| (no subject) |
[Nov. 20th, 2009|10:08 am] |
Why did the Battle Of Seattle succeed in shutting down the WTO (& the city) in '99 while dozens of other, lesser efforts to shut down the War(s) and other atrocities of capitalism while numerically larger have achieved nothing?
"We have to invest months of hard work in planning and coalition building. Seattle was built at the grass roots for months through educational efforts and the facilitation of creative planning by diverse groups. A coalition was built that included communities directly impacted by the WTO's actions. And it was a diffuse, decentralized coalition of affinity groups and clusters using open democratic decision-making and collective leadership. People were trained, and trained well, in nonviolent resistance, including in the use of locks and other equipment for the creation of human barriers. The city was divided into pie slices with the WTO meeting place at the center, and different groups had the responsibility to shut down their slice of the pie.
There is a myth that Seattle had the advantage of surprise. On the contrary, it had the advantage of extensive publicity. Plans were heavily publicized and, therefore, mainstreamed. Labor unions participated. Taxi drivers and longshoremen and warehouse workers went on strike. And a great deal of energy went into art and street theater used to energize and communicate messages, as well as to block streets. People were presented with very clear and immediate reasons they should participate. A flyer that was used is reproduced on the last page of the book. It explains, very succinctly, the damage done by the WTO to anyone who eats, works, breathes, goes to school, or lives. That's pretty inclusive."
From a story on After Downing Street about a new book called "The Battle of the Story of the Battle of Seattle," by David Solnit. |
|
|
| (no subject) |
[Nov. 19th, 2009|09:33 am] |
| [ | music |
| | Pulp - Cocaine Socialism | ] |
"We will only organize the detonation," an anonymous Situationist emphasized in the 1963 edition of the journal.(I.S.) "The free explosion must escape us and any other control forever."
IMHO not as good as the quote makes it sound but make up your own mind. IE read it here ; http://www.newhavenadvocate.com/article.cfm?aid=15540 |
|
|
| (no subject) |
[Nov. 18th, 2009|10:23 am] |
Greil Marcus has turned Lipstick Traces into a one man show now on in NYC:
"To mark the just-published 20th-anniversary edition of the book, Columbia University in partnership with the ARChive of Contemporary Music present Greil Marcus in a one-man performance of Lipstick Traces. With Lipstick Traces, Greil Marcus delved into the cross-currents, tangles, and whirlpools that made such vastly different movements as dada, lettrism, the Situationist International, and punk part of a single current. Altschul Auditorium at Columbia University. 417 International Affairs Building, 420 West 118th St. Free. 6:00pm."
H/t The Rumpus |
|
|
| (no subject) |
[Nov. 17th, 2009|11:39 pm] |
| [ | music |
| | Negatveland/Chumbawumba - The Abcs if anarchism | ] |
They cover EVERYTHING at Wikidumper:
"Penguins in popular culture
Penguins are popular around the world primarily for their unusually upright, waddling pace, their magnificent swimming ability, and (compared to other birds) lack of fear toward humans.Their striking black and white plumage is often likened to a tuxedo suit and generates humorous remarks about the bird being "well dressed".The bird is typically depicted as a friendly and comical figure, with considerable personal dignity despite its physical limitations. Perhaps in reaction to this cutesy stereotype, fictional penguins are occasionally presented as grouchy or even sinister. The popular Sanrio character Badtz Maru is an example, being cute yet somewhat surly. The 1960s television cartoon character Tennessee Tuxedo would often escape the confines of his zoo with his partner, Chumley the walrus. In the children's movie Madagascar, the penguins are cast as soldiers. In the animated series Wallace and Gromit a penguin called Feathers McGraw disguises himself as a chicken with a red rubber glove. Penguins are often portrayed as friendly and smart as well. Another example is in the anime Neon Genesis Evangelion, which features a warm-water penguin named Pen Pen.
Penguins experienced a resurgence in the mid-2000s thanks to films like March of the Penguins,Madagascar, Happy Feet, and Surf's Up."
I particularly liked the look of "Satanic ritual abuse and The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints" but apparently there wasn't any (or was there????) |
|
|
| (no subject) |
[Nov. 17th, 2009|01:20 pm] |
| [ | music |
| | Tilly and the Wall - Wild Like Children | ] |
Felt a bit uneasy about this myself;
"Tuesday, November 17, 2009
"Give and take"
John Key says there will be "give and take" in the negotiation of a free-trade deal with the US, and that we shouldn't rule out anything. Unfortunately, his specific examples - Pharmac and intellectual property law - are exactly the areas which we should be laying down as bottoms lines, and refusing to shift on. Pharmac saves us millions of dollars a year by leveraging our bulk purchasing power to bulk-buy pharmaceuticals and buying generic rather than branded drugs (the pharmaceutical equivalent of Pams or HomeBrand). But those savings mean that the American pharmaceutical industry - which has an army of lobbyists in Washington - doesn't get to screw us for monopoly profits, and so the Americans want to get rid of it.
Its a similar story on intellectual property. Currently despite the government's best efforts, we have a fairly standard intellectual property regime. But the US wants to impose on the world their draconian system of guilt upon accusation, near-permanent copyright (backed up by mandatory Digital Rights Management to prevent legal fair use), and bullshit patents for obvious "innovations" - all so Disney (who likewise has an army of lobbyists in Washington) can continue to screw profits out of cartoons that in any civilised country would already have entered the public domain.
These are both cases where we should not have a bar of any US demands, and any negotiation by the government will result in a significant loss to the people of New Zealand. But Key doesn't care about us - he only cares about getting the kudos for cutting the deal.
Meanwhile, I'm wondering how else Key is willing to sell us out to get a deal. Both ACC and the public health system limit the ability of US insurers to profit from human misery (and by cheating their clients). Are they on the table too? The problem with these sorts of negotiations is precisely that they are conducted in secret, giving us no effective oversight - and once they're signed, we can't get out of them; there's no Parliamentary ratification process to limit the ability of the government to make a bad deal. The result is that major policy changes can be made by stealth, with complete immunity from the OIA or parliamentary oversight. And there is nothing we can do about it. That sounds like something we should change..."
h/t No Right Turn |
|
|
| (no subject) |
[Nov. 16th, 2009|10:35 am] |
Really long (22pages) but still fascinating look at what the onetime No 2 SI theorist, long written off as a sellout & apologist for the status quo REALLY thinks now in 2009
"HUO: The Situationist International defined the situationist as someone who commits her- or himself to the construction of situations. What were those situations for you, concretely? How would you define the situationist project in 2009?
RV: By its very style of living and thinking, our group was already sketching out a situation, like a beachhead active within enemy territory. The military metaphor is questionable, but it does convey our will to liberate daily life from the control and stranglehold of an economy based on the profitable exploitation of man. We formed a “group-at-risk” that was conscious of the hostility of the dominant world, of the need for radical rupture, and of the danger of giving in to the paranoia typical of minds under siege. By showing its limits and its weaknesses, the situationist experience can also be seen as a critical meditation on the new type of society sketched out by the Paris Commune, by the Makhnovist movement and the Republic of Councils wiped out by Lenin and Trotsky, by the libertarian communities in Spain later smashed by the Communist Party. The situationist project is not about what happens once consumer society is rejected and a genuinely human society has emerged. Rather, it illuminates now how lifestyle can supersede survival, predatory behavior, power, trade and the death-reflex."
read the rest here; http://info.interactivist.net/node/13319
H/t Autonomedia |
|
|
| (no subject) |
[Nov. 15th, 2009|04:54 pm] |
| [ | music |
| | Microdisney - Peel Sessions | ] |
This sounds about right.
"Evicting Hone
So, after a week of bad press, the Maori Party has had enough of Hone Harawira, and want him out. This seems a little disproportionate - Hone is a loose cannon and a dick, but his recent behaviour doesn't seem to justify eviction from the party. So what else is going on? Turia's statement is revealing:
This is not just about a jaunt to Paris or bad language. It's been an ongoing issue and it's reached its end, very sadly
(Emphasis added)
My guess is that Hone has been calling bullshit on the Maori Party's increasingly subservient relationship with National and its support for policies which directly harm his constituents. And the leadership - which does very well out of that relationship, thankyou, with crown limos and a flag and a sense of utu - doesn't want to put up with him rocking the boat anymore. In a sense, he's being sacrificed to preserve Turia's relationship with John Key."
H/t No Right Turn
( & I even voted for the fuckers!!!!)
Ps. Against The Current had a good post on Hones own attitudes which are not entirely free of contradictions either you might say. |
|
|
| (no subject) |
[Nov. 15th, 2009|08:49 am] |
Ruh - roh
"New Zealand was a friend to Middle Earth, but it's no friend of the earth
Lord of the Rings country trades on its natural beauty, but emissions have risen 22% since it signed up to Kyoto
Fred Pearce
guardian.co.uk, Thursday 12 November 2009 10.28 GMT
As the world prepares for the Copenhagen climate negotiations next month, it is worth checking out the greenwash that has followed the promises made 12 years ago when the Kyoto protocol was signed.
A surprising number of countries have succeeded in raising their emissions from 1990 levels despite signing up to reduce them. They include a bundle of countries in the European Union, which collectively agreed to let some nations increase their emissions while others (mainly Britain and Germany) cut theirs. Step forward Spain, Portugal, Ireland and Greece — all with emissions up by more than a quarter.
Then there are the US and Australia, which both reneged on the protocol after signing it. And Canada, which never reneged but still has emissions up by a quarter (worse than the US) and shows no sign of contrition or of being called to account by the other signatories.
But my prize for the most shameless two fingers to the global community goes to New Zealand, a country that sells itself round the world as "clean and green".
New Zealand secured a generous Kyoto target, which simply required it not to increase its emissions between 1990 and 2010. But the latest UN statistics show its emissions of greenhouse gases up by 22%, or a whopping 39% if you look at emissions from fuel burning alone.
Some countries with big emissions growth started from a low figure in 1990. Arguably, they were playing catchup. There is no such excuse for New Zealand. Its emissions started high and went higher.
They are today 60% higher than those of Britain, per head of population. Among industrialised nations, they are only exceeded by Canada, the US, Australia and Luxembourg. In recent years a lot of Brits have headed for Christchurch and Wellington in the hope of a green life in a country where they filmed the Lord of the Rings. But it's a green mirage.
To rub our noses in it, last year New Zealand signed up to the UN's Climate Neutral Network, a list of nations that are "laying out strategies to become carbon neutral".
But if you read the small print of what New Zealand has actually promised, it is a measly 50% in emissions by 2050 – something even the US can trump.
Where do all these emissions come from? New Zealand turns out to be mining ever more filthy brown coal to burn in its power stations. It has the world's third highest rate of car ownership. And, with more cows than people, the country's increasingly intensive agricultural sector is responsible for approaching half the greenhouse gas emissions.
You might expect the UN Environment Programme to throw New Zealand off its list of countries supposedly pledged to head for climate neutrality. Sadly no. These steely guardians of the environment meekly say that the network "will not be policed... nor will UNEP verify claims".
Indeed, it seems to go to great lengths to deny reality. Check the UNEP website and you will find an excruciating hagiography about a "climate neutral journey to Middle Earth", in which everything from the local wines to air conditioning and Air New Zealand get the greenwash treatment.
After extolling the country's green credentials, it asks: "Have you landed in a dreamland?" Well, UNEP's reporter certainly has. He cheers New Zealand's "global leadership in tackling climate change", when the country's minister in charge of climate negotiations, Tim Groser, has been busy reassuring his compatriots that "we would not try to be 'leaders' in climate change."
This is not just political spin. It is also commercial greenwash. New Zealand trades on its greenness to promote its two big industries: tourism and dairy exports. Groser says his country's access to American markets for its produce is based on its positive environmental image. The government's national marketing strategy is underpinned by a survey showing that tourism would be reduced by 68% if the country lost its prized "clean, green image", and even international purchases of its dairy products could halve.
The trouble is, on the climate change front at least, that green image increasingly defies reality."
H/t The Gaurdian via Scoop |
|
|
| (no subject) |
[Nov. 15th, 2009|12:20 am] |
Felt like a relatively full day starting as it did at 6 am .Shit that happened: 2 -2 1/2 hours Garage sale prep followed then a slow but steady flow of punters through till 12pm . After a short sharp sleep spent another 3 or 4 hours pottering around the garden, then a fine nite of telly starting with the Antiques Roadshow, then a fantastic Argentinian Caper movie on Maori TV about swindlers called Nine Queens, sort of like a lighter House Of Games . Then the Sean Penn written & directed cult favourite Into The Wild on Dvd.
The last item was a dramatisation of the true story of a young guy from a gifted family who drops out in the early 90's & sparked off by Thoreau, Jack London & the like buggers off from civilisation to try to find meaning in the wilderness. I gather it's a bit of an Easy Rider for Gen X sort of thing. I don't really know what it means to other people , apart from knowing that it's very highly valued by those who've seen it but elements like the protagonist dying young & pretty, the appropriate & melancholy Eddie Vedder written & performed soundtrack (OK but a coupla tracks from Animal Collective or Moldy Peaches say wouldn't have gone amiss in some of the earlier, less highly-fraught scenes), the drop dead gorgeous look of various parts of the US especially "The Wild" of the title, Alaska north of human habitation,(especially the dying young thing which'll always go over big with the goths) meant it was always gonna appeal to those of a byronic frame of mind. I think I liked it . Sean Penn is obviously a gifted director (unlike some other actors turned directors like George Clooney & Marlon Brando). It's also a cautionary tale about the whole foraging thing . IE to be sure what you're eating isn't going to paralyse you & lead to a slow agonising death.
I'll be taking it back to the library tomorrow if anyone else wants to check it out. |
|
|
| (no subject) |
[Nov. 13th, 2009|10:03 am] |
Screening at the Red House in Syracuse New York (in case you're in the neighbourhood) :
"Overcoming the Spectacle: A Cinema of Pure Means today at 6 p.m. at the Red House, 201 S. West Street, Syracuse.
This short series of three films looks at the influence of Situationist detourned cinema starting with seminal American political filmmaker Bruce Conner's most well known work, “A MOVIE,” followed by the lesser-known work of Hungarian multimedia artist, Péter Forgács. Forgács' films, “Bourgeois Dictionary” and “Either/Or,” are comprised of found home movie footage and examine the production of the spectacle in everyday home life.
The night will also include a feature by one of Bruce Conner's students, Craig Baldwin, whose “Tribulation 99” uses found footage to tell the story of the alien invasion of Quetzalcoatl while speaking about the United States imperialist actions in Central America.
“A MOVIE” and “Tribulation 99” will be screened in their original 16mm. ”Tribulation 99” features a special video introduction from Baldwin."
H/t The Oneida Daily Dispatch |
|
|
| (no subject) |
[Nov. 12th, 2009|09:58 pm] |
Been reading American Splendour ; My Movie Year graphic novel out of the library which is pretty much everything Harvey Pekar wrote & /or had published the year his life was transformed into the superb film of that name, 2004. This time it covers quite a bit of his cd/lp/78 reviewing side gig in comic form , ie reviews & stories about incredibly obscure but interesting blues, jazz & rock'n'roll artists from the start of recording at the turn of the 20th century right up till now, most of whom have some connection to H's hometown of Cleveland Ohio. The two who jumped out for me were Jimmy Scott , whose life story is here; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jimmy_Scott
& the Sockmonkeys who unfortunately don't appear to have discovered or been discovered by the Youtube.
Quite good eh?
Now trying to decide on the next book to read between 54, Richard Price book #7 (& last), a Patrick O'Brian, the Douglas Coupland I started b4 getting distracted, or M.Postone. |
|
|
| (no subject) |
[Nov. 11th, 2009|11:37 pm] |
"Common everyday sociopaths
WHEN YOU SAY THE WORD "sociopath" most people think of serial killers. But although many serial killers are sociopaths, there are far more sociopaths leading ordinary lives. Chances are you know a sociopath. I say "ordinary lives," but what they do is far from ordinary. Sociopaths are people without a conscience. They don't have the normal empathy the rest of us take for granted. They don't feel affection. They don't care about others. But most of them are good observers, and they have learned how to mimic feelings of affection and empathy remarkably well.
Most people with a conscience find it very difficult to even imagine what it would be like to be without one. Combine this with a sociopath's efforts to blend in, and the result is that most sociopaths go undetected.
Because they go undetected, they wreak havoc on their family, on people they work with, and on anyone who tries to be their friend. A sociopath deceives, takes what he (or she) wants, and hurts people without any remorse. Sociopaths don't feel guilty. They don't feel sorry for what they've done. They go through life taking what they want and giving nothing back. They manipulate and deceive and convincingly lie without the slightest second thought. They leave a path of confusion and upset in their wake.
Who are these people? Why are they the way they are? Apparently it has little to do with upbringing. Many studies have been done trying to find out what kind of childhood leads to sociopathy. So far, nothing looks likely. They could be from any kind of family. It is partly genetic, and partly mystery.
But researchers have found that the brains of sociopaths function differently than normal people. And their brains function in a way that makes their emotional life unredeemably shallow. And yet they are capable of mimicking emotions like professional actors.
Sociopaths and psychopaths are the same thing. The original name for this disorder was "psychopath" but the general public and media confused it with "psycho" and "psychotic" so in the 1930s the name was changed to sociopath. Recently the media again caused a misperception that sociopaths were always serial killers, so now many call the condition "antisocial personality disorder (ASPD)."
But some experts think ASPD includes many things like narcissism, paranoia, etc., including sociopathy. And others think ASPD is the same thing as sociopathy, but the diagnostic criteria used to describe and diagnose ASPD is different than sociopathy, so for the purposes of this article, we'll stay with the term "sociopathy."
Sociopaths don't have normal affection with other people. They don't feel attached to others. They don't feel love. And that is why they don't have a conscience. If you harmed someone, even someone you didn't know, you would feel guilt and remorse. Why? Because you have a natural affinity for other human beings. You know how it feels to suffer, to fear, to feel anguish. You care about others.
If you hurt someone you love, the guilt and remorse would be very bad because of your affection for him or her. Take that attachment and affection away and you take away remorse, guilt, and any kind of normal feelings of fairness. That's a sociopath.
HOW COMMON ARE THEY?
Some researchers say only about one percent of the general population are sociopaths. Others put the figure at three or four percent. The reason the estimates vary is first of all, not everyone has been tested, of course, but also because sociopathy is a sliding scale. A person can be very sociopathic or only slightly, and anywhere in between. It is a continuum. So how sociopathic does someone have to be before you call them a sociopath? That's a tough question and it is why the estimates vary.
But clearly sociopaths are fairly common and not easy to detect. Even when the evidence is staring you in the face, you may have difficulty admitting that someone you know, someone you trusted, even someone you love, is a sociopath. But the sooner you admit it, the faster your life can return to normal. Face the facts and you may save yourself a lot of suffering.
Most of the information in this article is from two excellent books I strongly recommend: Without Conscience: The Disturbing World of the Psychopaths Among Us, and The Sociopath Next Door. The first book is by Robert Hare, who has made his career out of studying sociopaths. He is one of the leading, if not the leading expert on the subject. His insights and examples are compelling. But because Hare has done most of his research in prisons, sometimes his book seems a little removed from everyday reality. We don't very often run into rapists and cold-blooded killers. The second book, by Martha Stout, brings it to the everyday level, describing the kinds of people we are likely to meet in ordinary life.
HOW TO KNOW
The big question is, of course, how can you know whether someone is a sociopath or not? It is a difficult question and even experts on the subject can be fooled. If you suspect that someone close to you is a sociopath, I suggest you read both of the books I mentioned and think hard about it. Compare that person to the other people in your life. Ask yourself these questions:
1. Do you often feel used by the person?
2. Have you often felt that he (or she) doesn't care about you?
3. Does he lie and deceive you?
4. Does he tend to make contradictory statements?
5. Does he tend to take from you and not give back much?
6. Does he often appeal to pity? Does he seem to try to make you feel sorry for him?
7. Does he try to make you feel guilty?
8. Do you sometimes feel he is taking advantage of your good nature?
9. Does he seem easily bored and need constant stimulation?
10. Does he use a lot of flattery? Does he interact with you in a way that makes you feel flattered even if he says nothing overtly complimentary?
11. Does he make you feel worried? Does he do it obviously or more cleverly and sneakily?
12. Does he give you the impression you owe him?
13. Does he chronically fail to take responsibility for harming others? Does he blame everyone and everything but himself?
And does he do these things far more than the other people in your life? If you answered "yes" to many of these, you may be dealing with a sociopath. For sure you're dealing with someone who isn't good for you, whatever you want to call him.
I like Martha Stout's way of detecting sociopaths: "If ... you find yourself often pitying someone who consistently hurts you or other people, and who actively campaigns for your sympathy, the chances are close to one hundred percent that you are dealing with a sociopath."
WHAT DO THEY WANT?
This is an interesting question. Of course most of our purposes are strongly influenced by our connections and affections with others. Our relationships with others, and our love for them, give us most of the meaning in life. So if a sociopath doesn't have these things, what is left? What kind of purposes do they have?
The answer is chilling: They want to win. Take away love and relationships and all you have left is winning the game, whatever the game is. If they are in business, it is becoming rich and defeating competitors. If it is sibling rivalry, it is defeating the sibling. If it is a contest, the goal is to dominate. If a sociopath is the envious sort, winning would be making the other lose, or fail, or be frustrated or embarrassed.
A sociopath's goal is to win. And he is willing to do anything at all to win.
Sociopaths have nothing else to think about, so they can be very clever and conniving. Sociopaths are not busy being concerned with relationships or moral dilemmas or conflicting feelings, so they have much more time to think about clever ways to gain your trust and stab you in the back, and how do it without anyone knowing what's happening.
One of the questions in the list above was about boredom. This is a real problem for sociopaths and they seem fanatically driven to prevent boredom. The reason it looms so large for them (and seems so strange to us) is that our relationships with people occupy a good amount of our time and attention and interest us intensely. Take that away and all you have is "playing to win" which is rather shallow and empty in comparison. So boredom is a constant problem for sociopaths and they have an incessant urge to keep up a level of stimulation, even negative stimulation (drama, worry, upset, etc.).
And here I might mention that the research shows sociopaths don't feel emotions the same way normal people do. For example, they don't experience fear as unpleasant. This goes a long way to explaining the inexplicable behavior you'll see in sociopaths. Some feelings that you and I might find intolerable might not bother them at all.
HOW TO DEAL WITH A SOCIOPATH
There is no known cure or therapy for sociopathy. In fact, some evidence suggests that therapy makes them worse because they use it to learn more about human vulnerabilities they can then exploit. They learn how to manipulate better and they learn better excuses that others will believe.
Given all that, there is only one solution for dealing with a sociopath: Get him or her completely out of your life for good. This seems radical, and of course, you want to be fairly sure your diagnosis is correct, but you need to protect yourself from the drain on your time, attention, money, and good attitude. Healing or helping a sociopath is a pointless waste of your life. That is not your mission. It's not your responsibility. You have your own goals and your own life, and those are your responsibility.
In Hare's book, he says before you diagnose someone as a sociopath, he recommends you get a full clinical diagnostic, including an extensive interview with the sociopath by a qualified psychotherapist, plus interviews with the sociopath's bosses, co-workers, friends, and family. Yeah, right. Good luck on that one. I agree, that would be ideal, but if you can get a sociopath to submit to an interview, I would be astonished. So you'll have to do the best you can with the information you can get.
I don't recommend you tell anyone you have diagnosed him as a sociopath. In fact, I strongly urge you not to. I don't even know if it's a good idea to tell anyone about your conclusion. Just get the sociopath out of your life with as little fanfare as you can. The only exception I would make to this rule is if the sociopath is making someone else's life a living hell, it seems wrong to leave her to the wolves while you slink off. I don't recommend you try to convince your friend she is dealing with a sociopath. I recommend that you simply say you got a lot of insight from this or that book or whatever, and let your friend draw her own conclusions. It is not your mission to save your friend, either. Tell her what you know and if she ignores your warning, that's her problem, not yours. Because you said something, she may figure it out eventually.
If this all sounds cold or heartless, maybe you're not dealing with a sociopath, or maybe she or he hasn't driven you to the point of madness (yet). But remember what the solution is; you may someday need it.
And besides, the point of all this dismal information is so you no longer need to think about such negative things and so you can turn your attention to positive, life-affirming, uplifting goals of your own."
H/t Youmeworks
|
|
|
| (no subject) |
[Nov. 11th, 2009|09:54 am] |
|
Forgot to mention dropping into Coca yesterday - There's a show called The Art Of Protest by Sam Mahon. Worth a look for the head of Nick Smith sculpted in cow poo alone. |
|
|
| (no subject) |
[Nov. 11th, 2009|09:36 am] |
"Help for choosing the right font for a book
Brandstrup
10.Nov.2009 5.29am
Fellow members,
I’m looking for some advice to pick the right type to set a book with. The book is an anthology of articles about activism.
The idea is to mimic the publications from the Situationist International, which was a primarily French movement from the 1950’s and 1960’s. What would a French typographer from that period typically choose for body text? And no, I will not use Avant Garde ;-).
The style of the situationist is very lo-fidelity, cut’n’paste and much like an underground newspaper. It’s rather elitist and cares little about optimizing for such things as legibility.
What would you go for?
riccard0
10.Nov.2009 7.19am
That sure is an interesting project!
The problem is twofold: for one, if all you want is to mimic the typographic choices of a french publication from the early sixties, you risk to end up with something bland (as in the example shown in the page you linked)*.
The most important side, though, is that in so doing you would betray the very spirit of situationism.
Situationism is about what works now. It’s about subverting conventions and conventional wisdom. And using them to attain a political goal. Art is the primary political weapon of the situationists.
A trivial suggestion would be, for example, setting an article about animal rights/anti-fur activism using the poshest didoni** available.
* Which, to tell the truth, is italian, but you got the point.
** http://typophile.com/search/?keys=fashion%20magazine"
Discuss |
|
|
| (no subject) |
[Nov. 11th, 2009|09:23 am] |
"NEW YORK, NY – A paparazzo dropped dead after taking a photo of Lady Gaga!
Lady Gaga is a pop star who has become as famous for her outfits as she has her music. She wears a new and often bizarre outfit for every single event she attends, making her a prime target for celebrity photographers.
On Monday night, Lady Gaga attended the ACE Awards in New York City. Photographer A.J. Solkaner immediately took a photo of the singer, her face obscured in a spooky black veil.
But just minutes later, he collapsed on the red carpet! He was rushed to Bellevue Hospital but was pronounced dead on arrival. Philip Vaughan, the owner of ACE Pictures which Solkaner worked for, confirmed he died of a heart attack.
Solkaner was only in his 50s. Vaughan said that the photographer “was very well liked, he was very well respected … He was a real photographer and he did it because he loved it.”
Brian Lamb, another photographer working the event, said, “By the time I saw him, he was already blue and people were starting to give him CPR.”
Was this a freak coincidence? Or something more sinister?"
H/t Weekly World News via Disinfo |
|
|
| (no subject) |
[Nov. 10th, 2009|11:49 pm] |
Yeah gidday.
Today I went & saw Michael Moores' Capitalism A Love Story at the Regent, which was about as good as I expected but nowhere near as good as I hoped. Prime flaws were; basing his whole argument on positions articulated by 3 priests- like the Catholic Church (or any church) has the right to claim the moral high ground after the proven coverups & and moving elsewhere of priests repeatedly practising anal rape on choirboys, not that protestants (esp born again ones) are that much better given their deep involvement in the horror show that was the Bush/Cheney imperial presidency ( In fact following recent events I now have a theme for the next Ultrazine so thanx Jared, Dan, Tim - ripping Christian "anarchists" a new arsehole, or possibly two). The second flaw was that it was all anecdotal, not the facts on the pre crash depredations of Goldman Sachs or the utter heinousness of the 700 Billion $ bailout of Wall Street, but the other side of the argument, the "People power" responses to it, he needed to spend more than about 3 or 4 minutes on that - Look to Argentina at least. Also I think he could have gone way farther in defining or possibly redefining Democracy, Finally I don't think Obama's delivered nearly as much of the "Change you can count on" as Moore obviously expected but then they're both liberal, & quite gutsy ones so kudos for that much. It's not the fuckin' second coming tho'. Maybe he should go back to channeling Greg Palast.
Trailers for both Avatar & The Lovely Bones looked good enough to eat.
I think Jo-king better watch her step - I think it's pretty well established that "Beyond Resistance" WILL NOT TOLERATE having their urine extracted - especially on Indy. The cult leaders could PURGE her!!!!
Watched Marlon Brandos' biker classic The Wild One earlier today. Now I know where the name Black Rebel Motorcycle Club comes from.
In lieu of buying a scratchie I bought the stuff (all stuff I use) at Countdown that could win me a Suzuki Swift, &/or 2 lots of $5000 from this weeks' mailer. I think I deserve a lucky break. |
|
|
| (no subject) |
[Nov. 7th, 2009|06:04 pm] |
Just read a chapter of M. Postones' Time, Labour, & Social Domination called Contradiction and Determinate Negation. Hafta report experiencing my first "Aha!" moment with regard to Mr Postone. The Game is afoot I tell you Holmes (or Homes if you're a Wire fan).
Some good news on Natrad the other day - Blair has been completely rejected at the first hurdle as a potential president of the EU by a veto sponsored by both France (Sarkozy) & Germany (Merkel) . Apparently the vision of a conservative consensus on world governance didn't survive past Bush's retreat to Texas whipped by the ineffable forces of objective reality.
Had an unexpected call from Brother #1 in Auckland yesterday, He's really excited by the fact that it's 81 days till he turns 65 & gets to retire. So he should be. He's worked like a slave from the age of 16 without a single break apart from the officially approved number of holidays. In anticipation of retirement He's bought about 5 land & seagoing recreational vehicles (canoes, yachts etc) & actually started painting again (After a gap of about 30 odd years). Good luck to him I say.
Nice day today. |
|
|
| navigation |
| [ |
viewing |
| |
most recent entries |
] |
| [ |
go |
| |
earlier |
] |
| |
|
|
![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif){kind=small}
ultra_151's journal