Comments on: Ourselves, in Other Contexts.

By: George Allwell

George Allwell — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 20:15:54 +0000

“For many, politics has become something to passively consume.”

Is it though? ‘Passively consume’, or deliberately led? ‘Politics’ is a difficult subject to grasp; ideologies, agenda’s, spin, long-winded sentences that actually say nothing – short catchphrases designed to stir-up a specific emotion; aiming to please everyone whilst at the same time frustrating most.

My thesis at uni focused on apathy and I found trust in the system and its protagonists had disappeared amongst all but political activists. My subjective (non-biased) analysis found that people had just switched off, regurgitating the same old mantras of ‘they are all the same’, ‘they never do anything for me’. Is this by design? The majority claimed to still vote, reinforcing my belief that when people ‘fall’ into this state of mind, it is then down to the propaganda units to ‘convince’ them of the truth, and which party ‘represents’ their interests the most.

This is the circle of context creation that has such a negative impact on society today. Apathetic existence based on a concern for fictional characters (celebrities, video-games, films) and, of course, ourselves and ‘our’own ilk.

By: linda nicklin

linda nicklin — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 17:37:07 +0000

I particularly like the quote… Optimism is a political act…… women used to say the personal is political, to get others to see that their lives are affected by politics and that it was important to engage. Now, as people have a different sense of community and solidarity each individual person seem to expect the politician to address their specific agenda and don’t recognize societies needs and priorities. this then leads to disappointment and disconnection from politics, cynicism and leaves the door open for the media manipulations and powerful self interested parties to take advantage.

By: Hannah Nicklin

Hannah Nicklin — Tue, 02 Feb 2010 21:35:08 +0000

The answer to your question is in the wording – ‘consume’ is how you phrase it. consume, ingest – the relationship is one way. I do believe that people do construct group experiences (water cooler moments) around these one way narratives, but they provoke an interaction between people and a constructed world only. I believe theatre – with its visible and bodied gap between real and not – provokes an interaction born out of empathy, not absorption. The recorded aspect of television, it being always on, means that it’s never ending. Live art is one whole instant. It lives and it dies, and as such immediately reminds us of our selves, our mortality. The characters are born, and die every night, with the beginning and end of a play. TV even has a dual layer of narrative now, the stories of the characters played out on the screen, and the stories of the characters played out across the tabloids and glossy magazines. I think the longing for interactivity is present in the water cooler moments, but I think we are fobbed off with a shadow of it.

A bit prosaic by way of an answer, but I hope I’ve gotten my point across

By: 2pallas

2pallas — Tue, 02 Feb 2010 17:20:55 +0000

Thinking about it, perhaps the narratives of television are not as passively consumed as those of TV. Soap Operas and Reality TV both have a strong social element. I don’t mean that viewers interact with characters, contestants or programme-makers, but rather with other viewers. People buy magazines about Soap Operas. They discuss the plots and characters with their friends. Essentially – they gossip. “Character X is such a bitch; you remember the way she treated Character Y.” “Yeah but after the way he was carrying on with Character Z, he had it coming.” Similarly with reality TV, people choose favourite characters and banter with friends about their relative merits… or otherwise. Just look at the hashtags when x-factor is on.

The relationships between the overt narrative of the TV show and the narratives constructed by viewers gossiping about TV show is interesting because producers are well aware that this is how people consume the TV shows, and taylor the content to take advantage of this. The TV producers knew audiences could love Jedward despite their singing.

By: 2pallas

2pallas — Tue, 02 Feb 2010 17:05:27 +0000

Some very interesting thoughts.

This ties in with what I’ve long thought is wrong with people’s attitudes towards politics these days. For many, politics has become something to passively consume. Many people watch the ‘drama’ performed by politicians, and limit their role in shaping the narrative to pressing the red button; choosing which politician to evict from the house. Politics to me cannot be like that. It must be about active engagement and participation. Debate. Back-and-forth. Working together with others to realise mutual aims. The construction rather than consumption of narratives. When I think of apathy – this is what I think of. It is all too easy when you switch yourself off from engagement in politics to go one stage further – to switch off, to stay at home on voting day, or to dismiss politics altogether and conclude that nobody represents you.