This is the url for the video of the Media Burn event. Please comment on it and what you think it says about television and US culture!http://www.mediaburn.org/Video-Preview.128.0.html?uid=4574There is a site with a discussion of early video with several members of the Videofreex and Ant Farm. They even speak about the UFO in Lanesville. http://mediaburn.org/Video-Preview.128.0.html?&uid=5668
5 comments:
The video doesn't work on my Mac in either of my browsers; those of you who also had that problem can view it here.
Um, speaking of e-waste!
At first I "got it" but it didn't work for me at all. With the initial idea of the event I had, it didn't make sense. Quite honestly, I can't relate to ever having the urge to destroy my television or all televisions or anything of the kind.
From the standpoint of culture jamming, it makes a lot of sense. I had been thinking about it as some isolated stunt that didn't make much sense, but within the context of calling itself a media event and having it broadcast, it's rather brilliant.
I prefer to think of this production as just that — not a statement or demonstration per se, but rather an interference/messing with the powers that don't get that the joke's on them. That's what makes this meaningful to me. To look at it outside the culturejam context at a purely symbolic level just doesn't do it for me.
Maybe I am not being critical enough, but I am having a hard time telling whether Media Burn is being cynical, or actually trying to promote the idea that mainstream media is used in a “brain washing” manner rather then as a tool of communication and promotion of alternative forms of thought. I did find it interesting that the movie does not really provide an answer to this question and that it, in fact, shows many different (and sometimes strange) interpretations of this “art”. I am just confused as to whether they decided to make the “biggest media event ever” a strange and satirical form of art, or whether they were actually trying to promote the messages said in “Nixon’s” talk.
ops - the last message was writen by Juliana
some comments made by the first news person, and my comments to his comments:
"their way to alleviate the frustration of watching tv"
- somehow i dont think this served to alleviate frustration. i think that the event was a commentary, perhaps, on the intent of mainstream television as it showed programs about the event.
"even though the artists were knocking television, they were using it to make their point"
- this i agree with, and what makes it so powerful to me is that this reporter does not even seem to understand the degree to which he is part of the performance of it. i would argue that "media burn" itself was not the event, but the production of news shows about media burn and the watching of these shows and the discourse sparked by them were in fact the event.
~julia
It's interesting in the light of Julia's comment that this the the first post on this blog that has generated FIVE comments. Maybe the production of reaction is the goal of this "event".
DeeDee
Post a Comment