FEELING BORED? INTERESTED IN WHY LADY GAGA IS IMPORTANT? I HAVE THE ESSAY FOR YOU! I wrote a paper on Lady Gaga for my “What is Postmodernism?” class and some folks expressed interest in reading it after it’s finished, so here is an excerpt (it’s the introduction):Thus far in her career, a critical examination of Lady Gaga’s anomalistic position within the current postmodern condition has been notably absent; notable especially considering the markedly divided opinions expressed on both her character and career (she’s either depthless or brilliant or met with an ironic, qualified embrace). Except for the occasional aside in album reviews and articles, little effort has been made on the part of culture/music/art critics to consider the implications of Gaga’s insistence that she is first and foremost a performance artist, and what impact this has on the way we receive her perceptibly “depthless” dance music. The hesitation to do so can probably be attributed to Gaga’s status as a pop artist—that is, not fine artist. The impulse to categorize the two is characteristically modernist, but her attempt at bridging the two can be thought of as a postmodern effort, if not a naïve one. Regardless of whether she belongs in the high or low culture box, I believe the development of a critical discourse surrounding her work is highly relevant to a richer understanding of culture’s current schizophrenic state. There are some holes in it and it’s kind of a draft for something I want to take further… but anyway, download the PDF here! Email me “your thoughts” to me at: annalouisemack at gmail

FEELING BORED? INTERESTED IN WHY LADY GAGA IS IMPORTANT?
I HAVE THE ESSAY FOR YOU!
I wrote a paper on Lady Gaga for my “What is Postmodernism?” class and some folks expressed interest in reading it after it’s finished, so here is an excerpt (it’s the introduction):

Thus far in her career, a critical examination of Lady Gaga’s anomalistic position within the current postmodern condition has been notably absent; notable especially considering the markedly divided opinions expressed on both her character and career (she’s either depthless or brilliant or met with an ironic, qualified embrace). Except for the occasional aside in album reviews and articles, little effort has been made on the part of culture/music/art critics to consider the implications of Gaga’s insistence that she is first and foremost a performance artist, and what impact this has on the way we receive her perceptibly “depthless” dance music. The hesitation to do so can probably be attributed to Gaga’s status as a pop artist—that is, not fine artist. The impulse to categorize the two is characteristically modernist, but her attempt at bridging the two can be thought of as a postmodern effort, if not a naïve one. Regardless of whether she belongs in the high or low culture box, I believe the development of a critical discourse surrounding her work is highly relevant to a richer understanding of culture’s current schizophrenic state.

There are some holes in it and it’s kind of a draft for something I want to take further… but anyway, download the PDF here! Email me “your thoughts” to me at: annalouisemack at gmail

This was posted 2 hours ago. It has 10 notes.
austin is fun! this picture is of sam and i having fun!

austin is fun! this picture is of sam and i having fun!

This was posted 3 hours ago. It has 1 notes.
The Beach House Theory of 2k10.

standardgrey:

towerofsleep:

epicoverload:

shut the fuck up.

Dude, quit following me if I bother you so much.

Also, a clarification. I think Hipster Runoff is hilarious, because what Carles does is an extremely ironic and flippant version of what I study for serious: the structures that build consensus and validate judgments of taste in culture, and what they mean in terms of political economy (feel free to insert jokes about the meaninglessness of my degree). What’s bleak about Hipster Runoff is that he’s cruel about demystification: he makes a masochistic joke about saying that what we take for “meaningful experience” is actually just a game of competing for social capital.

This joke is, of course, also an oversimplification. It’s another kind of capitalist realism: “Behind your illusion of taste is just a dog-eat-dog world of alts against mnstrmrs, alts against alts!” If Carles was being serious, he’d be throwing the baby out with the bathwater. Obviously, our taste and our aesthetic experiences are more than just a hollow sham of competing egos. But Hipster Runoff is a satire, and it points out the economic mechanisms that drive the industry of hip culture, and what’s funny is exactly how it offends people who are too young or insecure or sanctimonious to admit that postmodern culture is a pretty uneasy marriage of actual feelings and expressions and a brutal, manipulative market apparatus that we’re all unavoidably participating in.

Lots of people “already know” all this and find Hipster Runoff boring or irritating (which probably goes double for this post), so to those of you, sorry for taking up dashboard space.

Well-spoken as always, Good sir.

that’s what i’m tryin’ to say
This was posted 1 day ago. It has 24 notes.
thedailywhat: Nice. [via.] this is the best fffffffuuuu i’ve ever seen

thedailywhat:

Nice.

[via.]

this is the best fffffffuuuu i’ve ever seen
This was posted 3 days ago. It has 381 notes.

word up kiddo

This was posted 4 days ago. It has 15 notes.
lol

lol

This was posted 6 days ago. It has 3 notes.

“everything is everything” by koki tanaka
for the 2006 taipei biennal

This was posted 6 days ago. It has 2 notes.

just ate some really spotty miso soup
then i watched this video

if my brain didnt feel like a shriveled baby carrot in an empty tub of gladware i would say something way more smart than “it really fucking sucks and made me sigh at least twice”

but life throws ya curve balls in your miso soup so thats what ya get!

This was posted 1 week ago. It has 1 notes.
my summer sam

my summer sam

This was posted 2 weeks ago. It has 3 notes.
lewischaplin: annamack: ADDENDUM: sometimes i wonder what is the difference between looking at an urban outfitters catalog and looking at art photography that circulates the internet. it feels like both of them are selling me an ‘alternative image’ to aspire to. i mean, i get that marketing follows art (the opposite could also be argued), but i think artists should feel obliged to make it difficult for that to happen. i also get that this could easily be read as a ‘crotchety’ opinion and the perpetuation of art as an elite sphere isn’t necessarily productive to the ‘goal’ of art (if it has one). all art doesn’t have to be subversive to be good, but what i’m saying is: artists right now, and i am talking in particular about young photographers who produce a very particular (yet very widely proliferated) strain of imagery, are in a complacent funk where it just feels like a shallow celebration of youth culture. d-d-d-dats all folks!!!! hey! i like you, and the things you’re saying. i don’t really get the ‘celebration of youth culture’ though- i get painted with that brush a lot or at least approached by people because apparently i do that. i take photos of my friends, who are young, and at some point that means my pictures become a celebration of youth? or more, my question is, how does one be a young photographer and not celebrate youth culture? hey lewis, first of all thanks for not getting pissy and taking this as a personal attack like a lot of people would’ve (given that i used your image)! i totally empathize with that paradox, and i don’t know that i have an answer to your question. it’s useless to dismiss all imagery that makes its subject the youth of today, and that’s not really what i’m suggesting. i guess what i’m interested in more than anything is the way the “market absorbs everything, including any dissent or alternative vision” and what happens when ‘the alternative lifestyle’ (whatever that exactly is anymore i don’t know) is capitalized on. i’m thinking right now about levi’s “go forth” campaign (see a commercial here). it encapsulates exactly what i’m talking about in regards to cultural capital and the way subcultural lifestyles are marketed. and i’m not making any new observations here; there have been dozens of essays in dozens of journals about this topic (not to mention pierre bourdieu’s sociological bible distinction and HIPSTER RUNOFF), but with the internet comes a whole new sphere of visual culture and new methods of dissemination to talk about. should we stop taking pictures of young people looking fashionable and doing edgy things? no probably not. there is a place for those pictures and if nothing else, they’ll become valuable as records of what we looked like in 2009. but, as i sit here in my american apparel jeans and white keds, i think it’s becoming important for us to ask the question: alternative to what?

lewischaplin:

annamack:

ADDENDUM:
sometimes i wonder what is the difference between looking at an urban outfitters catalog and looking at art photography that circulates the internet. it feels like both of them are selling me an ‘alternative image’ to aspire to. i mean, i get that marketing follows art (the opposite could also be argued), but i think artists should feel obliged to make it difficult for that to happen. i also get that this could easily be read as a ‘crotchety’ opinion and the perpetuation of art as an elite sphere isn’t necessarily productive to the ‘goal’ of art (if it has one). all art doesn’t have to be subversive to be good, but what i’m saying is: artists right now, and i am talking in particular about young photographers who produce a very particular (yet very widely proliferated) strain of imagery, are in a complacent funk where it just feels like a shallow celebration of youth culture.

d-d-d-dats all folks!!!!

hey! i like you, and the things you’re saying. i don’t really get the ‘celebration of youth culture’ though- i get painted with that brush a lot or at least approached by people because apparently i do that. i take photos of my friends, who are young, and at some point that means my pictures become a celebration of youth? or more, my question is, how does one be a young photographer and not celebrate youth culture?

hey lewis,
first of all thanks for not getting pissy and taking this as a personal attack like a lot of people would’ve (given that i used your image)!

i totally empathize with that paradox, and i don’t know that i have an answer to your question. it’s useless to dismiss all imagery that makes its subject the youth of today, and that’s not really what i’m suggesting. i guess what i’m interested in more than anything is the way the “market absorbs everything, including any dissent or alternative vision” and what happens when ‘the alternative lifestyle’ (whatever that exactly is anymore i don’t know) is capitalized on. i’m thinking right now about levi’s “go forth” campaign (see a commercial here). it encapsulates exactly what i’m talking about in regards to cultural capital and the way subcultural lifestyles are marketed. and i’m not making any new observations here; there have been dozens of essays in dozens of journals about this topic (not to mention pierre bourdieu’s sociological bible distinction and HIPSTER RUNOFF), but with the internet comes a whole new sphere of visual culture and new methods of dissemination to talk about.

should we stop taking pictures of young people looking fashionable and doing edgy things? no probably not. there is a place for those pictures and if nothing else, they’ll become valuable as records of what we looked like in 2009. but, as i sit here in my american apparel jeans and white keds, i think it’s becoming important for us to ask the question: alternative to what?
This was posted 3 weeks ago. It has 20 notes.