I'm off to a non-place...i guess

Wow…it’s been a while! Anyway, the material we covered in last weeks discussions was a little difficult to wrap my mind around. However, as we moved through discussion a few ideas became a little clearer. I had a lot of trouble with the Jameson writing The Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism. One of the important points I got from the Jameson critique was that he did not like how with post-modern art, a spectator has to go directly to the artist and ask them what the meaning is behind their work. For example, he brings up “A Pair of Boots” by Van Gogh, and “Diamond Dust Shoes” by Andy Warhol. He makes the claim that a person can start to grab a hold of the meaning and content encompassed within the boots painting, however when one looks at the painting by Warhol, it is very hard to understand what the painting means because it has become decontextualized (I don’t know if that’s a real word). Jameson really does not like that artists are putting work out there that to him has a hidden meaning. However, I don’t like his critique because I think a lot of artists have an idea of what they are going for, but a lot of their reasons for the work are to see what other people’s responses are. I think that is a great idea because everybody has different background they come from and therefore are going to have different views on the art they view. On page 10 of his writing, Jameson says, “…a third feature to be developed here, what I will call the waning affect in postmodern culture. Of course, it would be inaccurate to suggest that all affect, all feeling or emotion, all subjectivity, has vanished from the newer image”. So at least Jameson does recognize there is some meaning behind the Warhol painting, but he feels it is not as obvious.

The piece written by Auge was a little bit easier to understand From Places to Non-Places. The idea I was able to grab a hold of is what makes somewhere a “place” is when a person has interaction there. In class we brought up the example of a supermarket, which for most people would be considered a non-place. The reason for this is because for most people, they go into the supermarket, get their things and get out. The supermarket does not really have a lasting affect on a persons day after they have left. However, if somebody were to bump into you with their cart, and you confront them, and begin conversing, then you maybe have crossed over from non-place to place. Different people can be in different states. A shopper may be in a non-place, however a person who works at the supermarket may view it as a place because they will be interacting with people there often. I thought this was funny because I realized that I am the annoying person who often drags a person from the non-place to the place state at the grocery store by asking them some annoying question as to what they are purchasing or something like that. I apologize if this analysis didn’t really make sense to anybody, and I will try to fix it up a little bit. That’s all for now. Adios!