Apr 27, 2013

"Acceptable" and "unacceptable" social/political criticism in art

 If the regime is so undemocratic and oppressive that it wouldn't allow any social/political satire or even allegorical form of narrative which may imply criticism to the regime, then art may have a right to revolt against accepted "norms"of that society.

 But  if the regime is legally allowing  its criticism in art, essays and journalism etc., then the artist or activists who behave too "radically" (namely, too aggressively breaking norms of social behaviors) in the name of democracy or the freedom of expression, will lose their moral bases. Such a behavior can't be accepted by that society which has affirmed the current regime and whose existence and development is dependent on that regime.

  The performance of "Pussy Riot" in famous Cathedral in Moscow, which took place more than one year ago, seems to me too"radical" in that sense. It can't be interpreted in the context of art (because it's too primitive to be artistic not only in their skills but also in the strategy, if it had any). It can't be perceived as a form of political protest, because the cathedral is not at all the place for such an act in contemporary Russia. The Orthodox Church is still an important element for many people in Russia and they knew it well. They must have known well  also that the Cathedral was once destroyed by Communist Party in 1930s and rebuilt during 1990s with the effort of artists from all over the country, as a symbol of the resurrection of spiritual values in the corrupted society.

 Of course, they have a right to hold any kind of belief, criticize any concrete policy, politicians. But they can express their thought only respecting accepted social minimum norms, in other words, within the frameworks of such accepted institutions as "art", "social sciences", "journalism", "blogging"etc.
 Such institutions are really accepted in contemporary Russia with democratic tolerance, and it's the fact that can be easily confirmed by simple internet surfing.. Political satire in art is legally allowed.

 Any society has its particular laws to sustain minimum of social norms.
2 year sentence may seem too severe. But the combination of place and action they had chosen was such that brought an unnecessary conflict in the society. If they wanted to make such a little chaos (and such an result could be easily predicted with their educational level), then the sentence seems, personally for me, appropriate.
 If related laws seem to be too stern, then it's not a problem of the current regime itself, but the problem of social norms sustained by them. But if the norms are based on the history of people and now are supported by them, then foreign journalism and protesters have no right to judge them.  

Apr 13, 2013

The new era may come soon

 Looking back the human history, 20th century seems to have been the unprecedented era of mass consumerism. In other words, it was the era of global devaluation of noble spiritual values.
 Also, it was undeniably the unprecedented era of mass destruction of Life on Earth, the era of insane producing, using and accumulating of toxic gas, nuclear weapons, chemical and radioactive wastes, causing mutation and extinction of numberless species.

 These two tendencies made human being more and more close to "civilized barbarians" during the last century. Moreover, from the end of the last century, the economic-growth engine of modern society finally stopped its function. Currencies began to circulate in far more large numbers than they should be in normal demand and supply relations.The system was characterized by loans, credit cards, "derivertives"and recently it almost ended up with global economic crisis and disappearance of  Middle Class as the main cluster of demography.

 The resolution of this situation must not be easy. Human being can't go forward without giving up many, many things, mainly in developed countries (including some comfort in everyday life, unnecessary luxuries, goods for entertainment ). But, there are two fields which can be demolished without suffering almost all the people.

Military industry and current financial system (including rending money with "interest").

Some historians and archaeologists insist that War as a constant element of human life appeared only recently, after the beginning of agriculture. And even after that in middle ages Byzantine Empire tended to avoid war in contrast to Western feudal kingdoms of its time.
As to current bank system, it is 400 years old at most. Capitalism, as it is considered in economics , probably, is the same age. Before that time human being lived more naturally, sometimes with developed civilizations and cultures

Military industry and current financial system are not even inevitable elements of  Capitalism. So they can be more easily demolished than Capitalism itself. If only enough number of people would really want so. 

Apr 9, 2013

Changing worldview and the twilight of Sci-Fi

 Russian famous historian Andrei Fursov points out (in some of his lecture and television talks ) an interesting tendency in the contemporary popular culture.
 In his youth, he says, Science Fiction was a very popular genre. But after 1980s, instead of  Sci-Fi fantasy has become more and more popular (he also draws examples of recent Hollywood films based on the fantasy novels that must have been waiting for their time for decades).

 Though being much younger than Fursov, I also belong  to the generation when Sci-Fi was a popular genre in fiction and cinema. In my childhood the genre easily draw my attention with its inherent belief in rational thinking of human being and in the unlimited achievement of natural sciences in the future.
 Even then, the future on Earth and in Space was depicted not always "futuristic", as in "Soylent Green", "The planet of apes"and "Rollerball". But in those films the technologies were supposed to be far more developed than today.The reality is that today, almost none of those technologies (space travel to another solar system, totally artificial-looking food made from unknown materials, A.I. with the ability to do real conversation with individual human  etc.) has not been realized yet. These future technologies will, if being realized, serve to the intellectual development and widening the cognitive overlook of human being as species.

 Instead,technological developments for these 20-30 years have achieved to the contrary purpose: ENTERTAINMENT and BUSINESS. To make human being more dull, more active consumers of goods, having lesser interest in history, philosophy, and works of arts.

 Recently I walk around in a rental DVD shop to see which genres of movies are now popular (the numbers of stock DVDs and percentage of empty cases among them approximately show the popularity of each genre). For my surprise, "Harry Potter"series are far more popular than any kind of Sci-Fi series( not to mention classic Sci- Fi films of 1980s and before).

 What kind of intellectual labor is needed to see such fantastic tales, totally alien to the social reality of any historical period?  And what kind of anxiety or philosophical thought will they stimulate in the viewer?
 Nothing. Such films are not so different from amusement parks, the only difference is the existence of strong mythological, or irrational elements. In these films only the mythological, irrational elements have their roots in human history.

 I don't insist that fantasy is a "bad"genre, that they are secret propaganda of irrationality. But if remember such films of 70s and 80s as "Solaris", "Andromeda" , "West World", and "Blade Runner" and the "zeitgeist"of the time of their release,  the prevalence  of fantasy on screen today seems something unhealthy. Do people really want only such fairy tales with "initiation"of kids?

 Strangely enough, recently made Japanese anime film "Mardock Scrumble" based on the Sci Fi novel of the same title, also has strong irrational elements and "initiation"-like development of the plot. In mid 90s, we saw  also "Evangelion"and "Serial experiments Lain". In all these anime films and TV series, dominant tone is made from irrational, uncontrollable things in human (basic instinct, unconsciousness,  dream and fear of death, passions). They are total contrast to the Japanese classical Sci-Fi anime series made from late 70s to early 80s with clear human drama and hi-tech machines as tools.

  Fictional technology has become to be depicted  as some kind of "magic" on the one hand, the human physical body --as a hi-tech machine with inner "ghost" at its best ("Ghost in the shell" and "Innocence"),  mutated or mutilated flesh at its worst--on the other ("Evangelion"and "Mardock Scrumble") .
Technology as "black magic" wipes out the border between the reality and nightmare, as it happens in Cronenberg's "Videodrome" and in later works of Ph.K.Dick.

As we know, Dick hadn't (and Cronengerg in "Videodrome" neither, I think) been indulged in the depiction of such "black magic" technologies. He rather feared it.

Something has changed, really.