I can't deny that Jameson was a difficult reading. His style of writing really confused me. It seems to me that he has a fluid writing technique, where many ideas came together at once. However, I do believe a lot of his thoughts are interesting. Our class discussion really helped me break down some of his concepts (although I am still struggling with the latest part of the reading).
I may have been too tough on Jack before… I am now really interested in Jameson’s concept of late capitalism. Our contemporary culture represents a unique moment in history and it differs greatly from other moments from humanity's past. I like how he proposes postmodernism as the culture of late capitalism. I have to admit that in the beginning of this class I had major issues in understanding the differences between modernism and postmodernism. If I can assume that postmodernism is the culture of late capitalism, the word itself becomes easier to understand. It may be a generalizing term, but it is helping me contextualize my own ideas.
I also like his use of the term millennarianism. If we have a rupture with old cultures and we are creating something new in the postmodern world, it is only logical that a new set of rules (and a new vocabulary) will emerge with the new culture.
Another interesting idea we discussed was related to the complacency witnessed in our current culture. With so many issues being exposed by the media, it is hard to stay active and motivated. Sometimes I view that as an strategy to keep individuals apathetic… We are so overexposed to dire images that staying positive (or even being enraged and moved) becomes nearly impossible.
One of the new terms we see in the 21st century is cyberactivism. Although the internet does allow for ideas to flow better and for people to organize movements more effectively, it also transfers these essential "fights" to the virtual real. Many of them simply stay there and do not actually affect the real world. Is cyberactivism a response to apathy or a symptom of it? The postmodern (late capitalist) world is full of questions and inconsistencies.
Marcie,
ReplyDeleteI think it is so great to hear (read) that you now have a better understanding of what Jack was trying to explain during the previous class period; distinguishing “late capitalism” from “capitalism”. I recall speaking to you the night after that class when you seem upset by the specification between the terms and I love the fact that I was kind of see the progress of your understanding with that concept.
I also very much enjoyed Jameson’s concept of “millenarianism,” as it is something I find myself discussing with people on a regular basis. Technology has allowed mankind to progress exponentially in virtually every way. However, with that progression, we have growing increasingly more dependent on technology to live our daily lives. I think the idea that this progression may eventually lead to a Y2K or Rapture is extremely interesting. I know I bring it up all the time, but that also relates to the plot of The Matrix…
One of my favorite moments in class on Thursday was when were discussing the idea of the portrayal of women, or beauty in general, in the (most likely modified) photo of Brittany Spears. The mainstream develops a shared understanding definition of beauty around the popular culture portrayal despite the fact that the artistic portrayal may give a more realistic interpretation. The photo of Brittany Spears has clearly been altered but is able to impact the public’s understood concept of beauty and sexuality because of mechanical reproduction and widespread exposure. The photo is unrealistic, yet the mainstream seems to enjoy the reproduction of the ideal verses the production of the real.
I really loved everything you added to class this week and look forward to continuing the discussion on Tuesday.