Mckeon and Foucault Talk

Mckeon and Foucault both address the relation of privacy and power in their writings.  However, the manner in which they do so differs.  Mckeon takes a more passive approach, almost opposite of Foucault, by concentrating on privacy and the divisions of a building to promote privacy.  Foucault concentrates on the partitions of space to promote separation and publicity.  In order to maintain power, privacy becomes a major role.  In Mckeon’s example of the birthing room where behind closed doors only women were allowed, this space becomes mystified by men.  It is similar to the mystification caused by the central tower in the panopticon, since it is not known what is going on in either.  Mckeon illustrates how the political elite exhibit more private architecture in their homes.  This is important to mystify power while the poorer subjects remain more visible. Just like the panopticon, visibility promotes control.  Mckeon chooses not to reference Foucault in his essay and I believe it is a powerful move.  By not relating his work to a motivating force like Foucault, he is able to take his own ideas and express them in a manner that emulates his work but does so in an extremely different manner.  Effective control of masses can be expressed by the degree of privacy and publicity exhibited.  Powerful forces, while public appearances are often made, stay hidden and mystified from the public domain.  This can be seen by many world leaders and dictators.  The common person is then controlled by a workforce such as the police or military. Partitioning space allows the mysticism of power and the control of masses by separation and distinction of individuals.  Each essay is an equivalent match in terms of persuasion, but Foucault is more direct in his expression and can therefore influence, to a greater degree, the readers more effectively.  

Division of power and class can be seen by the partitioning of space.  One is more private allowing mysticism, while the other is more public offering control. 

Panoptic Influence in Modern Society

The Panopticon is a simplistic structure that is able to harness the power of the unknown to control a mass of individuals.  This plain design, an outer ring of cells circling a central tower, relies on the idea that someone being watched will be less likely to act out or will increase productivity.  But is this truly the case?  Foucault uses the metaphor of the plague that swept through Europe as an example of its effectiveness.  The plague, he describes, as a force that allowed the complete control of a town.  When the plague would break out, the masses would be quarantined to their homes and every individual would be accounted for.  If you were to leave your home you could be killed.  And it was this fear of being discovered escaping that led to the extreme effectiveness of the plague as a governmental enforcer.  The Panoptic principle of observation as the largest deterrent of acting out can be seen in modern situations.  The use of security cameras, in most cases, will deter the criminal from committing a crime.  However, just like the tower in the Panopticon does not need a person inside to still work effectively, the cameras do not have to even be hooked up or real for that matter to still deter crime.  In Bordo and Nochlin, the advertisers influence the public to dress and behave like the individuals in the ads.  This power comes from Foucault’s Panopticon.  The public will be fearful of being different, and seen by their peers as different, and will succumb to the advertisements and purchase the products.  The Panopticon is easy to see how it functions, but in the real world, the so called “tower” is less obvious.  It is embedded within art, ads, schools, and clothing.  The Panoptic structure is alive in modern society today.  

The all seeing eye is representative of the tower in the Panopticon.

Bordo or Nochlin

  Sexuality and masculinity are terms that have changed drastically over the years.  Bordo’s essay Beauty (Re)discovers the Male Body does a wonderful job at representing modern cultures idea of both.  Throughout history nude bodies have been included in art and advertisement.  Both Nochlin and Bordo acknowledge this fact.  It is however the female body that has become the subject of both classical art, represented in Nochlin’s Renoir’s Great Bathers: Bathing as Practice, Bathing as Representation, and in advertisement.  It is through both of these essay’s that there seems to be a bit of agreement.  Nochlin is strong in her stance that the male viewer and gaze is present in all of the bathing pictures included in her text.  The male view is then too present in every one of Bordos.  To think that the judging eyes of man painted the bather’s as well as the ads seems contradicting but it is not.  Masculinity has become mystified, as Bordo says, “men are not supposed to enjoy being surveyed period. It’s feminine to be on display”.  Here they are in agreement that a manly bias is attached to the bathers, but to think that men can observe other men shows how Bordo relates more to present culture.  It is now alright for men to look at underwear models and judge them, as well as themselves.  The movement towards the male body becoming more liberated can be seen in films with increasing male nudity.  Nochlin speaks as if men gaze disgustingly at the female body.  But they are now looking alongside women at men in the same way.  

Looking at this ad it is hard to tell whether it is selling a surfboard or bathing suit.  However, both parties, male and female, can gaze lustfully or objectively and not be judged.

The Ghost of Old Tom Joad

The Ghost of Old Tom Joad is a classic Bruce Springsteen song.  It was originally marketed as a mellow folk song but was taken and reformatted by Rage Against the Machine.  Each version of the song does an excellent job at presenting the lyrics in different contexts.  The way each band decided to deliver the words has a profound effect on the way they are perceived.  Bruce Springsteen argues that the story of Tom Joad is a lonely, sad and depressing one.  On the other hand, Rage Against the Machine presents it in a manner filled with anger and angst.

            Because the musical genres of Bruce and Rage differ so much, I am going to focus mainly on the presentation of the lyrics.  In Bruce’s version, the song begins with only guitar and vocals.  The choice to have the drums and the rest of the band come in on the lyrics “He pulls a prayer book out of his sleeping bag,” was deliberative.  Often in folk music religion comes up.  And I believe the band backing this line draws attention to it.  Bruce’s version is no doubt more somber than rages.  The harmonicas do a very good job at projecting a ad and heavy tone.

            In Rage Against the Machine’s version, anger is the main focus.  The music starts strong and heavy but relaxes as the vocals come in.  In general the lyrics are presented in a much more aggressive fashion, but emphasis on certain words provides fuel for the pain.  Lyrics like “You got a hole in your belly and gun in your hand “ and “Welcome to the new world order, Families sleepin' in their cars in the Southwest “ can all be taken as angry statements by the way they are presented.  Rage uses the words “No Rest” and repeats them one more time shouting them.  This is the best example demonstrating the anger in the lyrics.  Both bands present the same lyrics in a very different manner.  A combination of musical styles and vocal styles provide the context needed to present the song to both a folk music fan base as well as an alternative rock fan base.

A similar example can be found with Paint it Black covered by The Black Dahlia Murder.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h2jDGqy0p3U

A Response to Berger

Berger states that “If we can see the present clearly enough, we shall ask the right questions of the past.” I believe this to be correct.  If you can find facts, you will be able to ask the right question.  However, if you ask the question first, you will look for facts to support it even though it may be false.  Mysticism operates in a manner such as this where a question is asked about an image’s past and history is filled in around it.  This mystery in art occurs because the artist themselves are the only ones who truly know what is going on in the work.  Everyone else is left to speculate and interpret.  I do not believe this to be a bad thing however and in fact allows us to make of art as we please.  The mysticism that surrounds older pieces and even new ones gives us an opportunity to imagine for ourselves which I think is what any artist would want.

The modern era has allowed for replication of art.  This has changed the way art is now viewed.  Valuable oil paintings that were once a single moment in time captured on a single canvas can be screen printed on a t-shirt or sent in an email.  I believe this to have more of a benefit today than a harmful affect or decrease of the originals value.  Take for example the works of Andy Warhol. http://www.alt-web-design.com/photo-tutorials/images/andy-warhol-effect-all.jpg His art produced by screen-print can literally pump thousands of replicas.  This does not decrease the powerful imagery he conveys but instead shares its meaning with a much broader audience.