Dear Jo, Rita et al,
Thank you all for your thoughtful postings, I am glad I finally joined
-empyre- and am getting the opportunity to follow such a lively
discussion.
Amidst all the events down at UCSD and the responses and comments on
this list, my initial thoughts seem to be most closely aligned with
Jo's statement below and Rita's dire summation of the university as an
"institution of control" that clearly has the ability to distinguish
between scholarship about activism and activism itself (and yes,
writing is of course a form of "making," but one that fits in much
more neatly with the rubrics of academia). Sadly, I am not surprised
at all about UCSD's behavior towards Ricardo and EDT's work.
California is broke, the UC system is in deep trouble (to say the
least), and overall the senate faculty has been playing along with
this situation just fine. Some letters, some really smart ones
indeed :), some protests, some attempts at organizing, but most of us
are still going in to teach our classes and attend meetings in the
same way we always did. Some of us have used the funding crises and
increased push towards privatization of the UC as an educational
backdrop to sharpen the political literacy of our students, and in
many ways the publicity around the bang.lab events appears to have a
similar effect. However, what this situation really seems to indicate
is a somewhat broken approach to the negotiation between Tactical
Media and academia. We can't simultaneously ride a career as
"interventionist artists," claim a political edge and demand funding,
space and support from an institution like Calit2. It simply won't
work, at least not in the long run. Eventually, the support will
either stop, or the political "edge" won't be quite as edgy anymore.
Its a wonderful thing while it lasts, and kudos to everyone who tried.
For a while, we really seemed to have quite a few Tactical Media
enclaves splattered between different universities in various parts of
the country. But there is a time stamp on these moments of convergence
and activity, and we shouldn't really be surprised by that. Operating
in plain daylight is one strategy, and apparently the one the bang.lab
has chosen up to date. But it seems that Tactical Media has equipped
us with a few other tools that might be worth revisiting in this
context. de Certeau's describes his rendering of the french "wig"
concept to us in the following way: "La perruque is the worker's own
work disguised as work for his employer. It differs from pilfering in
that nothing of material value is stolen. It differs from absenteeism
in that the worker is officially on the job. La perruque may be as
simple a matter as a secretary's writing a love letter on "company
time" or as complex as a cabinetmaker's "borrowing" a lathe to make a
piece of furniture for his living room ... ."
If the window for passing politicized tactical media tool development
as legitimate research activity is closing, maybe its time to change
wigs? Or is it just a matter of never using our tools in any way that
could be traced back to the university? I don't know. I tried the
latter a few years ago, and it horribly failed.
On a much more mundane note: could anyone provide an update about what
is actually happening now at UCSD? I checked the bang.lab website, and
the last posting appears to be from last week. What happened since?
In solidarity,
Beatriz da Costa
excerpt Jo-Anne Green post:
You can't accept grants, teach at a university, and desire tenure
without these negotiations and compromises. The best one can do is
enter these negotiations armed with knowledge, awareness, and a well
thought out strategy for the best possible outcomes for your project.
Beatriz da Costa
www.beatrizdacosta.net
_______________________________________________
empyre forum
empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
http://www.subtle.net/empyre
