... so come give me a hUg...

Identity politics has always intrigued me by the way it (defining one's identity through association with a- usually marginalised- group), allows people to feel like they fit in, while at the same time, allowing them to feel "unique". Our culture demands that we buy into one/many of these various identities so that we may feel empowered, at some level, and I have generally leaned towards the understanding that identity politics distracts people from recognizing shared commonalities that would help to reverse feelings of alienation.

The debate about 50 Cent turned my brain insideout somewhat, in that I thought more about how the hyperbolization of black male stereotypes might really be a disruption of hegemonic discourse, and not simply an identity manufactured by capitalist entities for consumption by anyone with ears- white suberbanites, african americans in urban ghettos, or whoever. I'm not fully convinced, however, because 50 Cent is still not challenging that identity stereotype in any way. I'm not sure if the hyperbolization, among a culture that hyperbolizes so many marginalized identities (for example, italian americans, arabs, gay men, etc.) really is as empowering one might think.

I think 50 Cent "fits into" his identity group quite well, but that group has been put into quite a nice box by elites, and his success and power is quite dependant on that box keeping a certain shape.

P.S.- I, for one, LOVE the song he does with The Game...

This class makes me miss cableTV

As someone who leans strongly towards socialism, I can see the merits in Adorno and Horkheimer's argument that asserts that the economic base is the primary determining factor for how our material surroundings present themselves. Capitalism has definitely succeeded in injecting its beneficiaries' values into all aspects of culure; even a little into those aspects that consciously aim to defy the "culture industry". There is simply no escaping it completely. Even though I've chosen not to get cable television, I still feel shot at every day with values that are not mine, in newspapers, public space in general, and in conversations with people who also live within the same superstructure.

Maybe I sound paranoid and hyper-critical, but I suppose I do have that side of me. Is this side of me might be the agency that White speaks about? I very much appreciate White's referrencing of Gramsci, who wrote about how the masses give consent to be passified. There is definitely a certain enjoyment in being entertained and told what to aspire to, and I definitely enjoy watching TV (Oz and Coronation Street being my favourite shows, FYI).

I know I have agency to watch television, or read magazines, billboards, and newspapers with a critical perspective, however sometimes I wonder if I am able to do so because I have been fortunate enough to be able to be taught to do so. Taking university classes on media politics and literacy is not something most people can do. Not that one is only able to be critical if one attends university, but I know that I myself, personally, would not be as observant to the ideology of media texts and discourses had I not taken these classes.

Through this rambling I am trying to bring up how Adorno and Horkheimer have great- although expressed in a rather pretentious manner- insight into the deep permeation of bourgois ethics within our culture(s). However, I also agree with White that agency exists within the hegemony... although I'm unsure as to whether that agency is also somewhat privileged.

The word "blog" sounds funny...

Having my thoughts in such a public forum is new- I used to think it was a narcisistic practice to blog; putting your private thoughts out there for everyone to judge. But after having some random converstaons with bloggers, I realize that it provides a lot of opportunity for dialogue that isn't possible in "non-internet world" because of physical location of people, their willingness to approach others so directly, etc. Jacqueline rhodes' article also made the excercise more apealing by putting into a collectivist standpoint, and explaining how it can be used to interrupt the current discourse. I also like the oppositional approach to the theory on banking education, that blogging for a class assignment takes. The thought of not having to write another term paper with a thesis, middle, and conclusion makes me HAPPY. I am warming up to this excercise, even though it feels a little awkward- perhaps a lot like public speaking.

I'm hoping this will help me to gain some insight as to how to express myself in such an informal text, as well as to build on a collective and poiltical feminism that I don't see enough around me in the physical world. And although I consider myself a feminist, I am still learning what feminism means for me. I know others have a great sense of what it is for themselves, but I hope this will provide open discussion that won't make me, and others feel imbecilic for being, well, a little ignorant...