side note side note ***SideNote
Yesterday in class when Dana presented her idea for the poster project, I was able to begin a dialogue on her topic leading her to what I consider an interesting solution potentially. This dialogue was rooted from my recently developed interest in Slovenian philosopher Slavoj Zizek, he has served as inspiration in my search for a concept of my poster, though he isn't really involved at all in its concept. Nevertheless its information I find extremely interesting and assertive.
Here are some things that are interesting to deliberate:
Some of them are directly connected to Looking is not seeing, which I actually things is a significant concept that deals or is connected with each and everyone of the poster topics in some way.
1.Utopian: liberal pragmatic idea that we can solve problems gradually 1 by 1- Says that we attempt to only focus on one problem at a time, which isn't efficient because ignoring one debate asserts that there is no interconnection between the two groups when there usually is.
2. "When you really want to undermine the power of an illusion- it isn't enough to denounce this from the outside as an illusion, isn't good enough to say that its just an illusion" pertaining to a theological debate
The temptation of meaning- When something horrible happens our spontaneous tendency is to search for a meaning- it must mean something. Ex. of aids- it was a trauma then the Conservatives came and said it was a punishment for our sinful ways of life and so on. Even if we interpret a catastrophe as a punishment its just a way to make it easier for us to believe it happened. It's better for us to believe that God punished you than that it just HAPPENED.
Implicit premise of ecology- the existing world is the best possible world
problematic to Zizek because- Nature is a balanced organic reproducing living organism that is perturbed, disturbed by human ecological exploitation. This is a secular explanation of ecology.
There is no nature. It's a big series of unimaginable catastrophes that happen. Ex. of oil, developed because of a natural catastrophe. "Ecology will slowly turn into the new opium of the masses"- Marx's definition of religion
-We ask for some unquestionable highest authority that you don't debate
-scientific breakthroughs are like voices that warn us to not do certain things- voice of ecology is telling us to not mess with dna, to not mess with nature
Another myth is...
that as humans living, Western people, in our artificial technological environmental air alienated from immediate natural environment. BUT we are a part of nature, shouldn't forget this. IN ZIZEK'S RESPONSE:
We all know what kind of danger we are in with global warming etc. but why don't we do anything about it. In psychoanalysis :
"I know very well BUT act as if I don't know." For instance, I may know that global warming exists, that everything will explode and be destroyed, but I go outside and I see birds singing, and so on and even if I know rationally, that all of this is in danger, I simply do not believe that this can all be destroyed- that's the horror of visiting catstrophe sites like Chernobyl.
IN A WAY WE ARE NOT EVOLUTIONARY, NOT WIRED TO IMAGINE SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
What we should do to concront properly the threat of ecological catstrophe is not new age stuff to break out of technologically manipulative movement, and find our roots in nature but to cut off even more our roots in nature. We need more alienation from our life, from our spontaneous nature. We should become more artifical- should develop a more terrifying, abstract materialization, a mathematical universe where there's nothing but technical forms etc.
Then there's a difficultly to find poetry in this dimension, hard to find spirituality. (HAS THIS ALREADY BEGUN???)
- To recreate beauty in trash itself, we must have true love in the world, not solely the current idealization. In the same way that a true lover knows that you don't love a man or a woman by idealizing them, but by accepting a person with all of their failures, stupidities and nonetheless the person.
It's ABOUT SEEN PERFECTION IN IMPERFECTION ITSELF AND THAT'S HOW WE SHOULD LOVE THE WORLD- A TRUE ECOLOGIST LOVES ALL OF THIS.