Week 7 20.11.09

I have read decline and fall over the last day or so and found it to be a ‘nice’ story. This is not damning through faint praise but ‘nice’ is as good a word as any to describe its nature. I understand from the introduction, and class discussion, that the book is intended to be a social satire describing the failing moral fibre of post war Britain. However it was not the bitter attack on capitalism that I have come to expect from theory two but more of a light hearted funny story with cartoon like characters and a cheerful plot. Despite it promising scandal the humour was simply old fashioned by today’s standards, maybe a little childish, and completely excusable. It did not offend. In light of my opinion of this book I find it difficult to examine the architect, Professor Silenus’ character in any great depth. Silenus and the process of rebuilding King’s Thursday was a manifestation and characterisation of the attitudes of the bright young things. As it happens Silenus’ Corbusian principles appear to harmonise very well with the shock tactics employed by bohemian London society of the time. Waugh manages to make Silenus/Corbu look stupid (- I challenge anyone to read Vers Une Architecture without laughing) clearly showing that such arrogance can only lead to downfall .

My favourite part of the book was the description of the central character, Paul, where for one fleeting moment a glimpse of the possibility of his capability can be seen through his otherwise bumbling story.

‘For an evening at least... Paul Pennyfeather materialised into the solid figure of an intelligent, well-educated, well-conducted young man, a man who could be trusted to use his vote at a general election with discretion and proper detachment, whose opinion on a ballet or critical essay was rather better than most people’s, who could order a dinner without embarrassment and with a creditable French accent, who could be trusted to see to luggage at foreign railway stations and might be expected to acquit himself with decision and decorum in all the emergencies of a civilised life.’

I think that this is a fabulous piece of writing which leaves me asking where can I find one of these gentlemen? Waugh answers this question by reminding the reader that this description is only possibility and that the only interesting thing about the central character is the events that he is involved with. His fate for the remainder of the book is reliant on the decisions of Mrs Beste-Chetwynde the strong female character who lives by independent means courtesy of her numerous whorehouses in the Americas. This is a lovely little observation of the myth of the gentleman and it made me smile.

Week 9 01.12.09

Howard Roark is my tattoo artist- sorry Karl! A man with an unshakeable ego who refuses to do anything other than be allowed to produce his own work. There is no client/designer collaboration here. At one point in the film, The Fountainhead, Roark has no money but still won’t bow down to popularism. For him his is work is divine and it is his and it is part of him to be protected and despite the arrogance required to uphold this view there is little one can do but have at least a grudging respect for that individual. I think that Roark is actually a likeable man, he has a misplaced reverence for his work but also an admirable vindication in what he says. Even if you think he is wrong he has at least a logic which he can apply to his situation, a set of rules an identification of boundaries, something which I know I have not found yet.

As a film it is a little clumsy with the melodrama getting in the way of any meaningful cinema. I haven’t read the novel (but I think I will) which may have had a little more finesse than the over-egged syrup I saw on the screen. The bit about the paper going down for supporting Roark was more than ridiculous but the post modern adornments that were constantly stuck onto Roark’s models were positively genius and nearly made me laugh as much as the character in this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VfprIxNfCjk Graphic designer vs client the truest thing I’ve seen on the internet). Having said all that stick me in front of any schmaltzy obviously contrived black and white film and, as a golden age of Hollywood nut- you’ll find me a happy girl. I’m such a prole.

As an aside while in Amsterdam I noticed lots of posters in windows saying ‘no fountainhead’. It was not however an expression of dislike for the film or book or even arrogance of designers but an objection to the construction of a huge block of flats in the Dockland Island of Sporenberg called ‘fountainhead’. It strikes me that they could not have picked a more unfortunate name for a controversial building. Was this meant to be ironic?

http://www.amsterdamdocklands.com/navigation/News/Fountainhead.html

Week 10 13.12.09

As a result of ever continuing cash flow problems I have in hand photocopies of the three chapters from John Dos Passos’ USA detailing commentaries on Frank Lloyd Wright, Henry Ford and Thorstein Veblen. As discussed in the lecture this is a book describing the tragedies of a collection who individuals who were significant in early 21st century America.

The one I liked was the story of Veblen- The Bitter Drink. Accused by a fellow student as lazy I immediately empathised with this man. The story describes a very clever and natural thinker who didn’t fit to the path his Norwegian parents, or indeed society at large, sought for him but neither did he feel at ease with the academic life that he was resigned to. Dos Passos repeatedly says that Veblen ‘had a constitutional inability to say yes’ I don’t believe that this was right. He was a man who did not say yes to society, he did not say yes to the things that would lead him to the life that others had or others expected him to have. He said yes to what he wanted to do. To say yes to this above anything else and takes the most courage of all. It is also because of this that I do not believe that he was a lazy man. He was not. He simply did not say yes, because he knew he did not have to and he knew it would not serve him. This man said yes more than any of them, he said yes to more difficult things than taking a job offer or buying a house or a car, he said yes to not taking employment, he said yes to reading Latin and Greek and owning nothing but books and boating on the river and turning up to the university in a coonskin hat. He said yes to scandal on a cruise liner, to living like a hermit and practicing carpentry, to teaching what he believed in and not what he was asked to teach. He said yes to resigning from a job he wasn’t happy to do. These are the hardest things to say yes to, this man is the man who says yes in the noblest way.
These thought were further clarified after ‘googling’ him where I learnt about his theories relating to conspicuous leisure and conspicuous consumption. Veblen believed that businessmen (or service providers as we might call them today) are barbarians in that they do not do the difficult tasks themselves, they do not produce like farmers or labourers but simply shift goods around, taking a profit for themselves while creating the illusion to the genuinely ‘working’ class that they are necessary and represent an improvement of the basic feudal society history while actually promoting a feudal society run by themselves. This is made possible by man’s disposition to consume or waste money in order to display a higher status when compared others.

All I can say is jeez; if this guy thought this back then he would have a whole lot more to say about it now. The first thing that came into my mind when reading this was Range Rovers. One can buy a perfectly good working car that offers the same amount of utility (I am specifically referring to those idiots who drive clean Range Rovers in cities) for a far smaller amount of money yet the Range Rovers and Range Rover dealers still exist profiting from conspicuous consumption.

Week 6 10.11.09

I’m not very good at reading poetry. I have to speak it. Howl was a pleasure to recite. It has a very specific tempo. This tempo seems to bring a joy to what, when read, appears as a torrent of distasteful actions and events. Interestingly I really enjoyed this poem yet some might say it describes a horror far worse than that described in the article about Las Vegas by Tom Wolfe that we read last week- which I didn’t enjoy. I have a little background knowledge of the context of the poem and readily admit that I was looking forward to reading it; that probably helped a little. I recently read Jack Kerouac’s Dharma bums and it has probably been one of the most influential books I have ever read, it was just so easy to relate to a frustrated generation looking for fulfilment elsewhere that the society forced upon them, hell. Who isn’t? The poem captured the spirit of the period where physical acts were viewed as ultimate human freedom. The poem is a celebration of human encounter, of food, of sex, of drink; of reality.

I’m a little dubious about the link to Archigram. Is it that the work of Archigram is just another commentary on time and place? Did they believe in this stuff as ideal or inevitable? Was it positive or negative? For me Archigram is a group of gifted illustrators (but then I know very little about them) whereas Ginsberg and the beat generation represent something raw with more spirit and energy.

Week 5 05.11.09

Not having been to Las Vegas, I tried to read this piece with an open mind. Tom Wolfe quite clearly finds the place to be nothing but odious. This is evident in his descriptive language. There can be nothing attractive in pissed nobodies rambling nonsense suffering from toxic schizophrenia, piped muzak , being trapped in a car where the radio will not turn off and being surrounded by exposed butt cracks of pregnant women and aging ‘babes’. Not to mention phlegmy old men with oatmeal skin.
The image created by this writing is that of an exploitative machine aimed at the intellectually inferior. Wolfe describes a never ending drone fuelled by an infinite number of generic, interchangeable and replaceable characters. It’s worse than the lives they are trying to escape. It’s pleasure without a cause.

Hedonism and indulgence are far more palatable when linked to some kind of agenda such as search for enlightenment or rebellion in fact pleasure when coupled with cause has a certain glamour.

Las Vegas used to have glamour in spades. It was there once. Anyone who has seen Ocean’s eleven (the real Ocean’s eleven not the less than mediocre remake with George Clooney and Julia Roberts in it) can see that Las Vegas had once been fresh and pioneering and dangerous and exciting and edgy. It seems that today it has more in common with an aging British seaside town, tragic and slightly sinister in its trashiness; distinctively for the proles. It has crossed over the fine line between glamour and vulgarity and it did so a long time ago.

As always Tom Wolfe manages to veil his criticism in a blithe satirical way which results in a vivid read but ultimately in the realisation that it is a narrative you cannot trust. I will not let this essay form my basis for the judgment of the city but I must say that it hasn’t encouraged exactly cultivated any glimmer of affection or interest I might have had in the place. It just made me feel dirty.

Week 4 01.11.09

It seems that like I many people found Henri Lefebvre's 'The Production of Space' challenging. To be quite frank I’m just not sure that I got it.

I did however very much enjoy the discussion it lead to despite feeling somewhat inferior to the source material.

Theory was discussed in this workshop as a seeking of truth. I thought that this was a most thought provoking phrase. I drew a doodle (see above).

My first problem with this phrase is that I find it difficult to accept there being one truth. I find it quite plausible to believe in the possibility of their being many truths surviving simultaneously without one being superior to or more correct than the other.

Secondly, assuming that there is a singular truth- how can anyone recognise that it is the one truth? How can anyone judge this? To live a life trying to find this one truth appears foolhardy to me. Striving for an impossible and unworthy goal will not lead to happiness.

I believe that because of this strange desire to pursue the truth that people construct theory in order to try and access the truth. From my experience theory (and concepts) do not fit well within a list of categories and descriptions as life is far more akin to amorphous forms blending into one another with both shared and dissimilar characteristics and aspects than a filing cabinet type organisational system.

Then comes the individual in relation to both the truth and the constructed theory. People like to align themselves within this arrangement either in groups such as is seen in religion or as individuals. We find this comforting, this is human and it ok. Each person is never aligned perfectly with any one concept as the concepts are changing and amorphous therefore we all enjoy a unique and changing relationship with theory at different times of the day and at different times of our life. I celebrate this.

Scott’s statement the having a concept is important also sat uncomfortably with me. As one who does not recognise a need for a universal truth I find it hard to be attached to a single concept. I find theory and concept fascinating and useful on a descriptive level but am unsure as to what purpose it ultimately serves as I have sneaking suspicion that theorising is ultimately a self indulgent pursuit.

Week 3 19.10.09

Of the three articles we have been asked to read so far for this module ‘The Politics of Amnesia’ by Terry Eagleton is the one I am least comfortable writing about. I felt immediately alienated by the opening paragraph making reference to the late and great philosophers of our time of which I recognise the names and little more.

My gut feeling is that this article is somewhat sensationalist. I find it hard to believe that university libraries are full of ‘young Turks deep in incest and cyber-feminism’ or that middle class students are ‘at work on... subjects like vampirism and eye-gouging, cyborgs and porno movies’. I checked our library and they weren’t.

I found the tone of the piece to be confrontational, provocative, the voice of someone saying something to enjoy the reaction. It left me cold. It did however contain a valid description of the role of theory in relation to colonialism and developing countries. The writing on this topic (page eight onwards) was very revealing of the hypocrisies which accompany the politics of revolution, post colonialism and the establishment of new regimes. For me, I can never shake of the suspicion that theory and philosophy is a tool for the post rationalisation of events/phenomena that are non-rational, organic and difficult to generalise due to the complexities of specifics. What does this theoretical analysis achieve? It does reveal certain amusing statements and conclusions (I particularly like the bit on page 21 which describes how unpopular it is to be white and western but that having a shared identity with a marginal group helps to alleviate this, I find Irish relatives particularly useful for this purpose), it is also useful in developing theoretical and/or political argument. However in terms of overall gain the jury is still out. Perhaps I am of the new wave of theoreticians more concerned with the minutiae of everyday life and the discussion of specific fact than grandiose classical approaches. If this is the case then my ignorance of Lacan and Barthes may not only be fashionable but also to my advantage?

Week 2 13.10.09

It’s very easy to be critical about Dubai, to take a stance of superiority. ‘Ooh isn’t it awful what those rich Arabs are doing in Dubai, so unsustainable, such a humanitarian crisis’. However this is nothing new. Most civilisations have created a Dubai in their time of power; a roman forum in Celtic Britain must have seemed pretty wondrous, the pyramids must have seemed equally mystical in 2560BC (incidentally also built by slaves). What’s almost humorously ironic in this case is that the UAE have managed to create a monster mechanism that is not only built by the populations of our old colonies but also sustained by the incomes of those from the ‘enlightened’ nations. I’m not saying that what is happening in Dubai is by any means acceptable on a human level but part of me has a respect for these privileged few, who must be understandably laughing on the other side of their faces.

Can you, hand on heart, honestly say that you have no desire, however guilty, to witness any of the spectacles that can be found there? Are you not at all intrigued by the dinosaurs, the underwater hotel or the theme park of theme parks? The gigantism seems to tap into something primal, a desire to be awed. Herein lies the problem, yet we, the supposedly superior (in terms of economic development ) are in a position of power to stop this through our fuel consumption and tourism habits.

Which will win out?- logic or instinct?

Week 1 02.10.09

In the article 'Zaha the first great female architect' Meades describes an architect who is quite clearly not comfortable talking about architecture. What makes this statement more significant is that she is not any architect but an iconic architect with a reputation for being a tour de force- a guru. She will not describe her work other than in vague architectural jargon which quite clearly does not impress the author nor myself. She alludes to the process of her work in an almost mystical way and refuses to comment on the work of others. What is intelligible of her discourse has been said before and is firmly rooted in the institution.

I can however fully sympathise with this. It has taken drive, ambition and unwavering focus to be where she is now. Her work, the process of her work, the construct of herself is a precious commodity. It’s no wonder her life is contrived to form a predictably unremarkable background to the strange and mystical process of her creativity. She has a fear, as Meades notes, that if she or demystifies the formula of her success that her and her work will become of this world signifying the death of the icon she has created.

I find this all quite sad really. It must be a very lonely life at the top of the ivory tower.