Yoshie wrote,
>Tom, we can't "focus on the individual's role when discussing
>solutions to the planet's problems" (as Shawna Richer says Sut Jhally
>does) such as the individual's consumer choices. That's not a
>dialectical critique of capitalism. That's more like a program of
>Global Excha
>Let's simplify this discussion:
>
>undialectical critique of capitalism: bad
>undialectical apology for capitalism: bad
>dialectical critique of capitalism: good
>dialectical apology for capitalism: intellectually dishonest
>
>The latter proceeds by mistaking a dialectical critique for an undiale
Tom Walker wrote:
>
> Hey! What is this Yoshie? Theory of inevitable progress? Let me assure
> Yoshie and Daniel that I am not a woozy pre-capitalist romantic.
This thread had (mostly) developed in terms of characterizations of
either the participants in the thread or of "leftists-in-general."
Hey! What is this Yoshie? Theory of inevitable progress? Let me assure
Yoshie and Daniel that I am not a woozy pre-capitalist romantic. But I will
continue to wonder why such assurances are necessary at all. Look at my
primitive tools, youse guys: notebook computers, scanners, printers,
spreadshee
-Original Message-
From: Yoshie Furuhashi [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: 26 February 2002 08:48
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [PEN-L:23239] Re: Dallas Smythe student
Tom says:
>The anxiety isn't over pleasure and sensuality per se, but over the
>commodification of p
Tom says:
>The anxiety isn't over pleasure and sensuality per se, but over the
>commodification of pleasure and sensuality -- a process that is no doubt so
>far advanced that it becomes hard to conceive of pleasure and sensuality in
>any other terms.
Non-commodified pleasure and sensuality under
Sabri Oncu wrote:
>
> Carrol,
>
> Do you see what I mean?
>
> > economists receiving Nobel Price since he ...
>
> You have serious spelling problems with this language and you
> better do something about it. Moreover, what is this calling what
> everybody else calls football soccer, what eve
On Monday, February 25, 2002 at 11:33:33 (-0500) Doug Henwood writes:
>Tom Walker wrote:
>
>>This kind of hijacking selected words out of context and insinuating that
>>they mean something else is pointless. I would say juvenile, but would be
>>insulting to children. The context was the role of ad
What I see that I object to is not so much asceticism as good old fashioned
oppositional smugness. I object to it, though, with some humility. There's a
long tradition of smugness alternating between politically correct
asceticism and bohemian hedonism. For chrissake think of the sixties maoists
a
Carrol,
Do you see what I mean?
> economists receiving Nobel Price since he ...
You have serious spelling problems with this language and you
better do something about it. Moreover, what is this calling what
everybody else calls football soccer, what everybody else calls
wrestling football and
Michael wrote:
> Slanderous lies. PEN-L has a strict fashion code,
> and my makeup is impecable.
Hey,
I know a business professor here at UC Berkeley who recently dyed
his hair purple. Should we invite him to this list? He is quite a
nice and extremely clever fellow from Israel who is opposed
> Doug Henwood wrote:
>
> > I'll bet a
> > lot of PEN-Lers don't approve of makeup or stylish clothes either.
Michael Perelman writes:
> Slanderous lies. PEN-L has a strict fashion code, and my makeup is
> impecable.
me too. I'm sure that most of you want to know that when I sit at the
comput
Re: Tran Vanh Dinh. Listed here in Edwin Moise biblio. Moise
is a big source in Gabriel Kolko book from mid 90's on Vietnam
War, specifically on North Vietnamese land reform that has been
for decades subject to alot of debate esp. from Trotskyists and
others I'm familiar with.
Michael Pugliese
Slanderous lies. PEN-L has a strict fashion code, and my makeup is
impecable.
Doug Henwood wrote:
> I'll bet a
> lot of PEN-Lers don't approve of makeup or stylish clothes either.
>
> Doug
--
Michael Perelman
Economics Department
California State University
Chico, CA 95929
Tel. 530-898-5321
And my juvenile point was that a lot of this critique is a rather
undigested rehash of a lot of Puritan hair-shirt crap. You may think
the quote is out of context - I think it's a revealing expression of
anxiety over pleasure and sensuality. It is also likely to have
little political appeal be
Hey, I got my hair streaked gold last week! It doesn 't show up much on
white though. And the stylist assured me it would wash out, which it
did. But I still don't understand why ANY criticism of consumption
makes the critic a hair-shirter.
Gene Coyle
Doug Henwood wrote:
> Forstater, Mathew
Forstater, Mathew wrote:
>Tom writes:
>
>>The anxiety isn't over pleasure and sensuality per se, but over the
>>commodification of pleasure and sensuality
>
>this is Smythe's view, in my understanding.
Mine too. But in all the analyses of this genre I've seen - and along
with Jhally, I'm thinki
Re: Tran Vanh Dinh. Listed here in Edwin Moise biblio. Moise
is a big source in Gabriel Kolko book from mid 90's on Vietnam
War, specifically on North Vietnamese land reform that has been
for decades subject to alot of debate esp. from Trotskyists and
others I'm familiar with.
Michael Pugliese
Doug Henwood wrote:
> a lot of this critique is a rather
> undigested rehash of a lot of Puritan hair-shirt crap.
"A lot of X is Y." This is the sort of thing that gets an English 101
theme marked down for pure sloppiness.
Carrol
Not being a mind reader, I haven't the slightest idea what Doug's "a lot of
this critique" refers to. Sut Jhally? The Media Education Foundation? Dallas
Smythe? The critique of consumerism in general? (and here we could branch
off into other specifics, Marcuse's repressive sublimation? the volunta
Doug,
From reading your position on consumption over some
time, and Mandel below, I believe Mandel is not with you, nor you with
him. Mandel opens with
>6. The genuine extension of the needs (living standards) of the
>wage-earner, which represents a raising of his level of culture
>The consumption described by Mandel -- who was following Marx closely in
this regard -- was not consumerism, but using material means to elevate
oneself. Virtually nothing that you can see advertised on television would
meet that standard.<
not even Prozac or Viagra?
Jim Devine [EMAIL PROTECT
I am way behind in e-mail messages, but would recommend Smythe's book,
called Dependency Road: Communications, Capitalism, Consciousness, and
Canada to everyone. Smythe had been a visiting prof at Temple the two
years before I started there, and it seemed like everyone was reading
him when I arr
One can attack consumerism without calling for the donning of hairshirts.
The consumption described by Mandel -- who was following Marx closely in
this regard -- was not consumerism, but using material means to elevate
oneself. Virtually nothing that you can see advertised on television
would me
Tom Walker wrote:
>This kind of hijacking selected words out of context and insinuating that
>they mean something else is pointless. I would say juvenile, but would be
>insulting to children. The context was the role of advertising in the media
>and culture. The point is about advertisers promisi
This kind of hijacking selected words out of context and insinuating that
they mean something else is pointless. I would say juvenile, but would be
insulting to children. The context was the role of advertising in the media
and culture. The point is about advertisers promising people things they
c
Eugene Coyle quoted:
> Designer Kenneth Cole's latest glossy multipage
> spread in magazines and on billboards offers pithy
> advice on how to live from Sept. 12 on: "Buy some
> shoes," Jhally says wryly. "Really, after a while,
>
Sut Jhally sounds like my kind of fellow alumnus. Unfortunately his lecture
is on a Friday afternoon, one of my most congested. I'll see what I can do.
I disagree with one claim in the article. Dallas Smythe wasn't the first to
look at media as economic institutions. I wouldn't claim Walter Benj
>From the article Gene sent:
> "When intellectuals talk among themselves, they
> talk in a way that is impossible for a general
> audience to understand," he says. "They may be
> talking about great things, but they're in an
> intellectual alley. Unless we talk to that kid,
> we're just hanging o
Published on Saturday, February 23, 2002 in the
Toronto Globe & Mail
Shop Till You ... Stop!
by Shawna Richer
Sut Jhally has seen the enemy, and it is ads.
The 46-year-old communications professor at the
30 matches
Mail list logo