Kate | Slininger

MEDIA STUDIES GRAD STUDENT AT THE NEW SCHOOL
Recent Tweets @kslininger

Still from Nathaniel Dorsky’s August and After. (source)

By the way, do you know how General Schwarzkopf, the great Gulf War strategist, celebrated his victory? He had a huge party at Disney World. These festivities in the palace of the imaginary were a worthy conclusion to such a virtual war. But the Disney enterprise goes beyond the imaginary. Disney, the precursor, the grand initiator of the imaginary as virtual reality, is now in the process of capturing all the real world to integrate it into its synthetic universe, in the form of a vast “reality show” where reality itself becomes a spectacle [vient se donner en spectacle], where the real becomes a theme park. The transfusion of the real is like a blood transfusion, except that here it is a transfusion of real blood into the exsanguine universe of virtuality. After the prostitution of the imaginary, here is now the hallucination of the real in its ideal and simplified version.

Disney wins at yet another level. It is not only interested in erasing the real by turning it into a three-dimensional virtual image with no depth, but it also seeks to erase time by synchronizing all the periods, all the cultures, in a single traveling motion, by juxtaposing them in a single scenario. Thus, it marks the beginning of real, punctual and unidimensional time, which is also without depth. No present, no past, no future, but an immediate synchronism of all the places and all the periods in a single atemporal virtuality. Lapse or collapse of time: that’s properly speaking what the fourth dimension [la quatrieme dimension] is about. It is the dimension of the virtual, of real time; a dimension which, far from adding to the others, erases them all.
Baudrillard, Jean. “Disneyworld Company.” Liberation, March 4, 1996.

areasofmyexpertise:

Goodbye, Maurice, id of children, uncompromisingly beautiful, strange, mean, sweet, deep, dark, and true.

Via “N222011,” this is from “Tell Them Anything You Want,” a beautiful film by Lance Bangs and Spike Jonze.

(Double-heart-rendingly, it was and is distributed by Adam Yauch’s company Oscilloscope.)

That is all. 

theatlantic:

“This is how Maurice Sendak sometimes sent his letters. Just imagine getting one.” (via Letters Of Note)

youranonnews:

Know the feeling?

youranonnews:

Know the feeling?

sufjansfriends:

Sufjan, Shara and Unknown (Vito?)

100% Vito.

sufjansfriends:

Sufjan, Shara and Unknown (Vito?)

100% Vito.

I’m wrestling with my opinion of this documentary, which was obviously brilliant in form but possibly conventional in its perspective of war. I initially interpreted it as subversive, but am reading more about the weaknesses of the content. Here’s an excerpt from Dave Saunders’ Documentary:

“It is a war film, nominally about a specific war, yet it also uses the general trope of war, filtered through shock-and-awe visuals, as a vivid backdrop for its creator’s driving preoccupations - which, together with the artwork’s heady brew, arguably fail to contribute to the historical record, whilst ironically serving to diffuse the savageness of the revenge killings: ‘What comfort is it to the relatives of the Sabra and Shatila victims,’ writes Anthony Lane, ‘that a few conscripts who stood by and did nothing are now free to articulate, and even to lyricise, their internal pain?’ (in Hudson 2008: 1).” (170)

It did seem insufficient to dramatize a genocide without any care to represent the Palestinians’ perspective (it only shows them as anonymous victims in shockingly emotional moments), but I found Folman’s admission to playing the “role of the Nazi,” to be quite profound self-criticism. Either way, I still think the film is “important” in some way (still deciding exactly how) and is definitely worth seeing. 

Clearly, witnessing and mobilization can do good, but they work best when they take seriously the complexity of local situations and work through local institutions. Moral witnessing also must involve a sensitivity to other, unspoken moral and political assumptions. Watching and reading about suffering, especially suffering that exists somewhere else, has, as we have already noted, become a form of entertainment. Images of trauma are part of our political economy. Papers are sold, television programs gain audience share, careers are advanced, jobs are created, and prizes are awarded through the appropriation of images of suffering…One message that comes across from viewing suffering from a distance is that for all the havoc in Western society, we are somehow better than this African society. We gain in moral status and some of our organizations gain financially and politically, while those whom we represent, or appropriate, remain where they are, moribund, surrounded by vultures. This ‘consumption’ of suffering in an era of so-called ‘disordered capitalism’ is not so very different from the late nineteenth-century view that the savage barbarism in pagan lands justified the valuing of our own civilization at a higher level of development - a view that authorized colonial exploitation.
Arthur Kleinman and Joan Kleinman, “The Appeal of Experience; The Dismay of Images: Cultural Appropriations of Suffering in Our Times.” 
feministryangosling:

ETA: If you find yourself questioning MCAs feminist or philanthropic credentials, you may want to click here, here, here or here.

feministryangosling:

ETA: If you find yourself questioning MCAs feminist or philanthropic credentials, you may want to click here, here, here or here.

I can’t think of anything more awesome. #maddow #dowagercountess

I can’t think of anything more awesome. #maddow #dowagercountess

animalstalkinginallcaps:

WAIT A MINUTE. IT SAYS HERE WE NEED TO REDEFINE PATRIARCHY CATEGORICALLY TO ALLOW ANALYSIS OF MULTIPLICATIVE INTERSECTIONAL DOMINATION STRUCTURES FOCUSED AROUND (AND POSSIBLY FILTERED THROUGH) NODAL POINTS OF SUBJECTIVE PRIVILEGE, ALLOWING US TO UNDERSTAND AND HOPEFULLY INVERT MYRIAD HEIRARCHIES OF SYSTEMICALLY INSTITUTIONALIZED AND INTERNALIZED OPPRESSION.
Sounds lame.
I BELIEVE THAT’S A NODE OF ABLEISM.

animalstalkinginallcaps:

WAIT A MINUTE. IT SAYS HERE WE NEED TO REDEFINE PATRIARCHY CATEGORICALLY TO ALLOW ANALYSIS OF MULTIPLICATIVE INTERSECTIONAL DOMINATION STRUCTURES FOCUSED AROUND (AND POSSIBLY FILTERED THROUGH) NODAL POINTS OF SUBJECTIVE PRIVILEGE, ALLOWING US TO UNDERSTAND AND HOPEFULLY INVERT MYRIAD HEIRARCHIES OF SYSTEMICALLY INSTITUTIONALIZED AND INTERNALIZED OPPRESSION.

Sounds lame.

I BELIEVE THAT’S A NODE OF ABLEISM.