The Tar Baby theme is present in the lores in various tribes of Meso-America and of South America : it is to be found such stories as the Nahuatl (of Mexico) "Lazy Boy and Little Rabbit" (González Casanova 1946, pp. 55–67), Pipil (of El Salvador) "Rabbit and Little Fox" (Schultes 1977, pp. 113–116), and Palenquero (of Colombia) "Rabbit, Toad, and Tiger" (Patiño Rosselli 1983, pp. 224–229)."
Tuesday, May 31, 2011
Monday, May 30, 2011
The Politics of Spectacle: The Gwangju Biennale and the Asian Century
Sunday, May 29, 2011
Saturday, May 28, 2011
Friday, May 27, 2011
21st Century Primo Prototype
Sense of humanity
Intelligence capacity 100 trillion synapses
Intelligence capacity 100 quadrillion synapses
Prone to environmental damage
Impervious to environmental damage
Corrosion by irritability and depression
Elimination of messy gaseous waste
Recycles and purifies waste
- Humanity stands to be profoundly affected by science and technology in the future. We envision the possibility of broadening human potential by overcoming aging, cognitive shortcomings, involuntary suffering, and our confinement to planet Earth.
- We believe that humanity's potential is still mostly unrealized. There are possible scenarios that lead to wonderful and exceedingly worthwhile enhanced human conditions.
- We recognize that humanity faces serious risks, especially from the misuse of new technologies. There are possible realistic scenarios that lead to the loss of most, or even all, of what we hold valuable. Some of these scenarios are drastic, others are subtle. Although all progress is change, not all change is progress.
- Research effort needs to be invested into understanding these prospects. We need to carefully deliberate how best to reduce risks and expedite beneficial applications. We also need forums where people can constructively discuss what should be done, and a social order where responsible decisions can be implemented.
- Reduction of existential risks, and development of means for the preservation of life and health, the alleviation of grave suffering, and the improvement of human foresight and wisdom should be pursued as urgent priorities, and heavily funded.
- Policy making ought to be guided by responsible and inclusive moral vision, taking seriously both opportunities and risks, respecting autonomy and individual rights, and showing solidarity with and concern for the interests and dignity of all people around the globe. We must also consider our moral responsibilities towards generations that will exist in the future.
- We advocate the well-being of all sentience, including humans, non-human animals, and any future artificial intellects, modified life forms, or other intelligences to which technological and scientific advance may give rise.
- We favour allowing individuals wide personal choice over how they enable their lives. This includes use of techniques that may be developed to assist memory, concentration, and mental energy; life extension therapies; reproductive choice technologies; cryonics procedures; and many other possible human modification and enhancement technologies.
The Transhumanist Declaration was originally crafted in 1998 by an international group of authors: Doug Baily, Anders Sandberg, Gustavo Alves, Max More, Holger Wagner, Natasha Vita-More, Eugene Leitl, Bernie Staring, David Pearce, Bill Fantegrossi, den Otter, Ralf Fletcher, Kathryn Aegis, Tom Morrow, Alexander Chislenko, Lee Daniel Crocker, Darren Reynolds, Keith Elis, Thom Quinn, Mikhail Sverdlov, Arjen Kamphuis, Shane Spaulding, and Nick Bostrom. This Transhumanist Declaration has been modified over the years by several authors and organizations. It was adopted by the Humanity+ Board in March, 2009.
Wednesday, May 25, 2011
Tuesday, May 24, 2011
Can cultural appropriation ever really be exploitative? Are we not
forced to open ourselves to the Otherness of the Other whether we mean
to or not? Can we really judge cultural appropriation at the level of
"the forces at work"?
On the other hand, does the "flattening" of culture in contemporary
modes really amount to western capitalist logic par excellence. Is the
the presentation of Otherness now merely reduced to form while
effectively being disemboweled of all its Otherness at the level of
(apropos Zizek on multiculturilism (from memory)) -
When we listen to say, a remix of global music, to what extent are we
actually coming into contact with Otherness and does it matter? In
what way can a remix such as this one be said to exist not entirely
within the confines of a localised, Brooklyn based internalisation of
And to what extent does it actually try to address Universality
anyway? - is it not mostly directed at undermining those claims
themsleves; that genuine dialogue and openess to the Other is inherent
in "Global Culture"?
Monday, May 23, 2011
As soon as I read the name of the group, Not an Alternative, I knew they would reference Zizek because he's always talking about how the Neo-Liberal capitalist system is so totalizing and been so succefully 'naturalized' as ideology that it seems impossible for us to imagine any alternative or that any alternative is immediately labeled Utopian. He makes the point that the albeit justifiable obsession with the environment at the moment is a bit disarming because it suggests that it's easier for us to imagine the complete destruction of the planet that to imagine an alternative to the capitalist model of society which is producing the ecological disasters. I guess it would be interesting to think about how OOO fit's into this.
I also want to think more about how 'creativity' has superseded manual labor and bureaucracy as the engine of economic value in present Western economies, in the form of the corporate work structures which companies like Google, Facebook and Apple are based on and what implication that has for artistic practice. This article by an academic at University of Queensland contained a lot of ideas which were completely new to me and also commented on how Asia is now going through this process of positioning cultural production at the center for their models of economic growth in the future.
Friday, May 20, 2011
What do you think of this argument? It is essentially economic rationalism (and so I mistrust it a lot), but its conclusions are not all totally ridiculous. I cant but help feel theres something shonky about the data: its like a divide and conquer approach by taking localised examples.
Thursday, May 19, 2011
I kind of want to do one – but really I want to find a project that I
would do anyway and just find a way to get it backed by a uni. I want
it to be theoretical in motivation but to involve field
work/experiment/projects. I want to be really clever about it so that
I do not get swallowed up/destroyed/left to die in academic