Welcome to the Desert of the Real

Brian McHale has claimed that there is a" peculiarly postmodern form of temporality: the vision of apocalypse, of the end of history."  While that has been clearly evident, in a seemingly obsessive way, in the novels of Douglas Coupland, as well as the eco-disaster of Davis Foster Wallace's Infinite Jest, it has somewhat appeared overly paranoid.  Of course Slavoj Zizek would argue that paranoia is the naturalized conditioin of post-modernity, and his work Living in the End Times explores some of the current situation.  But, it is becoming more and more clear that apocalyptic concerns are not solely in domain of neurotic writers in the world of postmodernism.  It is an ever present element in the historical world of post-modernity itself.   From the closed White House meetings of Ronald Reagan and Ollie North, to the continued lunatic ramblings of Michele Bachmann, to the violent injections of Al Qaeda et al into the civilized world, the end of modernity (and the Cold War) has seemed unsatisfactory to those who wished that it would have been the end of history as well.  However, the attempt to end history has only projected it father along, throwing us back in.  As Baudrillard notes in The Illusion of the End, we are erasing our progress. I conjecture that this eschatology is not just on the minds of a few extremists, it is part of the fabric of the current historical reality.  The break in the signifying chain that has revealed not only the underlying gaps in mental processes (the Symbolic and linguistic), but has been injected into the physical and practical as well.  The ideology that holds back the Real from invading the civilized Symbolic world is no longer sustainable.  The sooner we realize this danger, of ideology as means to sustain civilization, the sooner we can avoid further calamities like the one in Paris today. The message of Zizek's Welcome to the Desert of the Real continues, and will continue, to return.

For now, we can only reflect on how far we haven't come since 9/11:

2015 Fargo Airsho

 2015.07.25, Fargo, ND

Viper Lounge Post
Photo Album

Bodycount

 The recent outbreak of violent attacks in America have generated tremendous amounts of internet discussion - most of it completely useless and irrational, appealing only to the primitive reptilian part of the human brain.  For a more rational, intelligent and civilized discusiion, here are a few points to consider:

I: The Confederate Battle Flag

First, this talk of "banning" a flag is pointless, misleading and obscures the real problems.  No such thing has happened.  What individual citizens do is very different from what the State should be doing.  No one arguing for freedom should be proposing that an individual should not own a Nazi flag.  But, if a state capital was displaying a Nazi  flag, or an ISIS one, I would hope everyone would call for its removal.  While these flags may not have a historical connection to the Southern States, that only highlights a larger problem.    Regardless of any racists connotations to the Confederate Battle Flag, which are not only recorded as a part of its inception but have certainly taken on those meanings in the Post-Civil War and Post-Civil Rights movement era, its represents a defunct government - one that lost a war against The United States of America.  For any state to fly it is a challenge to US Federal authority amounting to treason.  It's time the South got over losing the war.  For those suggesting that this move is simply a distraction from the real problem - they are absolutely right.  However, look at how this happened.  It was a Republican governor and legislature that enacted this removal.  It was not a liberal attack on the right-wing.  But it was a distraction from talking about gun violence - a preemptive move by the right to preserve their monolithic grip on the second amendment.

Second, as for any perceived continual revolt against the Confederacy, it is important to make a distinction.  There is a difference between history and ideology.  While history is locked into an objective realm, ideology continues as a subjective possibility, a "live option."  This is what separates the Battle Flag from Civil War monuments.  Memorials such as Stone Mountain  (while perhaps best not maintained by taxpayer funding)  point only to the past.  But a flag, as an ideological symbol, continues to evolve in meaning and stands for something now.  For an individual to adopt such a symbol and ideology is the price of living in a free country, but once again, it is not the place of the State to adopt, promote, and support such ideologies.  That is dangerous, unethical, and an ultimate restriction of freedom.  Groups such a the Sons of Confederate Veterans make no sense in the twenty-first century.  They may have had a place for a generation or two, but are now so far removed from history that they only perpetuate ideology.  Would we find German organizations of Sons of the Third Reich acceptable?  If not, then we should take time to reevaluate. As for symbols of ideology, flags work as symbols because their meaning is dynamic  - they represent something else and that something can develop on its own.  To suggest The Confederate Battle Flag is similar to the Egyptian pyramids is beyond stupid.  The pyramids are not symbols in themselves.  They are full objective structures with a fixed meaning.  Ignoring the fact they were built by trade laborers not slaves, they are not used by a State to symbolize slavery and further its promotion.  They couldn't be because they don't exist as something which can only represent something else - a signifier .  But flags are nothing in themselves, their meaning is only constituted by their use in context of ideology.


II. American Gun Violence

Any attempted talk to make an attempt at talk about gun violence is immediately shot down as unconstitutional.  For those that say there can be no restriction on gun ownership:  The history of American law shows that there can indeed be limits that are not unconstitutional.  Ignoring the fact (as usual) that it states a "well regulated militia", if there were no cases for limitation, then felons and mentally ill people would have to be given the freedom to purchase weapons.  Furthermore, why do we not have personally owned nuclear weapons, attack helicopters, etc ? (I'm not being flippant, there is a valid question - where does the line get drawn).  At the least we would have fully automatic weapons.  But these limitations have been continually upheld.  Just as there are constitutional limits to the first amendment, Hate speech, inciting a riot, slander, yelling "fire" in a crowded theater, etc.  I don't see why a national registry, limitations on high capacity magazines and high-power assault -style weapons would be an infringement, as long as a right is retained for the fundamental ownership of firearms for hunting, self-defense, sport (whatever that is beside practicing killing), etc.  I defer to Newsweek for further discussion.

The idea that society should bear no responsibility for events such as the Charleston shooting shows a myopic view of how people and society work.  This notion, while perhaps internally correct, lacks application in an external world.  Of course, no one is arguing against the responsibility of the moral agent, as apparent from the fact that only the agent is the one prosecuted for the crime.  However:

1. People are a product of society,  increasingly in the world of the de-centered self.  One does not become a homicidal violent racist in a vacuum.  One may be mentally deranged or have sociopathic tendencies on their own, but to find a target for their violent impulses often comes from a larger social message.  It comes from a shared ideology.  One that is propagated through media (not mainstream) that promotes fear and xenophobia, and supports the means such acts to be carried out.  Certainly those that expound such ideas have some responsibility for the psychopathic environment rather than the actual crime.

2.  We live in civilized states through a social contract in order to protect each other and promote good for all individuals in the group.  Failing to do something to actively prevent harm to innocent members of society is a moral violation, just as the individual's act are.

3.  The idea that society is not to blame is not one that the right adheres to in any event other than guns.  They are quick to attack morally deficient fields of media, music, video-games, and to blame a lewd and obscene entertainment industry.  Furthermore, they attack society as "degenerate"when it supports positive and personally natural behavior that they disagree with.

4.  When such events are caused by a Muslim, the entire cultural is immediately blamed.  They are all the same and a particular actor is merely the executor of that culture.  However, when those of a White and/or Christian culture act in a terroristic manner, they are quickly blamed as individuals before any of the previous methods can be launched against that background.

So, while a restricted notion of responsibility may have some legal and ethical truths, it is morally, socially, and practically deficient.  For society to protect the rights of the individual over the rights of the many to have security,  is a morally deficiency.  The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few.  While preemptively enforcing legal principles against an individual in areas such as thought crime would certainly be an overstep into liberty rights,  proactively preventing irreversible harm to another individual is far more understandable and necessary. Worst of all, following this reasoning leads to no practical solution.  If this is your response, you're part of the problem, because nothing can be done to prevent these tragedies, it only allows for a reaction.  Rather society needs to actively deal with the problems of society.  This is another example of why libertarianism is a scam.  The only conceivable response to this view of personal responsibility would be to have everyone in the church armed.  At best one person would have lost their life while the others could engage return fire.  And one innocent loss is still too many for an advanced society.  While it is impossible to prevent all such events in a free society, proactive steps in the restriction of the means for carrying out such effective attacks can be made and ultimately reduce the devastation caused.

The divide found in American opinion is interestingly analyzed in this discussion of the separate American countries which comprise the United States.  And here is another discussion on gun control, now slightly out of date, but since nothing has changed, still just as relevant.

Roll the Bones / Grand Finale

Rush 2015.05.12 @ The Xcel Energy Center, St Paul, MN.

In the range of songs about ice and fire, Rush's work seems to fall on the side of fire, at least in terms of the intensity of their stage imagery and effects and the matching fast-paced hard-rock presentation of this tour.  For R40, the entire concept was a journey back through their catalog.  This would have had more impact if it were not for The Time Machine tour in 2010 (never-mind the R30 tour).  Starting with Clockwork Angels the set went in reverse chronological progression.  As far as a a setlist design, this seems rather unworkable to me, but it did provide an interesting study of their music.  As a whole, the set felt rather imbalanced, starting with a heavy emphasis on a Clockwork Angels for the first half hour (material which was featured quite heavily on their recent tour).  The next hour of the first set showcased 2011-1981.  The remaining hour and half covered 1980-1973.  So, while there were a number of interesting rarities (including Jacob's Ladder, Natural Science and Lakeside Park among songs which had not been played in 38 years), their peak years in both popularity, and in my opinion, artistic achievement, were rush-ed through. Presto and Hold Your Fire were unfortunately completely omitted, as was Power Windows.  The only inclusion from Vapor Trails was the weak One Little Victory (the previous night's debut of How It Is would have been a far superior  inclusion, and a live debut of Vapor Trails would have been even better).  Animate and the return of Roll the Bones were a welcome high point which finally animated the crowd, with the former involving video appearances by Jason Segel, and Peter Dinklage (whose brother appeared as a member of the orchestra on the last tour).  More interesting than the set selection was the stage show.  Starting with props from the Clockwork Angels and Snakes and Arrows tours, jumpsuit covered crew members dismantled the stage in an actualized Moving Pictures cover, until the encore consisted on only some on-stage spotlights, a gymnasium background, and a disco-ball - the setup of an aspiring garage band.  What was most notable through the musical thread was what began as hard and progressive opened up into a spacious, melodic, song-oriented material, and then faded back into long-form progressive hard rock.  While coming full circle, dismantling was the theme, as they deconstructed all of the superstructure that had been constructed over their music for several decades, leaving only their original essence. If they're true to their word, this was their last major tour.  It's likely they will appear again in some form, but if this isn't the end it is the beginning of the end.

Setlist:

The Anarchist / Clockwork Angels / Headlong Flight (with "Drumbastica" drum solo) / Far Cry / The Main Monkey Business / One Little Victory / Animate / Roll the Bones / Distant Early Warning / Subdivisions / Tom Sawyer / YYZ / The Spirit of Radio / Natural Science / Jacob's Ladder / Cygnus X-1 Book II: Hemispheres Part I: Prelude / Cygnus X-1 (The Voyage Part 1 & 3 with drum solo) / Closer to the Heart / Xanadu /2112 Part I: Overture / 2112 Part II: The Temples of Syrinx / 2112 Part IV: Presentation / 2112 Part VII: Grand Finale/ Lakeside Park / Anthem / What You're Doing / Working Man

+: What was presented of the middle years: Animate, Roll the Bones

-: Too much Clockwork Angels, over-played 2112 & Moving Pictures

Subdivisions

The launch of Better Call Saul is not wholly what I expected, not the 75% comedy that it was advertised as.  It's better than that.  It is a continuation of Breaking Bad, and everything about that show that was great TV.  Stylistically, the shots consisting of a slow tempo and attention to the trivial, mundane details with a Zen-like quality.  Thematically, this show continues to explore what happens within the cracks of society -those gaps and spaces that are ignored by the social construct in the postmodern age.  On top of that is the resulting malleability of everything, particularly ethics and identity.  The empty deserts and ominous late night streets apparently contrast with the world of bland mini-malls, carefully manicured lawns and suburban homes.  The contrast between the urban and the empty natural open up a gateway- which leads to the space of the Real - the articulated potential experience that exists outside of the carefully structured world.  These two shows represent Baudrillard's America, and the escape from the empty blandness of the contemporary era, as presented in the works of Douglas Coupland.  When the modern constructs fail to give one authenticity, the only path to self hood is though the wilderness of the Real, in which self-chosen acts facilitate meaning, create a purpose, and allow control over one's own life.  These are the worlds obscured by "normal" society.