It has come to my attention that The Gutter Art Critic has been dormant for a long time, over two years to be precise. I am not sure why this happened. Maybe it was because I got into graduate school, maybe because I was busy with making work and residencies abroad, maybe it was life and maybe I couldn't bring myself to write anything sensible other than complaints about the fucked up things I saw around myself. Whatever it was.... today is a new beginning, a rebirth of The Gutter Art Critic. I hope that two years of graduate art school has given me a new perspective, I also hope that living near Los Angeles, the supposed new capital of the art world (whatever that means) has given me a new impetus to write about art and culture from ground zero. Ok, maybe not quite ground zero, I don't actually live in Los Angeles, maybe ground five and a half, because I am pretty close, as close as I think I can stand it. But don't get me wrong, I actually like Los Angeles, well, parts of it anyway. I also hope that you, my readers, wherever you are and whoever you are, will find the new blog interesting and worth the effort. Since I started GAC there have been close to 10K hits, which is way more than I would have every predicted. Ok, I realize that GAC has ten followers right now (thank you wherever you ten people are right now!) and that in the scope of real readership for mainstream blogs 10K is like a drop in the ocean, but GAC is not concerned with numbers. I couldn't give two shits less about the popularity contest we call western culture right now. What I want is to put out something that is real, authentic and that has feeling. This stuff comes from the heart! For the past two years I've been writing academic theory papers and working on a thesis using peer reviewed materials, primary and secondary sources, and on and on. Much of the time I don't know where my theory begins and someone else's opinion ends, or vice versa. The new GAC is hopefully going to meld the shit I learned in grad school with the real world shit I experienced, without the ridiculous opinions of others who think that I'm either not going far enough or that I have already gone too far, even if it concerns the same piece of work or writing. That said though, I want to say that I enjoy reading the comments left on GAC, I do read them and I look for them. If you read this and want to comment, do it and I thank you for it! I may respond but I also may not. Grad school definitely taught me that everyone has an opinion, but opinions are like assholes, everybody has one. Stay tuned!!
First, I would like to point out that in no way am I offering any sort of diagnosis of Slavoj Zizek’s speech impediment. This article/essay is a simple exercise in perception, and yes, a Zizekian analysis. What do we get when we apply Zizek’s theories to Zizek himself? The answer may or may not be surprising, depending on whether you are a Zizek follower or an anti-Zizek propagandist. In an analysis of The King’s Speech, Zizek points out that the king’s stuttering makes the king self-conscious and in a way embarrassed. As a divine ruler, the king of England should be a confident authority figure perfectly capable of assuming the role of the head of state. Delivering messages to the masses through oratory on the radio is just one of the ways that the king’s authority is projected to the public and if the people hear that in the voice of the king is a slight imperfection, this may be read as a fault that might preclude the king fr...
Comments
Post a Comment