And then Colectiva hipped me to the work of Alvvino, who does a really excellent turn-of-the-century surrealism.
a work by alvvino
It got me thinking, a propos of nothing in particular, about our past century. When will “turn-of-the-century” come to connote 2000 rather than 1900? Maybe 2000 gets to be “turn-of-the-millennium” and we can get another 100 years out of “turn-of-the-century”.
When you look back on the rapid-fire changes of the 20th century, it’s hard to imagine what the turn of the next century could possibly look like. The quickening, accelerated culture, koyaanisqatsi — whatever you want to call it — it’s sure to be substantial. Just as it would assuredly be difficult for a turn-of-the-century person to parse 21st Century Life, how hard would be for the millennial to understand what’s going on in 2100, should he end of there by virtue of time-travel, cryogenics or clairvoyant vision.
Is it possible that mores and reality will change so much that it would be unnavigable for one of our peers? Most likely not, as language does not completely transform that quickly and certain innate qualities exist throughout the continuity of mankind. We could communicate with our turn-of-the-century forebears. But to imagine what they would make of electric cars and 747s and instant communication between any two parties.
At my overtly liberal college, we studied the great scholars of deconstructionism and postmodernity. We ate our Foucault and drank our Lacan. Apparently, it was not just us spoiled lefty whiners who were paying attention.
One of the key themes of postmodern thinking is the power of language to re-shape reality. In seminar after seminar, we discussed the way that using “he” as a default pronoun for all humanity was the way the male patriarchy retained its dominance. We talked about the loaded racist undercurrents of our language — how black had developed connotations of evil and ignorance and white became associated the purity and elucidation. And so on.
Was Karl Rove in my class and I didn’t know it? The Republican Party has had some success with its renaming campaigns and now seems to have embraced it as a primary strategy. With its “enhanced interrogation techniques” and “extraordinary renditions,” the Republicans have clearly felt some success in changing the public’s perception about reality through language. Now they’re hooked and can’t seem to create any policy solutions beyond efforts to get people to say things differently. And so the latest from the RNC — the initiative to change “Democrat” to “Democrat Socialist.” RNC Chairman Michael Steele is down on the idea, but rumor has it he’s a lame duck anyway.
Previous efforts have gotten purchase by circulation through FOX News foot soldiers and a constant drumbeat from the rank-and-file in Washington. I don’t think a Congressional bill will make it far. (Can you try to pass a bill renaming the opposing party?) A successful effort might horrify the base into taking more action — “Good God, they’re socialists?! I didn’t know how bad it was!” For the most part, anybody who dutifully starts using the new term already believed it anyway.
At any rate, if the Republicans are into reframing everything, they should be dreaming up some euphemisms for “recession”.
Alright guys, the page hits are down on this blog. We all need to step it up and start reading it a little more, especially since I’ve started updating it more than once every three months. Think about what you might be missing. I wonder how many of the hits are coming from me viewing my updates. That might account for most of them.
I found this link off Ween’s site about a show they did with the Butthole Surfers in 1987. It’s a very funny interview. I doubt there are any shows like this any more, especially in light of the Great White tragedy, and it’s probably just as well.
But I still say it’s never been like the old days. I may listen to a bunch of soft acoustic and airy fairy sound-pad electronica these days, but these shows were what I grew up on.
RSS Feed