Welcome another Member

Would like to take a minute to welcome Veronika to our space. She has been a long time friend and mentor for me in so many ways. Gone are the days of 30 page letters arriving in the mail – i loved getting those thick envelopes! – and here are the days with relative instant communication. And the stamps are cheaper ….for now…

Comments Added

When i decided to create this space, it was so that there could be a form of virtual dialogue for a people who dont get much face time but still want to keep the conversation rolling. I figured out how to include a comments section thanks to HaloScan. This way, we can add direct comments to a thread, and otherwise add new content on the main page. Also, i want to thank Sashay for keeping content rolling with various issues and things to check out.

I enjoy the shared space, and hopefully this will add to the dynamic.

Another Disappointment

Coming into this semester, I had high hopes for some of the courses i had selected. My Media, Technology and Politics, ended up taking a slightly different turn from the course description in the course handbook, and i must admit, i was a little disappointed between content and description. Fortunately for the media tech course, it does not take the prize this year for most disappointing class.

I have to do general electives – otherwise known as Z courses, which are essentially classes outside your chosen field – you know – to broaden our horizons. Anyways, i was excited to see a course being offered in the Fine Arts department titled Art, Science & Technology: From Leornardo Da Vinci to Virtual Reality.

Well, Bart told me that he likes to start with a title and work backwards…i am rather fond of this method as well (since it is usually the only purely creative step in working a paper) .. Point is, this course has a great title, but damn, based on the substance, we have barely made it past the industrial revolution. Seems like the weeks dragging our heels on Leornardo means we’ll need to burn rubber over Virtual reality…I understand, as the prof reminded us countless times, that we needed to learn the history to understand the now, but we barely have time to look at the now… its just not what i signed up for… oh well, three more credits done. /sigh

Another Happy Birthday

Can you believe, Everquest is 5 years old this month!

When we started playing (5 years ago… wow) we never thought the game would continue on this long, one of the longest shelf lives in my world of short attention spans. I have made many friends through this game, it taught me the delicacies of politics and brought me a trip to denmark in its honor. Now, it seems to have even been my foot in the door to my academic future. Sitting here baffled, that this game has brought so many things to my life, regardless of the negative press and evil things it has “forced” people to do, I think we should take this time to see the good things it has brought to people as well.

Marx: Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844

Estranged Labor

Key concepts to define:

*inorganic nature

*estrangement (later to be known as alienation)

*Ownership of the means of production

This article is from the very early writtings of Karl Marx, and although many of the concepts seen here sound familiar in terms of his life’s work, they bare different words. (From estrangement to alienation is one example) The theories presented in this work, are therefore, to be taken at their face value for the relevance of this course, and not interpreted via one’s deeper knowledge of Marx and his later works.

From the order of the text, Marx introduces the piece by stating that “the worker sinks to the level of a commodity” (106) and therefore becomes the “inverse proportion to power” (106). Essentially, this diagnosis stems from the worker alienating himself from the the material of his labor. The products that he produces are not for him, and therefore creates this speration between labor and its fruits. The effect this has on an individual is that they become seperated also from realization. The more man objectifies his labor, the less realization [of self] he has. Man’s worth is in his labor, and by becoming estranged from the objects produced in labor, his worth decreases. This devaluation process occurs during the activity of production. Active producing of an object that is the mere tangible objectification of the process. This makes the “active production” takes the labor outside of man – in turn causing alienation.

The only non-alienating activity in man in this situation, is those actions that are related to the animal existence of the human species. Eating, sleeping etc.

The only thing that seperates man and animal is consciousness. How does this factor in with alienation, and the fact that the work is outside of the man himself? If man is conscious of his alienation, is he still any better off then an animal, if animal actions are the only thing he has that is of his true essence?

Marx goes on to discuss the ‘product of labor’ as something that holds power of man, and the act of production is also action alien to man in these terms of not owning the means of production.

Inorganic nature – is essentially that of which is not of the body, but that is natural. Anything that is natural (not man made) is considered inorganic nature – even though nature is found in human consciousness, it isnt ”of the body”. Being “of the body” is in terms, the universality of man as species. All men of body are the same but do not share the same consciousness – as in nature.

When man is estranged from the inorganic nature, or body, he is seperating himself from not only self but from species as well. This alienation “changes for him the life of the species into a means of individual life.” (112) By estranging man from species into the individual, he then changes the purpose of life and creates an abstract “estranged” form.

Marx then looks at the consequences of these actions of man in paradigmatic proportions. What happens when man seperates self from species? He says, that by doing so, he is therefore seperating himself from man, and essentially creating the paradigm of self and other. And only in the face of this “other” is he made aware of the estrangement from both man – or other – and species, leading to true alienation.

How does fit into the political and economic structure that is capitalist society?

By defining who these actions belong to, Marx clarifies where this new, estranged man, fits into the meta-structure.

He goes into discussing private property as the product of this type of labor, and not its cause. Private property is in essence, the product of alienated labor as well as the means of this alienation. Admitting that this is a cyclical and potential contradictory explanation, he claims that this is in effect because of the very nature of estranged labor.

And so, instead of wages being an exchange of labor value, it becomes a consequence of the sacrifice of self to the other. Increase of wages becomes nothing short of “better payment for the slave” (118) since all types of labor that alienates the self, is in essence forced labor.

And so, this is my deconstruction of Marx’s “Estranged Labor”

There is one more page that i could go through, that ties this into the larger frame of society – but alas, the exam is in thirty minutes!

Hannah Arendt: The Crisis in Culture

Concepts to look at:

*Colere – Roman word and concept meaning to cultivate, to dwell, to take care, tend and preserve. Originally used in relation to agriculture – as means of tending and cultivating the land hor human habitation. Represents an attitude of loving care. Cicero is responsible for first using colere in terms of the human mind and spirit with the term “excolere animum” and “cultura animi”.

*Culture– [as defined by the Greek] the attitude toward, or more specifically, the mode of intercourse prescribed by civilizations with respect to the least useful and most wordly of things.

*Paideia – Opposite of being a fabricator or creator of art works. In ancient times, things that were of culture, were supposed to rise naturally out of nature. And so, as an artist that fabricates works of art, the art itself was admired, but the artist was looked upon skeptically in terms of technique and skill which was in direct opposition of how ‘art’ and essentially ‘culture’ was to come to being.

*Philistinism – described below

Arendt runs through several ideas throughout this article. The common view of this article has been that she is criticizing mass society and mass culture. But to read the article and to understand it through her definitions of mass culture, culture and society, it becomes clear that she is not criticizing per se, but distinguishing the difference between traditional culture and mass culture. In the center of this dichotomy lies philistinism, which Arendt is most critical of.

Historically, culture was reserved for the privileged few who were not tied to the burden of physically exhausting labor.[Marxist ideas here] In past societies, there were significant distinctions between each class in terms of their leisure time. In this sense, with leisure came the luxury of [appreciating] the arts – culture. With modern times, the concept of one’s leisure time [in a western/european context] has expanded across the classes as the lines, although still existing, are blurred between where each strati meets. In the increase of leisure among the working class, culture is now accessible to them as well. Arendt clarifies that the type of culture that the working class is now open too is still limited in forms of entertainment rather then true [lasting culture]. With the present society being that of a consuming one, the entertainment sought is also consumptive in nature. The ‘culture’ being produced for this purpose, therefore, is not designed to last. In Arendt’s definiton of true culture, the ability to outlast human life is its primary defining characteristic. And so, this is how the line between Mass culture and culture is drawn for Arendt.

So, Arendt does not attack mass culture as being the destructive force of traditional culture, as some have interpreted her works as saying. The destructive force is actually what she calls “philistinism”. This is essentially the act of people who strive to be more ‘cultured’ by simply absorbing culture for the mere sake of it. To read the classics in literature, because one is expected to read them when one is cultured. Arendt describes that the “trouble with the educated philistine was not tha he read the classics, but that he did so prompted by the ulterior motive of self-perfection, remaining quite unaware of the fact that Shakespeare or Plato might have to tell him more important things than how to educate himself...” (203)

And so, this education without depth is truly what kills culture, not mass culture – which creates and consumes its own form of culture as entertainment.

The article continues to describe why and how culture and concepts of beauty and taste are political in their true form. This idea comes from Platonic theory of law and society (and perhaps further back) that the polis was the realm which set the limits to the love of wisdom and of beauty. This goes back to a political structure that was based on cultivating human virtue. [i knew that plato course would come in handy some day!!]

The dangers of philistinism in the context of political concepts of culture, is that culture is supposed to be useless except to cultivate the mind, spirit and soul. Philistinism takes this concept and puts utility in the mix [for social advancement] and by adding utility, the attitude of culture is then destroyed by its very nature. Politically, this has consequences because the philistines will “judge action by the same standards which are valid for fabrication, demand that action obtain a predetermined end and that it be permitted to seize on all means to further this end.” Culture is also threatened by philistinism because it will be judged in terms of utility essentially leading to a devaluation. By definition, things that are of culture are to carry their own, independent – intrinsic worth. Philistinism takes this away forcing art and culture to have utility – which further means that once its function has been fulfilled, it can be cast aside.

Active Study

Getting ready for an exam on tuesday for my poli tech course, we are looking at Arendt’s The Crisis in Culture: Its Social Significance, Marx’s Estranged Labour and Heidegger’s The Question Concerning Technology. This is the first exam in my three years that i have the exact concepts to look at. So, Today, i will spend my time reading and posting what i think each article embodies in terms of what the prof is asking. Can’t say that i will be right, but if i can get it out of my head today, chances are it will flow on tuesday. Stay tuned…

The End Result

To the mulling mentioned below, here is my tentative course outline – granting i get into honors this year…

SUMMER 2004

GAME STUDIES – READING COURSE (HOME)

COMPARING DEMOCRACIES (INTERNET)

FALL 2004

SOCIOLOGY OF MEDIA – 341

SOCIOLOGY OF OCCUPATIONS – 342

MASS COMMUNICATION – 360

FALL/WINTER 04/05

HONORS SEMINAR – 409

RESEARCH DESIGN & ANALYSIS – 410

WINTER 2005

POLITICAL SOCIOLOGY – 333

URBAN REGIONS – 355

Aging: State of mind or biology?

Quite off topic, but this is something that has been in my head since Wednesday night. In my Field Research class, we discussed the international black market for people’s organs. Besides all the common ethical questions, Tamara asked me something that I havent had the time to look into. Could someone live longer, stay young longer by getting organ transplants from younger people? Say you are 70 years old, could you replace your organs with someone who is 20 and be revitalized? Is aging in the brain or in the organs?

This brings me back to some of the cyborgian concepts i posted about a while back [re: Lyotard, post-humanism] To have artificial organs brings someone closer to cyborg in concept (again, according to literature i have read), where does human organs that are not your own place you? If they serve aesthetic functions and not necessarily health ones, in the sense of replacing organs for rejuvenation purposes versus liver transplant due to natural malfunction… would this constitute a cyborgian-type mindset, seperating the need for want?

I have to think about this a bit more, not sure where i want to go with the idea. My mind is turning to beauty products and anything (manufactured by man) that alters our natural state as entering the cusps of post-humanism as defined by Stuart Sim in The End of Everything.

Yet another thing to clutter my brain – wonder if this is what my psyche does to make me incapable of producing papers on demand? Heh

Digging and Mulling

Pretty much what i have spent the last two days doing. Digging for articles for this Game Studies Course i am working on for summer session, am almost finished, and it has been a blast conceptually, but the digging and the scanning of material has taken me hours! And all i could think of is, there is no way i will ever get to read everything! For a field that is relatively new, there is so much literature! Sure, there are very few books per se, but the amount of academic papers and conference proceedings is astounding. At this point, i see several distinct catergories within the literature [to be outlined later]. Its been alot of fun – i think i found my new procrastinatory pass-time (i know – its not a word! but i like it heh)

The only problem with digging so much is knowing when to stop. It has been two days of “ooh i want to add this… ooh!! that too” I can only pick 20 articles at most, and have decided to start [another] personal bibliography of articles i want. The wonderful thing about digital and game studies, is the majority of the literature can be found online and for free. Figuring the cost of ink and paper, i just printed out about 17 articles (ranging from 8 pages to 45) for the cost of about $55. Not bad at all, considering the cost of coursepacks and academic books.

From digging to mulling. Finishing up another year of my BA, i am more then eager to get it over with and move on. With another full year worth of credits ahead of me, i have been contemplating squeezing them in before Christmas. Scheduling and rescheduling with much agony for several days, i think i have found a course outline that might put me over my idealistic time frame by one semester, but i finally get to take that Mass Com. course sashay has been encouraging me to take. (now lets hope werber is still teaching it!) Nonetheless, the soul searching it took for me to decide to take things a step slower to, essentially, get more in then simply graduating early, was well worth the end product. If i am lucky, the IT University of Copenhagen will have an english program by the time i am finished…

Just had to get all that out!

Off for now until procrastination gets me again!