent, smiling shyly.


ReplyThread Parent