Tuesday, September 21, 2010

Tues 21/9 Culture Jamming

Culture Jamming is about doing rather than theorising the media. As Naomi Klein puts it, "culture jamming is writing on the streets" (Klein, 2000, p. 284). Adbusters founder Kalle Lasn makes a valid point that "communication professors tell their students everything that's wrong with the global media monopoly, but never a word on how to fix it." When examining Culture Jamming it is crucial to not just theorise the faults of media corporations, but to reflect on the active, two-way communication between the self and the sign.

Tarsh talked about the book Welcome to the Real by Slavoj Zizek in the lecture yesturday which focussed on the repetition of signs in the media. A sign which has been repeated is still able to be compelling. This made me think of the examples of Jamming I have found which reinforce the the sign as a spectacle. The McDonald's logo for instance doesn't just represent food, but also corporate giants, overconsumption, and obesity. The meaning behind signs is always changing as our culture becomes more and more saturated with information. Do you think it's still possible to uncover the real or original? Furthermore I would like to pose the question- how do Culture Jams affect the cultural process of the Cyborg? How are we resistant or subversive to technology in this context?

I might be on a bit of a tangent here- but let me know what you think. In the meantime have a look at this site http://parody.organique.com/053.html -there are a few more examples of Culture Jamming to get you thinking... thanks to everyone who contributed to today's discussion! :)

Carla.

3 comments:

  1. I liked what you said about 'signs' now representung more than just their original meaning. If we take your McDonalds example, the many meanings of it's logo that you mentioned have come to be because of culture jamming. It is a symbol which we are bombarded with and that is parodied so often that these meanings become a part of that symbol.

    In this example, the meanings given to this smybol are very political and have been associcated with it for rather a long time, making the messages very effective because they stick to that symbol and it is always the same messages associated with it.

    If we look at the examples of the ipod, I don't believe that it has the same effect because each seperate parody is portraying something different, further highlighted by how easily we all created examples in the workshop and none of them attempted to drive the same message. I think that perhaps, culture jamming has become to commonplace and has become too much 'just for laughs', that its effect is diminishing and its messages becoming lost and fleeting.

    If the message isn't driven at you hard and consistently, it is too easily forgotten. How many of the examples from the workshop can you remember?

    ReplyDelete
  2. That's a really interesting point about the Culture Jamming workshop activity...I don't remember majority of the examples, although I do remember laughing and thinking they were 'clever' at the time. I think this really highlights the distinction between the roles of the parodist and the comedian. I liked the analogy from the reading this week which referred to the comedian as a surfer. "Parodists attempt to change things in the nature of a presupposed value, comedians diagnose a specific situation, and try something to see what responses they can provoke" (196). So if comedians are surfers they ride the waves (notions) which are already set in motion. Comedians are not interested in "bringing the people to consciousness" and because of this ideal they arouse mistrust within the media. I think that because we didn't have long to create our Culture Jams most of them were just on a simplistic, humorous level. These messages don't aim to impact a change in behaviour/ thought unlike parody which aims to push the limits of power...
    What does everyone else think of this?

    ReplyDelete
  3. In reference to the first question – is it still possible to uncover the real or original? I think that the concept of the real or original has become an abstract term. As Tarsh explained in the lecture, the post modern world has replaced all symbols and signs, and as such nothing is original. This idea is exemplified in the Mc Donald’s parodies that Emily P mentioned. It leaves us questioning what is original or real, as so many different meanings and satires have become associated with the Mc Donald’s brand.

    As such, culture jamming has constructed a ‘hyper-mediated’/ ‘simulacrum like society’, whereby original meaning is lost, and as such, agency is questioned...as in a world without originals, who has agency?

    ReplyDelete