Weeks Three and Four: Power to the Masses

Politics of Amnesia, opening chapter of Terry Eagleton’s After Theory, suggests that the high brow theory is not over. After theory means after high theory, a new era in which everyone, not only the elitist philosphers and intellectuals, can be taught how to theorize. Theory has long been a field only for the intellectuals. Tracing back in history when words and printed books were rights to the upper class, and when the Bible was written in codes only could be read and preached by the priests, transmission of knowledge and theorization, as a result, have come a long way. Formerly coined “high theory” for the high society, theory has taken on a phenomenon in popularizing itself in the modern era.

So, what kind of fresh thinking does the new era demand?

“an interest in French philosophy has given way to fascination with French kissing” (2, After Theory)

Theory has now seeped down to popular culture and the everyday, evidenced in the Lady Gaga Sociology course in University of South Carolina. High Theory has been transformed to adapt to modern mentality, in a time more people are being educated than ever and knowledge is not exclusive. Thus, knowledge and critical thinking are applied to the issues relevant to the masses.

The Lady Gaga course will “look at business and marketing strategies, the role of old and new media, fans and live concerts, gay culture, religious and political themes, sex and sexuality, and the cities of New York and Hollywood.” Because of the fact that Lady Gaga appeals to the masses she deserves to be studied; it is the power of the masses in line with Eagleton’s take on postmodernism:

By Postmodern, I mean, roughly speaking, the contemporary movement of thought which rejects totalities, universal values, grand historical narratives, solid foundations to human existence and the possibility of objective knowledge. Postmodernism is skeptical of truth, unit and progress, opposes what it sees as elitism in culture, tends towards cultural relativism, and celebrates pluralism, discontinuity and heterogeneity. (13, After Theory)

Nothing is absolute; everything is under the scrutinization of the mass based on what influences their daily lives. Therefore, what appeals to the mass receives more attention and by attaining more attention such object becomes a subject! The wide dissemination of knowledge correlates with the development of postmodernism and Capitalism as well. The recent anti-Capitalist movement speaks of the power of the masses, of their desire to regain control over the elites which is in accordance with “After Theory”. Knowledge bestows power and with power the minorities could revolt against the establishment.

However, despites of increasing literacy rate and education level, a sign of a well-read/informed public, the future of an ideal society is still very grim because the solid foundations of civilization are still very rigid. With people still attaching to elitism and benefiting from exploitation nowadays, I think the shift of power depends on the mass. The Lady Gaga sociology course just signifies preliminary step in deposing establishment, further development lies on the hands of people willing to give up their private interests for a common good.

Lady Gaga sociology course http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-11672679

Recent Wall Street Protest and Badiou

Zizek's speech (transcript) given at the recent Wall Street protest bears a striking relevance to our Theory 750 first reading on Badiou. Apparently, as the negative sentiments towards financial crisis (among lots of other crises which appear to be 'spectacles' and a dream that we have lived in) intensify and people are fed up with mythical Wall Street solutions and compromises from politicians; it's time to wake up!

Zizek does raise a fallacy shared by the civilized and democratic ones that capitalism and democracy are correlated. He rang the bell that it actually is not the case. The moral high ground embraced by those who believe in their correlation is a tool that the democratic countries have used to blame the communists, which through some brain-washing and propaganda has become a given!

It is utterly important to think critically for the common good of all. After the failure of capitalism, what's next?

Week Two: No Justice, Only Privilege and Profit

Modern Slaves of Dubai: The workers are waiting for the bus to bring them back to the camp after a hard day of work in the heat of Dubai.

The theme of this week’s reading is social mobility and dream. Las Vegas and Dubai are man-made modern marvels that demonstrate humans’, or say, capitalists’ endeavor in exploiting every resources in sight. However, with relatively more civilization and sanity, America’s creation of Las Vegas has created a comfortable home for Dave Hickey (author of Air Guitar) and thousands of happiness pursuers. However, Dubai in contrast is described as a “Devil Paradise”, where megalomania has been materialized with no restraints.

Las Vegas and Dubai are cities built on purely fantasy. Their appeals lie in their very conception. Illogical and boisterous, the births of Las Vegas and Dubai draw on our search for something exotic, distant and different. The more different the desert city is from the mundane city that one is living in, the more appeal it carries. The physical and geographical difference is directly linked to the development potentials. Its separation from pre-establishment nurtures a sense of venture and guilt-free sins. The deserts are a blank canvas, waiting to be drawn on, freely.

Making a desert habitable requires a lot of human and natural resources. In Las Vegas, there is exploitation in nature in irrigating a desert city. In At Home in the Neon, the hopeful. residents of Las Vegas find comfort in the Sin City because they are being accepted. Yet in Dubai, there is not only exploitation in nature but also in labor force and in laws. Doubtlessly Dubai has all the freedom it needs it is almost like playing SIMS City in real life. To supply labor force to build Dubai an ancient but almost extinct trade remerged – the slave trade. Putting Las Vegas and Dubai side by side for comparison, Las Vegas is more habitable for its openness to culture and social mobility; at least the work force is not slaves. Moreover, with the hope of moving up the social rank, they could start fostering a sense of belonging to a place. Unluckily in Dubai, where laws could be changed casually to tailor to the profits of the international investments, hopes of the work force extinguish.

Who cares about workers’ lives while the millionaires ski in a refrigerated dome?

Las Vegas people would feel at home because of being accepted and having a common ground. Yet in Dubai the gap between the rich and the poor is huge. People in the conception of the devil paradise adopt a capitalist mode of everything is weighted on profit motive. Flexible measures such as exemption from legal enforcement and lawful exploitation are all justified by the drive to develop. Human basic values are thrown out of the windows at the cost of capitalism as being the golden rule.

Doubtlessly designing the very iconic Burj Dubai will gain Dubai and its architects a place in the world record and the front-page. However as ethical practitioners, we must also consider the logistics and the system of creating architecture. City planners and architects’ duty does not merely stay at completing ever-growing towers and the biggest city in an extreme environment. The focus on the symbolic significance of the biggest and the tallest must be curbed by environmental awareness, human right condition, availability of resources and the happiness of its citizens.

No justice. Only privilege in Dubai.

The thinkers (architects, financiers, oil tycoons) who are on the privilege side need to reassess justice not on the scale of dollar sign, but of morality, social equality and environmental impact.

Week One: Hadid, Badiou and Moore

Jonathan Meades’s Intelligent Life article on Zaha Hadid, contrary to it’s title The First Great Female Architect, is saying Zaha Hadid is, maybe, not so great after all!!

With this article being the first assigned reading in Architectural Association’s Theroy 750 seminar, I was alarmed of how much of it was not about her or the practice of architecture. As Meadas confessed, Hadid was more lively when talking about everything other than architecture and likewise, the article is hiding away from getting to the essence of her and her practice, which leaves the readers and maybe the author (too!) perplexed. Her works, embodying her, have an unexplainable dimension and unpredictability, which are essential in differentiating her from the rest.

The sense of mystery that Hadid either purposely or subconsciously embeds in her conversation and process of her works adds to her aura. Once the secret is revealed, the aura is gone. It could be because of her reluctance to reveal her design process; however when Meadas found her contradicting herself in finding her inspiration from and not from natural topography and landscape, I for a moment wonder if she is that forgetful.

The value of this article is in its confusion and opposition. Zaha is sometimes evasive; and Meadas incisive. The tug of wall between the star and the commoners is well illustrated through Meadas’s firing of questions wanting to know how she works, which is disappointingly fruitless. I have a suspicion, after reading, that Hadid might not know how and why either. She would disagree with a statement but not explaining why… sounds like a stubborn parent or boss who only gives order and expects a reflexive nod in return, demonstrated by her factory of taciturn employers in her school/office.

Zaha Hadid’s inability and reluctance to answer the inner-working of her practice remains me of a scene in Michael Moore’s “Capitalism: A Love Story” in which Moore interviewed a former investment banker and a Harvard professor who created but could not explain what derivatives are. Hadid and the investment banker are similar in their inability to put into words what they do. Maybe it’s just too hard to explain… or maybe they don’t even know!

When something becomes a brand, it needs no explanation and justification; religion only needs followers. Zaha becomes a brand and a style as someone would say the building looks ‘very Zaha’. Capitalism becomes a religion when people believe profit motive is just and morally right. Badiou’s and Moore’s critical attitude towards capitalism is crucial in our understanding of the architectural practice and the world economy. We have a few options:

1. A follower who is being led by nose

2. A thinker who critiques

3. A revolutionary who materializes critical thoughts into action