That makes the searing brightness of the day serve only just to blind them
So far today I have called several doctors and am hoping not to have to fight with my insurance, since that would be absolutely a fun time right now. Have some further Readercon flotsam.
1. In the general department of getting used to my face, I feel I might look less like an effigy if my eyes weren't closed, but I'm still glad![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
spatch in his Twitter-searching ran across this photo. (I believe we were all listening to teri.zin saying something resonant and smart.)
2. Forashnistrike: the point is not that I didn't get placed on this panel at Readercon, the point is that I liked my answer to the question of what anti-fascist aesthetics might look like and since I didn't get a chance to field-test it on a captive audience, I'm field-testing it on a captive audience.
I don't believe that I have a silver bullet for fascism any more than the next person who would like a road map out of our new international nightmare, but the deep unreal nostalgia of it has struck me more than once; as an aesthetic it is so dependent on imaginary constructions of the past (Aryan purity, Roman nationalism, Little England, MAGA) that just the act of remembering the world as it was can feel like radical pushback. Fascism sells simple stories: this is what a real person looks like. That's the source of your troubles, all of them right there. In the good old days, everyone knew their place. Anti-fascism reminds of the complexity, the plurality of the historical past as well as the present—the women who fought, the men who wept, the non-white civilizations, the queerness everywhere. Fascism is sleek and seamless and streamlined, there's a reason it ate the Italian Futurists alive: it buffs the surface to such a high gloss, who'd want to look under the hood? I would expect anti-fascism to turn over every rock it can get, to show you the moving parts, the structures, the intricacy and the work of being alive. When fascism trumpets that only the fittest survive, anti-fascism should note Darwin's theory of sexual selection—in which aesthetics and female choice play far more of a part than simple survivalism—and be aggressively kind. It might be a cut-up aesthetic, a lot of it might be handmade, it should never be so artisanal that it disappears up its own gentrification and never anti-intellectual, because fascism hates thinking. It should know how to listen. It should value what Bundism called doikayt—hereness, the world we live in, the world we share—over some narrow brutal dream that never even was real. What would that look like in speculative fiction? It might look like the space opera of Yoon Ha Lee, the secondary-world fantasy of Rose Lemberg, the cosmic horror of Ruthanna Emrys. Niceness is optional, compassion a must. Above all, because fascism is such an aesthetic of hatred and fear, anti-fascism should welcome the Other, which is what each of us is to one another anyway. Anti-fascist aesthetics certainly looked like Le Guin.
3. I believe this is the line I was trying to remember from Lloyd Alexander's The Beggar Queen (1984): "'The world is absurd,' Keller told Sparrow. 'Thank heaven for that. Otherwise, I—we, that is—would have no occupation.'"
1. In the general department of getting used to my face, I feel I might look less like an effigy if my eyes weren't closed, but I'm still glad
spatch in his Twitter-searching ran across this photo. (I believe we were all listening to teri.zin saying something resonant and smart.)2. For
ashnistrike: the point is not that I didn't get placed on this panel at Readercon, the point is that I liked my answer to the question of what anti-fascist aesthetics might look like and since I didn't get a chance to field-test it on a captive audience, I'm field-testing it on a captive audience.I don't believe that I have a silver bullet for fascism any more than the next person who would like a road map out of our new international nightmare, but the deep unreal nostalgia of it has struck me more than once; as an aesthetic it is so dependent on imaginary constructions of the past (Aryan purity, Roman nationalism, Little England, MAGA) that just the act of remembering the world as it was can feel like radical pushback. Fascism sells simple stories: this is what a real person looks like. That's the source of your troubles, all of them right there. In the good old days, everyone knew their place. Anti-fascism reminds of the complexity, the plurality of the historical past as well as the present—the women who fought, the men who wept, the non-white civilizations, the queerness everywhere. Fascism is sleek and seamless and streamlined, there's a reason it ate the Italian Futurists alive: it buffs the surface to such a high gloss, who'd want to look under the hood? I would expect anti-fascism to turn over every rock it can get, to show you the moving parts, the structures, the intricacy and the work of being alive. When fascism trumpets that only the fittest survive, anti-fascism should note Darwin's theory of sexual selection—in which aesthetics and female choice play far more of a part than simple survivalism—and be aggressively kind. It might be a cut-up aesthetic, a lot of it might be handmade, it should never be so artisanal that it disappears up its own gentrification and never anti-intellectual, because fascism hates thinking. It should know how to listen. It should value what Bundism called doikayt—hereness, the world we live in, the world we share—over some narrow brutal dream that never even was real. What would that look like in speculative fiction? It might look like the space opera of Yoon Ha Lee, the secondary-world fantasy of Rose Lemberg, the cosmic horror of Ruthanna Emrys. Niceness is optional, compassion a must. Above all, because fascism is such an aesthetic of hatred and fear, anti-fascism should welcome the Other, which is what each of us is to one another anyway. Anti-fascist aesthetics certainly looked like Le Guin.
3. I believe this is the line I was trying to remember from Lloyd Alexander's The Beggar Queen (1984): "'The world is absurd,' Keller told Sparrow. 'Thank heaven for that. Otherwise, I—we, that is—would have no occupation.'"
no subject
"Sleek and seamless and streamlined" reminded me of the research that shows the connection between the disgust response and authoritarianism, the philosopher Martha Nussbaum's work examining how disgust at our physical natures gets projected and used in structures of oppression against women, the disabled, Dalits, homosexuals, and others. And there is, of course, Trump's well known, self admitted, germ phobia.
In a ruthless way, I can't help but wonder if a useful strand of anti-fascist aesthetic would be to code authoritarian characters and ideas in ways that evoke pollution, contamination, and unpleasant elements of being physically embodied beings.It might be nobler, of course, to reclaim the body and "what is", and less painful/problematic to avoid using against fascists the sort of rhetoric they instinctively grasp at.
But if authoritarian views can be predicted by intensity of physiological reactions to body odor or disgusting images, it seems counterproductive, at least, to default to portraying fascists in the modes they prefer: rows of gleaming white stormtroopers, sleek black leather outfits modeled on the the designs of Hugo Boss. And isn't it arguably more humane to lead people instinctively fixated with concerns of cleanliness and contamination away from bad ideas?
Of course, weaponizing descriptive language or cinematic images probably fits more on the realm of memetic warfare than aesthetics.
no subject
Thank you!
It might be nobler, of course, to reclaim the body and "what is", and less painful/problematic to avoid using against fascists the sort of rhetoric they instinctively grasp at.
Yeah, I am generally in favor of the body being what the body is (even if the body doesn't work very well) and not rhetoricizing it as icky from whatever direction, because that just seems to lead to problems in the long run.
it seems counterproductive, at least, to default to portraying fascists in the modes they prefer: rows of gleaming white stormtroopers, sleek black leather outfits modeled on the the designs of Hugo Boss.
I agree very strongly, especially since it leads to adopting their view of themselves.
no subject
You are almost certainly right. Still, there may be some space to show fascists as gassy, sloppy, with mustard stains on their wrinkled clothes, sweating. If Mel Brooks is correct that getting people to laugh at fascists is a good thing, perhaps one could prioritize the types of humor that we otherwise don't find objectionable, but which hits their hot buttons.
And, in political rhetoric, one might lean harder into perfectly true observations that serve to alienate them from their constituency.Their policies poisoned Flint's drinking water. Their deregulation means that polluters will contaminate the air you breath. Their cruel desire to keep people from accessing healthcare spreads disease.
I'm increasingly sorry I missed this panel. But having too many good choices is part of the charm of Readercon.
no subject
Hell, yes. See also Ernst Lubitsch. To Be or Not to Be (1942) still has teeth.
On the one hand, you want to avoid the all too common equation of evil with ugliness. On the other, these people are genuinely repugnant. They are grotesque. I was going to write that their regime is perverted beyond the dreams of de Sade, but then I remembered The 120 Days of Sodom (1785) and Pasolini's Salò (1975). So we might as well call them out on it.
Their policies poisoned Flint's drinking water. Their deregulation means that polluters will contaminate the air you breath. Their cruel desire to keep people from accessing healthcare spreads disease.
That's good and that is true. Share it somewhere that isn't just my comments.
no subject
I shall, and I apologize for getting carried away and using you comments as a composition book!
no subject
I don't mind at all! Just not that many people read my comments.