The Rise of Barack Obama

Pete Souza, 2008

This image was taken from a low angle. The photographer is Pete Souza. He is Barack Obama’s official Whitehouse photographer. Souza has been taking photographs of Barack Obama since his first day in the Senate. This photograph was taken while Obama was a Senator. It is the photograph on the front cover of a book called, “The Rise of Barack Obama.” Obama is running up the steps in this photograph. I’m not sure where exactly this photo is but leading up the steps, there are these elaborate buildings that look very prestigious. This can symbolize Obama’s rise to presidency as the first African American president of the United States. Obama also looks like he's in the shadows. A few more steps (maybe into presidency) and he'll be out of the dark shadows and into the light. This photo seems to symbolize a man coming from a minority entering into this elitist society. Obama is surrounded by really tall buildings and he's the darkest thing in the picture. Even though everything around him is taller and lighter, making him seem small, there is something heroic about it; being a minority, overcoming racial issues to become President. Someone from another culture might look at this picture and see how the person in it is so overcome and surrounded by buildings. It makes Western government seem monstrous and overwhelming and dominant.


http://www.petesouza.com/gallery.html?gallery=The%20Rise%20of%20Barack%20Obama

Sketch 2

Or: How I learned to Stop Worrying about Handing Things in Really Late

I chose to mess with the images from Revolutionary Self-Theory. While I read over the pages, I got the impression that this was a prototypically earnest guide to revolutionary theory of the late 60's and early 70's when there was a bigger place in pop culture for Marxist theory. Reading over the pages, there is a lot of valuable information to be gotten, but it seems so dated and irrelevant to today's culture, which has a more apathetic and cynical climate. I feel that today, the 'revolution' usually only exists through taking images found in pop culture and twisting it in new ways. Often the purpose of the manipulation is simply absurd humour, often at the expense of the figure in the photo.

In doctoring each page, I wanted to take the revolutionary content, and trivialize it with respect to today's culture of censorship, spectacle (especially in relationship to the celebrity phenomenon), and the unprecedented scale of global corporations. To do so, I (poorly) superimposed various images from pop culture, or added logos to revolutionary lines from the text, or took out critical lines of text to produce totally contrary meanings and produced the following images (maybe they speak for themselves?):

Sketch. 2 (Spectacular Times)

I do not think that the idea of citizenship has changed in terms of it being tied to the individual and to the male dominion in terms of politics and who is being represented. We usually see that the politicians are male and that our society is patriarchical where women is still marginalized and is still considered secondary in many areas such as in the home and in occupations that restrict women to fit their gender. So women such as Hilary Clinton that was running for president was questioned about her femininity that she was being a woman when she cried and many male politicians and some of the public was not sure if she would be up to the job because she was a woman again. She quotes, (We can not have true democracy unless all citizens are able to participate fully in the lives of their country.)

Also a citizen was thought to be rational, but can be emotional, feeling, and react also in my opinion. Personally, I think people show their citizenship and passion when they do not agree with issues that have a direct impact on their lives such as protesting or having a union group for change. However the government and patriarchical system does not allow us to protest for another government to take over and if we oppose the laws, we can be considered the enemy when our choices threaten the control and power of the government.

Also the word citizen is conflicted with the idea of freedom of expression which is in the Charter of Rights and Freedom, where citizen or if you are considered a person should have freedom of speech. However we are censored by saying what is appropriate and that will not threaten or override the government. Also our society is patriarchical and is privileged to whiteness, so even though we feel that our society is multicultural and there is a difference. It is limiting. The reason is that other cultures can practise their language and practices at home but in the wider realm and in public, it has to fit under the ideals of Western culture such as everyone should be educated within the Western system of education not only their language and practices and traditions of their culture will not be sufficient. Thus in this way we have to assimilate to some degree.

Lastly as a citizen, it is our responsibility to vote and to make a change in this way and voice our opinion. However at present, I do not think the majority of people that vote believe their vote will make a change at all and rather they are voting for a new face. We know that the promises that this candidate say will probably not be fulfilled and we do not have faith in our politicians that is supposedly supposed to represent for us, but could be more about their own interests. I think that it is better to not to vote because there will not be a change that we will want, but rather that we end up with spending more money especially with higher taxes. However it is ignorant and a weak stance when I complain that taxes are higher and not to exercise my agency. The change might not come immediately but over time with pressure and to keep voting then it might change but still hard to believe.

I think that the food production has still some similarities to the past by animals being treated as if they are to just to be used for human needs and that they do not have intrinsic value. Animals are treated and expected to perform efficiently and with speed to get food product to the grocery stores to feed and meet the food supply of the growing population. Animals are treated to be breed machines and that it is alright for them to be slaughtered and that hundreds of chickens for example to be housed in a large farm. Farmers and their animals had a closer relationship in that the farmers looked to their animals as part of their home and the animals would have time to develop and eat from the land. We treat our pets as a family member, yet we do not extend that to animals. Animals seems to be a commodity and property and that they do not have a mind of their own which makes humans look superior (because we do have a mind) to animals. Animals are a commodity in that it can be bought or can be exotic and property of the humans that seems to have the right to control the animal production.

Lastly, I think that the experimentation and factory production of animals is shown in humor or to sell a food product. We see animals being shot by hunters or animals that are being experimented are shown in humor and making fun of the situation. It avoids the morals and ethics that should be extended to animals. Also animals are used to sell a food product such as the picture of a cow on the milk product shows that the milk is of good quality and that stands for its brand as being the best and good for the consumer.

I like my page on the controversy of the faith and honesty of the politics and politician and where do we situate ourselves. I like that it the part that I chose to keep was a narrative and playful, but underlined who has the power, authority, control, and access. If you did not have power then you are stuck at being manipulated and in the hands of the one in power. Thus it is useless to fight against them. Even those that seem to have some power and access may have their hands tied in regards to answering and following the person who is superior to them.

It is about taking a side in terms of which politics that you have to choose for and how you situate in which position you will take. You have support and opposition, but there never seems to be a neutral position that one can take and has to be either for or against.

Politics differ from the everyday life of what is considered to be intelligent and portrays a strong position. You need to change and adapt to different environments in day to day interactions because the information is changing everytime and even then there are many media sources that gives you so much information, that it is hard to know which one is saying the truth. Thus you can take every information for granted because the source might be unreliable. However politics seem to be not as flexible and that it is rather about maintaining solidarity about the position and argument that one takes to make the argument not easy to compete and argue against.

The simulacra of the real world can be seen in ecotourism but is a false picture of reality and rather points to a utopian fanstasy and ideal rather than to everyday life. I chose Disneyland because the (reality) that is protrayed is a pristine vision that is an escape of everyday life but the most important thing is that Disneyland trieds to keep you believing in this pristine world of magic and happiness and distract you from the environmental concerns such as water table being contaminated by chemicals and more land being taken to build and expand Disneyland upon.

Some problems that I find when looking at images of Disneyland is that it is a cookie clean version and that it is a frabrication. There is no pollution and the streets seemed to be clear of debris. The people that plays the Walt Disney characters always seem to portray the character and their performance is structured so rigidly that their identity is solely based on portraying the Walt Disney characters and upholding their image and behaviour and it is not about their own individual identity. Also sites such as the Critter Contry is based on a specific culture and rather the culture is represented as something that is easy to digest, universal, and evoke nostalgia or exoticism and entertaining.

We live in a consumer culture where advertisements of products and even lifestyles such as being healthy or having a fit body is being sold to us to buy into. We are told this product will defy our age and make us beautiful and youthful or this diet will help us to lose weight faster or to relax, take some yoga or go to the spa. Even magazines such as Cosmopolitan offers advice from health to beauty to life advice and sex and there is that aspect of that this product or this advice will solve the problem and is the answer that you are looking for. Even cooking meals faster to show that women working and doing things at home as a housewife can be done and even how to sleep. Therefore there is a certain expectation that is presented in buying into these advertisements.

Media spectacle

Media - Not so black and white

With the media environment having changed from transmitting mass media to network mass media, obviously a lot have changed since the Spectacle # media was published in the 70's. The revolution of the Internet in the mid/end 90's made the understanding of medias' effects and influences on our reality change drastically, and involved us in a era of "the global village", as Marshal McLuhan predicted already in the 70's. It also made the media landscape less black and white, and more impenetrable. Bias, manipulation, social relations, false statements, identification, addiction, self-reflection and exploration / exploitation within the media today, is what my version of Spectacle # media is about.

Remix Manifesto

I found a great documentary film from the NFB about the current Remix culture and the war of the internet and issues of copyright, and I felt obligated to share it with the class.
check it out
-Thomas Zukowski

Sketch 2

The pamphlet Cities of Illusion discusses and analyzes how we as a society look to and understand power structures work. Through a series of illusions, created by institutions and corporations, a reality is constructed. I have come to the conclusion that not too much has in fact changed since the creation of this pamphlet. Many, if not all, of the concepts and ideas dissected are still present in contemporary society. People continue to live their lives in a bliss, almost completely unaware of the power-game being played by these institutions that control our lives. In fact I have come to the conclusion that perhaps the only thing that has changed from when this pamphlet was created, is that today society is even more controlled and regulated via these illusions and images. Not only that, we are growing less and less aware of it. In many cases we invite it into our lives without realizing what is going on. (i.e. Facebook, Twitter) I imagine this will continue for quite some time. That is until something revolutionary occurs, which is highly unlikely. We are so accustom to this lifestyle that no end seems to be visible. However I am left with several thoughts/questions.

To what extend can and will this control benefit institutions/corporations? If this form of control and illusions are created by institutions, which are controlled by real people what does that say about these people? are they also blinded by the illusions that they themselves are creating? CAN anyone truly be aware of these illusions?

Sketch #2

There's very little that has changed since these pamphlets have been produced. As I re-contextualized and re-appropriated the images, it was evident that the only thing that has changed is the method of production. This pamphlet, specifically, claims that 'THE BAD DAYS WILL END,' but evidently they've only increased and snowballed into greater problems.

1)The first image was once represented by a man who may have been a refugee or even a prisoner of war. As I read the text below the image, it struck me that the same statement can be said about today's wars - the secrets of war do not lay within the 'defense,' but rather the daily lives of the victims.

2)

As this image speaks of isolation, one of the major new medias that we speak of with regards to this subject matter is social networking websites. I found a quote from a blog that referred to a Daily Mail piece that stated the downfalls of this new media outlet. Below, the original image questions the desire to find something extra-ordinary - something that we can also argue a medium like Craig's List does, which is what the faded image in the background represents.

3)

One of the major issues that face the construct of childhood is who, what and how are these children being raised? As the text speaks of the re-appropriation of the term 'child's play,' it also speaks volumes about today's society and our lack of extra-curricular activities. As child's play is censored by rules and regulations, it's almost destroying childhood itself.

4)

Continuing on with the notion of 'play,' the quote that I left is striking in telling the story of Iranian Twittering. Juxtaposing the mocking image of Mickey Mouse, with that of the President of Iran, we can understand how this form of media has become destructive to the Iranian government and it's attempts to withhold / banish public outcries.

5)

The last image was previously represented by a crowd in front of (a) Pope, who was disclaiming the statement in the speech bubble; "Being in love is really wanting to live somewhere else." In our society today, this statement can be applied to the constitutional change of human rights, specifically the legalization of gay marriage.


Overall, it seems like these 'bad days' will never end. Yes, we're able to make changes - change laws, change behaviors, change our attitudes - it's evident we cannot solve problems, but rather mask them. It's said that we should remember history, but not repeat it, however the texts spoken within the pamphlet have foreseen the problems that exist today.

Sketch # 2 - Julian Bachlow

A few things have changed when you look at some of these particulars. Take for instance the way people were being regulated and informed through their television screens back in the 1960's. Now, we are being regulated by our computer and HOW. Well I will tell you how, it is because of the internet. We are able to search for anything we want, but there are still borders to what you can or cannot search. There are also people watching you behind the scenes, making sure there is no troublesome happenings going on within the browsers. We have been so fixated on the computer screen that we are now the evolution of the computers, we ourselves are becoming computers with regulations hindering our most lawful acts. We will never be safe. What about the coca-cola industry? are they still the huge corporation taking advantage of countries for some reason? one reason being taking all the water from a particular town or city, who by all means DO need the water. Oh, and also I noticed that instead of an add saying "Enjoy" coca-cola, I have noticed that it now says "Drink" coca-cola. It seems to me like it is telling me what to do. I don't like being told what to do, but sometimes maybe aggressive ads tend to reach the eyes of thirsty people. Haha, I can see through your corporate eyes coca-cola. Just another trick to grow the corporation into a super power of greed. It seems the new voice of authority is the voice of the atom-bomb, WMD (Weapons of mass destruction) so it's called. They are using these tactics to scare the people into fear. Manipulating us and causing us to act rationally. Definition of rationality- Saying something that may be true but it probably isn't. This is what has changed quite dramatically. Authorities and governments are using these terms in order to get what they want done and to gain some initiative for these problems, which in turn we the people do not have that much information on the subject to cause a war. It seems like the government tells us one thing and then 6 years later we are still battling the problems that we started off with. Evidently there is more than meets the eye, more and more participants are becoming the extremists, conjuring up a boiling pot of death and misery. Democracy is now becoming a political term that young children and teenagers don't even know what Democracy really means.. freedom of the people of freedom of the government to skew the people into doing what they want after using scare tactics to get them on there side. What will this world come to 40 years from now when this "freedom" becomes the free dumb of projected assumptions and authority.

What has changed? Not much...

After reviewing the panflits and re-creating the images, i have come to the realization that really not much has changed since the past but rather, the MEDIA have only blown more and more out of proportion which has helped lead to the rise of fear amongst the people who live in the many cities throughout the world.

The continuing examples of the media using everything against the population will continue to haunt the majority of citizens which will help keep most of the population settled in fear where as not only do we need to stop listening and believing everything the media has to say but rather begin to do more for ourselves by making change and not allowing the media and the governement in which we are supposed to trust to continue to walk over us, use us, and steal from us.

Sketch 2

Write up....

What has changed? Well, when looking at the original 'animals' pamphlet... it seems not much! We are still faced with animal cruelty today on so many levels. All that has really changed is a greater public awareness; but even with more people aware of what is going on, few corrections are being made, and what was once 'then' continues into the 'now’.

Animal cruelty takes place on many different levels, from forms of entertainment to profit, scientific research, art and beyond. Animals are not able to speak for themselves, and when put up against mankind they are basically helpless. It is fair to say that the ‘use’ of animals allows for humans to survive successfully, but just because mankind has become dependent on animal and animal resources does not mean that they can or should treat animals with disrespect. With all of the good animals do for humanity, it is almost like we are biting the hand that feeds when we incorporate acts of cruelty towards animals to benefit ourselves... although, it seems that nature has its own way of getting back at man; such as newly developed diseases that come out of mistreated farm animals which then spread to the human population...

So, back to the pamphlets and course issues... does animal cruelty fit in with the idea of spectacular?... sure, why not... as something spectacular is defined as 'resembling a spectacle; impressive, grand, or dramatic'... and it is impressive that in our modern times, animal cruelty still exists... and that it exists on such a grand scale... and that it is preformed in a dramatic and over the top way... My remade pamphlet takes modern day images of animals at 'their' worst and puts them all together with text in question... I also hope the final page leaves things on a more positive and hopeful note... [Nick Nardi]

Sketch 2

These first six remake pages are from the "Animals" handbook. I chose many from this book since it is a subject I care deeply about. The alteration I did for this page, was to change the picture but keep the quotation. I really loved this quotation, I think it's a very wise thing to be aware of; how we appear in the eyes of animals. The first picture was a cute picture of two monkeys embracing, looking kind of scared. I replaced it with this picture of a monkey who is caged and subject to medical testing. This image seems to contextualize the quotation into a modern day paradigm; the older "cute" picture seemed to symbolize a 'before human involvement' shot of nature, while this heartbreaking new picture seems to be an 'after human involvement' shot.

These next two pages share a quotation so I'll discuss them together. Once again I chose to keep the quote and change the pictures to something more contemporary. I chose to include more pictures from animal testing instead of factory farms, although I did include one picture from a slaughterhouse for balance on the issue of Animal rights. Even though these pictures are shocking and very disturbing, I believe that we need to be aware of the consequences of our greed. The quotation is very appropriate to the updated pictures since it deals with the idea of animal slavery, and the needless suffering they endure simply because we deem them less of a being than ourselves.

These pages also share a quotation, but in this instance, the quote is the altered not the pictures. In the Spectacular Times, these two pages had no print at all but I found this quote and thought it quite fitting with the imagery. The original pictures display dead chickens, presumably at a slaughterhouse, hanging upside down in a gruesome fashion. The quote discusses the animal's ability to feel as much pain as we do, without the ability to reason with it. Humans can endure terrible pain if they are focused and strong, the mind can block out the worst of the pain, or can handle it by simply keeping faith in the fact that it will not last forever. Animals cannot do this. For them it is a seemingly never ending tortured existence.

For this page, I added a picture and kept a part of the text. I thought that these two ideas would work well together, despite having different separate meanings. On its own, the cartoon is a darkly satirical take on animal testing, showing the humans caged and tortured with the animals in charge. The text is a simple statement building on the definition of a revolution. When placed with this image I think it highlights the animals' position as the oppressed, with humans as the oppressor.

This page is taken from the "Cities of Illusion" handbook of the Spectacular Times. This particular page focused on the relationship between weapons and authority. The cartoon here is original. The texts I added were two quotes from famous celebrities concerning their own pro-gun views. I chose this because I thought the connection between political authority and celebrity influence would be interesting to explore. These days celebrities have an unheard of amount of power to influence our society, and when the powers of politics and celebrity are mixed (as in the unfortunate Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger), the results can be quite disastrous.

This is actually the same page as the last one, but this time I chose to alter the picture, not the text. The distinct political content of the cartoon comments on the intense debate on gun control in the States, while the text is a quotation from a fictional work. Neither directly relate together, but when presented like this, they take on a different connotation. Now this page seems to suggest that the reason the supreme court "shot down" the gun ban in D.C. was to protect themselves so that the government may then "protect" the people.

This page was taken from the "Media" handbook. The bottom text is original, but the picture and its caption were added by me. I chose this picture to accompany that text because it addresses the constant need we have to be plugged into the electronic/televisual society in order to establish your own personal normalcy. Most people (especially young people) are constantly shoved up against the media, whether online or through TV ads. This enduring contact with the Spectacle forces these people to check themselves again the ideals of our media; always worrying that they do not fit in with the established norm.

This final page is also from the "Media" handbook. For this page, I chose to alter the caption and keep the original picture. The caption I chose is a quote from The Simpson's, which regularly pokes fun at our utter dependence on TV. This contemporizes this picture, making it reference our partiality towards the false reality of television, instead of friends or healthy hobbies. The picture of the man walking with only his TV, in search for some outlet in a post-apocalyptic world, now connotes that he chose to save his TV firstly, since it is all he has left, instead of anything living.

The style of my pages was kept simple and formulaic to try and mirror the aesthetic of the original handbooks I worked from.