Re: Hactivism, Baldwin, MF DOOM

Been a while since the last blog post, hasn’t it? Well we’re back in full force now and we’re here to talk about hactivism. So, let’s get started.

The first piece I’ll be talking about is the Nikeplatz “piece” and I will—admittedly—approach this piece harshly. This piece generated quite a bit of discussion in the class due to its confrontational nature. Traditionally, this piece is rooted in the tradition of “culture jamming” (the grassroots phenomenon that involves estranging what corporations have made commonplace; later co-opted by (now) shit-rag Adbusters). As such, the piece takes easy-target Nike and attempts to show the invasiveness of corporate entities in the public sector. In doing so, they (0100101110101101.ORG) publicly purport (through pretending to be Nike representatives) that Nike will be buying Karlplatz and erecting a gigantic “swoosh” logo in the center, in addition to renaming Karlsplatz to Nikeplatz.

While pieces like Nikeplatz succeed in calling attention to the invasiveness of corporate entities into the public sector, they fail to generate anything beyond mild disgust from civilians. In interviews with passerby, most people express disdain for Nike and the desecration of a historically rich public park, but seem to do so only out of expectation. In other words, people know that they should be against such a thing happening, but fail to ever generate enough bile to put a stop to it. I spoke in class of Berlin’s Sony Center, a series of buildings so Japanese and out-of-place that its presence next to Berlin’s historical Tiergarten and .5 mile distance from the Brandenburg Gate makes it correlate to the Nikeplatz project. The only difference here is the fact that the Sony Center is an embraced cultural center, whereas the Nikeplatz project wasn’t. Again, the disgust generated by the Nikeplatz piece seems generated only out of expectation. This is all to say that, while I enjoy “jamming” pieces like the Nikeplatz project, I feel like the piece fails because it fails to motivate and inspire people. Who’s to say it didn’t, though, right?

The most successful type of hactivism comes from—to me—Keith Obadike’s Blackness For Sale. The piece simultaneously estranges and perverts the sort of bidding forum that Ebay is, commodifies something that we would like to believe isn’t commodified, and is self-aware/self-aggrandizing enough to joke about blackness.

Given the blog’s limited word count (or suggested word count), I’d like to talk about Craig Baldwin and the film Sonic Outlaws for the remainder of the piece. Simply put, I thought Sonic Outlaws was a masterpiece of archival and documentary film mash-up. Archival footage has long been a love of mine and to see it used to such an effect was inspiring.

Baldwin’s “thesis”—as he called it—was something that I had no problems buying into. Essentially, he believes that archival footage, commercials, orphan films, etc. are what give the best glimpse into the times in which we live. Therefore, when we look at the 60s, it’s best to look at the commercials and b-movies that were being made to really familiarize oneself with the time period. Sonic Outlaws plays upon this thesis, remixing old films (from time periods that were nonetheless heavily invested in copyright law or like-legislation) into saying exactly what he wants them to say (be it anti-Copyright rhetoric—and I don’t mean that in a bad way—or a “sign of the times” vignette). It’s pastiche with a message and a distinct speaker (though, those doing the speaking are all different) and I think it works, especially as a form of hactivism. For example, it’s hard to imagine CNN Concatenated without first looking at the work Baldwin was doing in the 80s and 90s. Hell, he’s still doing it and that’s exactly what he was doing in our class on Thursday; remixing his thesis through a variety of DVDs (god knows what would’ve happened had their been a film projector there) and talking a mile-a-minute.

Really, there was only one thing I didn’t enjoy about Baldwin’s presentation and that was his reluctance/refusal to admit rap and hip-hop into the world of “art” and not entertainment. Baldwin drew the line between his work as art and the work of “sampling” forms like rap and hip-hop, stating that the latter use sampling merely for entertainment. I will give Baldwin the benefit of the doubt and assume that he’s not familiar with the work of DJ Spooky or, more importantly, MF DOOM. I say this because, were he familiar with either of those artists, such a distinction would be inexcusable. I suppose that’s what my generation will be around for, though, to make sure the likes of Rap, Hip-hop, and DJ artists will be canonized—rightfully—as art.

If you’re not familiar with MF DOOM, here are some clips:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ewc1hixzYPY&a=gnZBoqWK7kw&
playnext_from=ML

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SFHkEzxg66s

If hactivist rhymes (dropping smart, political verses in an album full of archival samples and persona developing) aren't enough, then the samples at the end ought to do it (which segue neatly into the next song).