Newer posts are loading.
You are at the newest post.
Click here to check if anything new just came in.

Quotes from #Ranciere

“as the opposite of the passive spectacle in the texts of Guy Debord….”

“the concept of the spectacle implies that images are no longer doubles of things but. but the things themselves,  the reality of a world in which things and images are no longer able to be distinguished. Whenever the  the image no longer stands opposite the thing, form and image  become indistinguishable from one another….”

I was initially intending something rather different, more akin to a rejection of Ranciere’s understanding of art and the media, but when looking at the work again it became obvious that the real problem remains that he is thinking of the spectacle solely in terms of that moment in the 1960s when the Hegalo-Marxist spectacle was understood in terms of images, false consciousness and mass consumption. In a sense whilst that precise moment may haunt Ranciere’s perspective, it is also evidence of how static his work appears to a contemporary non-academic reader. In a mass consumptive network society Ranciere’s focus on the image avoids the necessary extension of the spectacle into language, data, the network society and beyond. In a few years unless checked it will be reaching down into genetics and up into the clouds.

“Guy Debord’s critique of entertainment as spectacle, meaning the triumph of alienated life; the identification of entertainment with the Debordian concept of play as the antidote to appearance….”

Entertainment of course references the ongoing triumph of alienated life. Art does not manage anything better. But let’s be clear that passivity as Ranciere references it exists where readings and theories of the media are not placed within the spectacle.

Reposted by02mydafsoup-01 02mydafsoup-01
No Soup for you

Don't be the product, buy the product!

YES, I want to SOUP ●UP for ...