VeryMuchSoButMaybeNot
maandag 30 mei 2011
mes un club!
Anyhow, it brough back to me the argument by Terry Eagleton that football is the modern delirium of the people, made during the World Cup:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/jun/15/football-socialism-crack-cocaine-people
But see for a counter-point:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/jul/06/footballs-debt-socialism-world-cup
So, football as a kind of false consciousness, distracting people from the real material forces that shape their existence. I'm sure he meant it tongue in cheek. But as someone who favours the idea of the superstructure 'determining' the infrastructure, though not in an idealist sense, I think a different perspective can help. Like art, sports in the modern world are one of the areas in which values can be expressed. But art (within institutions) these days is hierarchical, it demands you fit in with a certain class of people, speak their language, imitate their manners, etc. To demand meaning, allowing for discourse and reflection, exposes you as a, well, a hooligan. Of course, there is art that does that, but it is marginal and not connected with either the elite or the people (just with generic creators and spectators).
Football is different, here values are displayed and they address society as a whole. Bruce Trigger in his 2003 magnus opum Comparing early civilizations wrote about values such as the warrior culture of the Mexica (Aztecs), the self-restraint of the Egyptian bureaucrat class and Yoruba competitiveness, as constituting a key element in these societies. More or less similar forms of organisation (infrastructures) can be coupled with very different superstructures. And here football comes in as a modern-day version for displaying such values, appropriately rooted in Renaissance Italy. As such, it actually trumps capitalism, socialism or any other meta-ideas about the economy. What is at stake is the relation of the individual to the collective in modern life and civilisation.
That is why Barça's victory over Real Madrid in the semi-finals was so important, one with cosmological dimensions. In the current philosophy, the universe of Real Madrid is centered on the celebrity, both with its coach (whose name I will not mention here) and with players like Ronaldo. Enormous sums have been spent by its president to gather these galactico players, who are all part of the celebrity show and culture of money determining everything, as well as a sometimes ugly show of egocentrism. For FC Barcelona by contrast it is the team collective and values of cooperation and beautiful footbal that are the core of the team's style. Messi of course epitomizes this philosophy, and like Xavi and many others was raised in it as a youngster on the training grounds there. Everything about them displays these values, and their victories materialize them in reality. This has an impact, not only in Europe but especially in the rest of the world, like the changing Arab countries.
The structure of the club, which involves not only football but also other sports, is also interesting. The members, known as socios, elect the president every four years in a kind of corporate democracy. Of course, it also is a corporation in that the salaries of the players are really high compared to those of ordinary Catalans that struggle to get by. Better than to spend it on bankers, though. Barça represents real added value to society, which is why its hymn talks about it as mes un club!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L2O_cLcWyck&feature=feedf
Of course, the Dutch have a kind of connection with the Catalan club, some of which is explored in this (Dutch) movie:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pAXtTscsmsk
That's it, I'm going back to my obscure Mycenaean high-culture work now.
zaterdag 6 november 2010
dogs chasing their own tails
“It is very remarkable that we should be inclined to think of civilization – houses, trees, cars, etc. – as separating man from his origins, from what is lofty and eternal, etc. Our civilized environment, along with its trees and plants, strikes us as though it were cheaply wrapped in cellophane and isolated from everything great, from God, as it were. That is a remarkable picture that intrudes on us.” (50e)
It is indeed a remarkable picture, but upon further reflection it is not intrinsic to modernity but rather appears more strongly Christian in character. Humans as alienated from God appears regularly in the Church Fathers. It led some of them into the Egyptian desert to live like animals and find God again. I remember visiting such a site, Deir el-Baramus, back in 2002 as part of an archaeology project. Outside the monastery you could find scores of very simple habitation holes in the desert. Only the wind to kept you company. A good place for an alienated man to find God again. It strikes me that, come to think of it, this idea of alienation has always been part of Western spiritual culture. Should we then be very surprised that it recurs in the modern world that we have made? As Marshall Sahlins recently observed:
“Here was a clear injunction to expand structuralism to the infrastructure. Rather than a discontinuity, temporal as well as ontological, wherein culture appears as the symbolic afterthought of a material practice that has its own rationality, what is entailed in infrastructuralism is the realization of encompassing conceptual schemes in the particular material function of provisioning the society. Economy, one might even say, is the objectification of cosmology.” (Sahlins, 2010: 375-6)
This brings me to my main point. If one wants to overcome alienation, how can one achieve it? The Soviet example was to try to develop a new kind of culture, to achieve a radical break with the past. Theirs was what is now called the 'communist hypothesis'. Recently this has been elaborated by Alain Badiou and Slavoj Zizek in a number of books, as an alternative to the contemporary version of modernity in crisis. While I am interested in alternatives to the present, their hypothesis contains some very peculiar elements. Apparently they think Paul of Tarsus, the founding father of the Christian church as an institution, is a central inspiration in their quest for a different world. I don't know, maybe they are ironic, but how can you use the originator of much of the problem as its solution? Both men seem to act like dogs who are chasing their own tails. No wonder both never yield from embracing violent action, for how could one expect reason to come from such a basic contradiction. It can only be overcome by unreasonable violence, I would observe. Very much in line with Paul, btw.
This ought to leave one concerned in a world that will become more polarized between mindless alienated capitalism and the violence implied by the communist hypothesis. The latter, possibly in a kind of brew with other fundamentalism, could well be seen as the only alternative. And alienation is something very real, creating harm in people:
http://medicalhypotheses.blogspot.com/2007/07/alienation-and-animism.html
I feel there must be other ways. Ones that should proceed from a more anthropological perspective, realizing that we can make our own world to a considerable extent. Realizing, with Nietzsche, that alienation is something we have made ourselves by objectifying a certain cosmology (Paul's).
Sahlins, M., 2010 ‘Infrastructuralism.’ Critical Inquiry, vol. 36, pp. 371-386.
Besides these thoughts, I'm busy with my thesis, work and relocating, so I do not always post here as frequently as I would like.
woensdag 14 juli 2010
party over
So, I missed what would have been a really great party on Sunday. :(
End of my holiday. :(
End of the heat wave I think(still have hopes here). :(
But also new challenges, maybe more on which later.
Song that captures the mood a bit better now:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9tNs2ZuOVOQ&playnext_from=TL&videos=JwHakx2RLtw
Hope you are enjoying your summer!!
donderdag 8 juli 2010
finalistas!!
What a nice summer so far. I even solved a little philosophy (at least for myself). It concerns the status of models in archaeology, especially concerning comparing different cultures. How can you 'catch' another form of life in your own language without 'rewriting' it. After reading much Wittgenstein and an anthropologist named Viveiros de Castro, I have formulated some ideas myself. Put simply it means being able to take another point of view. Now, that really sounds so simple, with large DUH factor. But for us comparativistas it is really hard to resist a 'craving for generality', so it serves a purpose. Also figuring out Amazonian perspectives is not as easy.
Still a lot of work to do, but it's adding up a bit. Persistence, determination, they get you places.
In case you don't get the vibes from watching the Oranje squad, maybe check this out:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CkcltdCknBI&playnext_from=TL&videos=D6p9VmmU7WQ
woensdag 17 maart 2010
Happy St. Paddy
donderdag 14 januari 2010
Update/resumption
maandag 10 augustus 2009
Popol Vuh on youtube
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uMMo0-kEFis
It's brilliantly done, no documentary but the story itself in a gripping way. There's also a different film, The Five Suns, about central Mexico but haven't found that one yet.