Comments to theme 2

1) Your reflective thoughts on how standardization and generalization oppresses people instead of making them free can also be applied to modern society. The dialectic between an increased production of media and the increased passivity from the audiences to take in the information, would be interesting to study further. I could really identify with what Aleksandra wrote in her comment above, referencing Adorno and Horkheimer about the ”escape from everyday drudgery”. When working full-time I did not have the energy when arriving home after work to consume media that required a lot of thought and cognitive capacity. I rather watched Lyxfällan, which is interesting, because it is fleeing into a world were people have problems, which ultimately are solved. It is a classic narrative technique, and I guess that’s is also to be considered a false escape. I liked how you referred to enlightenment as an ideology, which according to Marx is a set of ideas imposed by the bourgeoisie to justify that there are class inequalities. I am sure diving into how this concept applies to neo-marxism in the globalized world and looking at the world from dialectic materialistic standpoint would raise some interesting questions. To conclude I liked that you mentioned the time and circumstance surrounding the texts, that you wrote about the sub- and superstructure in a modern context and the democratic potentials of media.

https://u1j8du7c.blogspot.se/2016/09/theme-22.html?showComment=1474873995541

2) You have done a great job in describing the different concepts and explaining how your view of these has changed throughout the progression of the theme. You have covered a wide array of different subjects in a clear and concise way. By describing the enlightenment, the dialectic concepts used in Benjamin’s texts, the ontological view and how it connects to the concepts of thesis/antithesis, nominalism, myth and the revolutionary potentials of culture, you manage to describe the core concepts of these texts, which is impressing. I find the description of hierarchy of dominance to be of particular interest, especially how you connect it to the LGBT-community and the hierarchy of dominance in nature. I agree with you that popular culture can create ”false needs”, but you mention that this is particularly true for popular culture. Do you think that is also true for what is considered fine art? And what can be done to truly empower the people and give them authority to make an impact?

https://scarsickbg.blogspot.se/2016/09/theme-2-blog-post-2-critical-media.html?showComment=1474876467812

3) In the last paragraph you connect the concepts of sub- and superstructure to modern society, in a very comprehensible manner. This is an interesting dilemma, we think we are free to express ourselves freely, when in fact, we are not. So if looking at this problem from a critical theory perspective, how can we be liberated from the circumstances that enslave us? The answer according to Adorno and Horkheimer was to create a vision, that aims at making society better. One alternate way is to change the substructure, but does it have to account for society as a whole or just media technology as a integral? One last questions that emerged from reading the text was the role of media and public service today, and how the term ”tyranny of the majority”, a concept popularized by the liberal democracy-advocate John Stuart Mills, can be a backlash if media would be socialized.

https://u10o7oqf.blogspot.se/2016/09/theme-2-critical-media-studies-part-2.html?showComment=1474879382842

4) I agree that putting the texts in a societal and historical context provided extra depth to the readings and added new perspectives. While Adorno and Horkheimer focused on the US capitalistic model, Benjamin focused on how fascism introduced aesthetics into political life. During the lecture another perspective was mentioned when Henrik talked about the rise of futurism in Italy and Mussolini's influences from Freud when enhancing that the ground from which the new society should be rebuilt upon was on emotions, rather than rationality. Looking back at history reminds us about the importance of not repeating the same mistakes again. Looking at news reports today, which often alludes to emotions, medias current role in society can be questioned. What about rationality?

https://u1mv5a16.blogspot.se/2016/09/theme-2-second-blog-post.html?showComment=1474880773956

5) The way you use Plato's cave allegory to describe nominalism is really helpful, a concept that can also be linked to perception and conception as discussed in theme one. You ask whether change in society really is possible – but since the texts were written, a lot has happened. The main question in my opinion is, whether positive change is possible or if we are doomed to stupidity, laziness and passivity. Instead of using culture to reproduce societal structures, we need to question the big picture, ultimately by looking at the small components that they constitute of. It is easy to feel overwhelmed, which adds to passivity, but I am definite that it is possible to make a change. The big question is what change to make. I am not sure about revolutions being the right way to pursue societal changes, but rather moving baby-steps towards the direction you perceive to be right. By interacting and using the Socratic method or dialectic, I am sure that we increase our understanding of each other, which I believe is one way to change society in a positive manner. But as nominalism denies categorization as it could result in social oppression, I am not sure that Adorno and Horkheimer would agree with my standpoint.

https://u1gixy4z.blogspot.se/2016/09/after-theme-2-critical-media-studies.html?showComment=1474882535526

6) I think the Kanye West reference was very thought-provoking, a good example of how we are chasing superficial illusions (could they be considered as myths as well?), something I guess derives from our wish to find our place in the world. When we reach our goal, we are still not satisfied. Are we lacking an overall goal in the Western society today? As JaHaPe mentioned, when we realize we are chasing an illusion, we just find a different one to chase. So how do we overcome this problem? Is the overall goal to be free? If we by revolutionary means would erase our modern society – what would replace it? You are mentioning how Benjamin raises how everyone in society today can influence the substructure – but does it really matter if the superstructure is still controlled by such a small fraction of society (according to Oxfam the richest 62 persons are as wealthy as half of worlds population). 

https://u1kq1ay0.blogspot.se/2016/09/second-blogpost-theme-2-critical-media.html?showComment=1474890183209

7) Reading your text, I have a hard time understanding what you mean by writing that the enlightenment offered the world a certain domination over the other species. What species are you referring to? Man being more dominant than an animal? I think that has been the case since way before the enlightenment. Regarding myths you write that we can start ”the correct science”, what do you perceive to be correct in this case? Is there incorrect science? You also write that what drives humankind is the need to understand the world and prove the real truth about it. Even though I wish this was true, I don’t necessarily think it is the case. I think that a lot of people just want to confirm the things they already know, rather than understanding were the real ”truth” lies. You are connecting the thoughts on the sub- and superstructure to religion, a concept I find interesting. If looking at Sweden, one of the worlds most secularized countries, only one in five express that they don’t believe in anything at all, which I think is a small amount of people. A majority in Sweden says they believe in something, which I think could be a way of showing that faith is something I as an individual has chosen, rather than something that has been imposed upon me by the superstructure.

https://u17fpbu5.blogspot.se/2016/09/post-theme-2-critical-media-studies.html?showComment=1474900838725

8) I think the way you incorporate a modern concept (the phone) into you text and applying the theories to it shows that you have grasped the concept of sub- and superstructure. One theory that came to mind when reading your text was ”The media is the message” by McLuhan. This is a theory were one looks at the societal impact a new technology has. So you mention how our behaviour change by using this device, but looking at it from a holistic, long-term standpoint, it can also change the structure of our brain and our cognition resulting in societal impact in areas that we might not think of directly. I also liked how you wrote about historically determined perception, and the example with Jesus wearing 
Swedish folklore was very suggestive. 

https://u1bauz11.blogspot.se/2016/09/theme-2-reflection.html?showComment=1474901749099

9) In your text you are clearly highlighting both the pros and the cons of media technology. You manage to connect these ideas to the 21st century and provide the reader with different clarifying examples. In your text you mention that media is used to spread propaganda in Russian and North Korea. This is interesting because there, media is to a higher degree connected to the state, compared to Swedish media. Looking at the substructure of media technology, we need to look at the sources of income, which to a high extent is advertising. This means that the news paper must create content that caters to the great mass in order to maximize their revenue. So could one say that media in Sweden is used for propaganda as well? There are reports that say that as much as 80 percent of the content in news papers derives from press releases and with only a few dominating media conglomerates dominating a country could result in the bourgeoisie interests being represented in media, a theory that is expressed in Noam Chomsky’s book Manufactured Consent.
https://u1h4muxc.blogspot.se/2016/09/theme-22-reflection.html?showComment=1474920827267


10) After reading a few other blogposts I know that you are not the only one that had problem grasping the concepts before the lecture, myself included. In your text you describe the relation between enlightenment, myth and mimesis in a clear manner. It is ultimately about our human longing for understanding the world in which we live. Looking at what we perceive to be right today, does not necessary means that it will still be right looking back at it. We can not know what is right, but we can try to act instead of being passive and aim at more than just having a descriptive version of status quo. 

https://u1eqtjc8.blogspot.se/2016/09/theme-2-reflection.html?showComment=1474923511643