Reading Sabbatical: Day 1

Book: Postmodernism or The Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism, Fredric Jameson

Introduction & Chapter 1: The Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism

I received this book a couple of years ago for my birthday or Christmas. Or perhaps Easter. But definitely not Halloween or my wedding anniversary. I don’t recall how I found out about the book but some how it caught my eye and I decided to acquire the book (I do remember I was spending a lot of time in the Literary Criticism section of book stores, which is an incredibly small section.

My first impression of the book is that there are a lot of five and six syllable words. This isn’t bad, but I get the impression that most of the ideas could be expressed with words comprised of two syllables—three tops. Take Bukowski for instance. The man’s work is concise, to the point, original, and groundbreaking. Yet how often does he use words over two syllables? Rarely. In fact, the only time he uses a three syllable words is when he uses the word alcohol (admittedly, he uses this word a lot). My point is, I’m only understanding like 60% of what is being said. I’ve read postmodern philosophy translated poorly from French that made more sense. But I think that is part of the point. This is a book spouting Marxist ideals (i.e. freeing the working class masses from their kapitalist masters) that is completely inaccessible to the masses. I guess that is postmodernism.

Random thoughts:

Pg 4 - Discussion on how modern culture has come to the point that art is almost completely pointless because it has lost the ability to shock. Due to higher education, the likes of Picasso and Joyce are no longer ugly; rather we “get it.” Can art or the artist even exist without the use of shock or ugliness when the new aesthetic seeks to commercialize everything. Even anti-kapital pursuits are used to feed the machine of the kapitalist system; thus Che Guevara shirts being sold at the mall.

So is there art that can exist that can shock or be ugly? In my own pursuits of this, I have found it difficult to find a scientific answer, which is one that is repeatable. Many are aware of my Bratz exhibit, which featured pictures of the best-selling dolls adorned with porn-facials. While such exhibit exposed the schizophrenia of modern culture as pointed by Jameson—with criticism of the exhibit being considered child porn while most watchdog groups also admitting that Bratz dolls were exploitive of children themselves—it was impossible to recreate the same shock with a similar exhibit.

Thus, the aesthetic of smashism. After one taboo has been traversed, its value of taboo-ness will geometrically decline. Thus, art exhibits composed of feces is now cliché. For the smashist, the only solution to the declining value of art is to push society through every taboo until it is forced to reach the logical end of art, politics, philosophy, etc. and begin again. It is as if we are required to read a murder mystery that we have already figured out and are merely reading because we have to take a test at the end which asks questions like, “What color hat is the clown wearing on page 197?” Thus art no longer teaches us anthing, rather it only signifies what we should already know.
For example, Garth Ennis’s version of Frank Castle, a.ka. the Punisher. The Punisher came into being at the proto-stages of the Bronze Age of comics. The anti-hero was the new hero of the day in movies such as Taxi Driver. He came into full realization as the Bronze Age embraced a grittiness of its characters. The Punisher shot up in popularity because he was able to do what traditional heroes would not—kill. This became his novelty; what set him apart from other comic book heroes. The dialectic has been pushed from admired hero to admired anti-hero.

Ennis’s Punisher of the Punisher MAX. Frank Castle was released from the PG world of comic books to the NC-17 realm. This was the next step in the dialectic, but what was he to do? The first story arc ends with the Punisher murdering his former sidekick. What was his sidekick’s crime? Trying to recruit Castle into waging war against Osama bin Laden. This was as if Batman murdered Robin because Robin felt that their talents would be better used to defeat real life threats as opposed to the cartoony Joker. It at once produced a comic book “hero” that was amoral, borderline insane, violent, and completely impotent in defeating real life threats. It was both parody and reflection of years of comic book history. By creating a character that the reader cannot associate with (a senseless murder who kills his former allies), the reader enjoys the product of the “hero” without liking the “hero.” In other words, it is modern America. We enjoy the commodities of China while also hating those communist reds. Ennis’s Punisher via Punisher MAX reflects Jameson’s points of art reflecting the death of the subject (pg 16) (the Punisher ceases to exists as a character as the reader now only enjoys his product, violence, and not the Punisher himself) and the schizophrenia of modern culture (pg 26) (the Punisher, a violent military expert is impotent to defeat real life threats).

Ennis’s Punisher creates a product that is at first ugly, but each following story arch features a similar story. Someone befriends the Punisher, and that partner meets is met with death. What was first met with shock as the Punisher murders his former sidekick becomes normal. The ugliness and shock goes away. It goes from a postmodern critique of the comic book hero to an accepted commodity. Frank Castle still remains an unlikable sociopath, but he is now tolerated for entertainment purposes.

Jameson then devotes a large part of chapter one to critiquing the architecture of the Westin Bonaventure Hotel in Los Angeles (pg 39—44). He speaks of how inaccessible it is and how it was created so that the visitor would get lost in it. As I attended a party there during Celebration IV (commemorating the 30th anniversary of Star Wars), and let me tell you, there were a bunch of obese, lonely men in Stormtrooper armor walking all over that hotel looking for the party. Of course, they may have been lost because they were delirious with excitement because it was the first party they were ever invited too. I dunno.