i don't know where you will be taking this, but it would be interesting to investigate the idea of 'the simple' which many contemporary theorists use to oppose the complexity of the present to the simplicity of the past. of course we have discussed this in class in terms of nostalgia, but nostalgia is just the motivating emotion which we assume is being expressed by such a gesture. there is a moment in Madness and Civilization when Foucault says something like, 'wouldn't it be nice to go back to the good old days when the village idiot touched the girl by the well, and nobody thought much of it?' clearly this is a dangerous way of thinking because it validates sexual violence. what is it about the simple that makes it useful as a dialectical opposite, or as an argumentative technique?
i guess i mean it would be cool if you discovered something deep within the simple that you could argue motivated this sort of thing, rather than simply calling it nostalgia.
The Shakers (personal research obsession of mine) were quite emphatic that simplicity of form, harmonious relationship of parts, good workmanship, and utility were markers of true craftsmanship. Even embellishments such as signing a name were displays of unnecessary, sinful personal pride.
For the interesting tension between the apparent simplicity of the object, and the complexity of what it encapsulated, see 'Some Shaker Gifts that Are Anything But Simple': http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E03E1DF1130F931A35752C1A9679C8B63
Consider the relevance of simplicity in the realm of fashion. Today we are witnessing a growing affinity towards the simplistic - either basic or reminiscent of the past (simpler times,etc.). This is obvious in the success of stores such as American Apparel that sell basic, plain clothing items in solid colors and the rise of "the vintage," that is clothing founded on nostalgia, as a prevalent trend.
Commodities, fetishes, souvenirs, relics, rubbish. What theories help us think about things? In this course we will read Victorian travelers on West African "fetish," Michael Taussig on his imagined cocaine museum, Susan Stewart on longing and souvenirs, Freud on shiny noses, Marx on tables, Annette Weiner on the similarities between gift and commodity exchange, Mary Douglas on dirt, D.W. Winnicott on string, and Arjun Appadurai on the idea of the social lives of things. The singularization of things, the ways in which history and memory are stored in real and imagined objects, the commodification of the human body, the animation of the inanimate, utopian recycling, gleaning, found objects as art and craft: we will consider a broad range of theoretical issues in our readings and in projects that put them to quirky use.
4 comments:
i don't know where you will be taking this, but it would be interesting to investigate the idea of 'the simple' which many contemporary theorists use to oppose the complexity of the present to the simplicity of the past. of course we have discussed this in class in terms of nostalgia, but nostalgia is just the motivating emotion which we assume is being expressed by such a gesture.
there is a moment in Madness and Civilization when Foucault says something like, 'wouldn't it be nice to go back to the good old days when the village idiot touched the girl by the well, and nobody thought much of it?' clearly this is a dangerous way of thinking because it validates sexual violence. what is it about the simple that makes it useful as a dialectical opposite, or as an argumentative technique?
i guess i mean it would be cool if you discovered something deep within the simple that you could argue motivated this sort of thing, rather than simply calling it nostalgia.
-Jonathan
The Shakers (personal research obsession of mine) were quite emphatic that simplicity of form, harmonious relationship of parts, good workmanship, and utility were markers of true craftsmanship. Even embellishments such as signing a name were displays of unnecessary, sinful personal pride.
For the interesting tension between the apparent simplicity of the object, and the complexity of what it encapsulated, see 'Some Shaker Gifts that Are Anything But Simple':
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E03E1DF1130F931A35752C1A9679C8B63
--Ryan
Consider the relevance of simplicity in the realm of fashion. Today we are witnessing a growing affinity towards the simplistic - either basic or reminiscent of the past (simpler times,etc.). This is obvious in the success of stores such as American Apparel that sell basic, plain clothing items in solid colors and the rise of "the vintage," that is clothing founded on nostalgia, as a prevalent trend.
~Jordan Carter~
Margerite--
Great "blank". Have you considered talking about the simple as used to mean lacking in common sense, moronic?
--Andrew
Post a Comment