Wild River Review
Connecting People, Places, and Ideas: Story by Story
May 2012
Open Borders

COLUMN - THINKING OTHERWISE:

Avatar - When Technology Displaces Culture

THINKING  OTHERWISE,

"We Irish think otherwise"  Bishop Berkeley 

Avatar: When Technology Displaces Culture


 * I am indebted to Karen at Oddity Journal for this wonderful image of the tesseract.  

When printed manuscripts were first introduced, they appeared as incunabula and were made to look like medieval hand-illuminated vellum rather than printed paper. When new Victorian hand guns were introduced, they were covered with vines and made to look more like a plant than an aggressive weapon. When the new technologies were all displayed in the Great Exhibition of 1851, the building in which they were displayed, the Crystal Palace, looked like the greenhouse of a great country estate. 



Crystal Palace

The nineteen-thirties Broadway musical song, "My Funny Valentine" by Rogers and Hart became a signature piece for Jazz musicians in the fifties. Over 1300 different versions of it have been performed, the most famous of those being the versions by Miles Davis and Chet Baker, and, for the next generation, Keith Jarrett.  The thirties popular song became to avant garde fifties Jazz musicians what the traditional folk song had been for Dvořak and Ralph Vaughn Williams.

When television was introduced in the early fifties, it became filled with old black and white Westerns of Gene Autry and Hopalong Cassidy.


So it is often the case that the content serves as camouflage for a novel structure. This is a perfectly natural process in evolution, which can take an ancient gene or organ and rework it into a new function or ability. "Eyes are largely built from building blocks designed for other things. The lenses of vertebrates use proteins that bacteria developed to deal with stress; the flexible guanine mirrors that make a cat's eyes glow in the dark provide gas-proofing for the swim bladders of fish." (See Simon Ings, "An Eye for the Eye," Nature, Vol . 456, Nov. 20, 2008, 304-309).

The idea that there is form on the one hand and content on the other comes from a mentality we owe to literature. But technology is now our culture, and so McLuhan was right: the medium is the message. Our gadgets of TV, netbook computers, cell phones, BlackBerries, and iPods are not instruments to express a culture; they are a culture; they are the culture.

McLuhan also pointed out that each new technological extension is an amputation. If we have cars, we do not walk to the corner store. Artificial intelligence, therefore, is part of our oft-noted American dumbing-down process and has served to make humans less intelligent. I am old enough to remember a better educated high school culture and recall a time when Americans weren't so dumb as to make Sarah Palin the most successful non-fiction writer in publishing history.

So it was natural on James Cameron's part to take a collection of movie clichés from Dances with Wolves and Star Wars as well as other memes spliced in from the Hollywood gene pool that John David Ebert pointed out in his Blog Cinema Discourse and use them as the basis for his technological tour de forceAvatar, which has become the greatest earning movie in history.

Avatar's success like Sarah Palin's, is owed to its superficiality. Even the addition of 3D could not hide the movie's lack of depth. With clichéd plot and stock characters, Cameron was not making a film version of a novel, but another Western as a moral allegory of the military industrial complex versus the Gaian tree-huggers of the New Age.

But like ivy vines on the iron legs of Victorian sewing machines, the moral allegory itself is yet another level of camouflage. The Great Spirit and the natives are the products of  a computerized entertainment technology. Disney may have pioneered this territory in which the cute animatron figures of Disneyworld are controlled by an invisible technological complex, but the film Avatar, like Fantasia before it, is one of those works of popular culture that mark a transformation of the polity. Fantasia marked the end of the authority of high culture and used classical music and the poetry of Goethe as camouflage for the structure of pop culture's takeover. How many Americans now have ever heard of Goethe or realize that The Sorcerer's Apprentice is one of his poems?

In Avatar, Cameron has presciently given us a description of the Obama administration and the Democratic Party.  Although we naïve liberal progressives thought we were voting for a change from the military industrial complex of Bush and Cheney, Obama has proved himself to be its loyal avatar sent among us to win our trust and trick us out of our votes. Now as President, he has not only "reached across the aisle," but shifted sides as he first rescued the banks through Geithner and Summers, then rescued the medical insurances companies, and is now ignoring our mass unemployment, suffering, and economic stagnation to ask for Giga billions to shore up the military and keep the imperial war machine going against the Islamist natives fighting the Great Satan of Uncle Sam.

 

In taking entertainment technology to a new level, Cameron has also presciently described the end of the university as the cultural authority. Once to be a scholar you had to be part of the Church; later scholars could escape to an academe that had become its own high church. Since World War Two, the university has been a place for intellectuals to escape from the business world. But now Business has taken over academe, and even the Creative Writing Departments must conform to the corporate interests of the publishing and media industries—a complex in which a Rupert Murdoch owns them all.

Academic administrators are now managers from the entertainment industry; they see which majors are popular money-makers and have begun to eliminate the losers of the humanities from the curriculum. Classics, philosophy, English: these are to be replaced by programs in Media and Communications—Sarah Palin's major of choice. Retiring faculty are not replaced with young professors, but are replaced by inexpensive Temps who are paid for piece work without benefits and have to commute between several colleges to make enough to scrape out a meager living.

Soon the middle management of academia will eliminate faculty who have failed to turn themselves into celebrities by replacing them with Time Warner Cable Lecture Series and Kindle downloaded textbooks—for which they will probably earn a percentage or finder's fee for delivering the contract.

Expensive sports complexes will continue to be built to inspire the business majors with corporate team spirit and love of their alma mater. After all, academic sports are the entertainment industry at its Saturday best, producing new athlete superstars for future  Superbowls and its theatre for dazzling new corporate ads.  

In the near future the ultimate entertainment of industry will not be to produce subversive avatars to infiltrate the native culture, but to offer a choice of temporary cultures for us to inhabit for the thrill of it. Reality TV will be passed up by the appropriation of reality—otherwise known as politics.  Comfortable in our electronic couch, we can inhabit our clichés and call it America, the greatest show on Earth.

To support our mission and passion for good storytelling, please make a tax-deductible donation by clicking here:  Wild River Donation.

Tags:

William Irwin Thompson, Columnist, Thinking Otherwise

William Irwin Thompson

William Irwin Thompson (born July, 1938) is known primarily as a social philosopher and cultural critic, but he has also been writing and publishing poetry throughout his career and received the Oslo International Poetry Festival Award in 1986. He has made significant contributions to cultural history, social criticism, the philosophy of science, and the study of myth. He describes his writing and speaking style as "mind-jazz on ancient texts". He is an astute reader of science, social science, history, and literature. He is the founder of the Lindisfarne Association.

His book, Still Travels: Three Long Poems was published in 2009 by Wild River Books. To order a copy, click here: STILL TRAVELS.

WEBSITE: http://www.williamirwinthompson.org/


» View all articles by William Irwin Thompson

William Irwin Thompson

Comments

Will Morgan (not verified) Posted 05:22 AM on May 21, 2012

By saying that "technology" has made humans less intelligent WIT is only saying what is obvious. Just walk into any University Library today. What do you see? You see students staring at computer screens and wearing earphones. Just the other day I was forced to do some difficult word processing. A geekish professional computer person gave me a twenty page paper entitled "Paginating in Word 2010". I learned how to "paginate" in the old version of Word, but now I am supposed to be stupid again, this year, because a whole new set of commands must be learned. And why? Mostly so that Microsoft Inc. can garner all the money we print. And why? So that none of us will have the time to read, to reflect, to think. It is that simple. Technology can support and enrich our lives, but commodity fetishism about it is beginning to be the point of a culture which lacks a point. So while I am happy for the assistance of technology in leading a good life, technology is only a means to and end. Culture is not served by fetishism, as is now happening with computers.

As for Sarah Palin, her marketable "ordinariness" was doubtless discovered, as such things always are, by those analysts who market soap in the same way they market books. It's not a serious thing. No one will remember he name in a few years, for we will have passed on to the next commodity.

jonathan (not verified) Posted 05:22 AM on May 21, 2012

Thank you--a terrific piece, as always. I just saw Avatar this evening and while I was entertained on a certain level by the visuals and, as a big fan of science fiction, enjoyed some aspects of the world-building (although there was nothing that I hadn't seen or read before; as John David Ebert pointed out, it was all parsed together from various--and rather obvious--sources), I felt an increasing sense of dis-ease building throughout the film, to the point that I was eventually quite physically uneasy, antsy in my seat and tempted to leave. I was able to settle back into the film for the rest of the embarrassingly predictable Hollywood climax, but wasn't unhappy when it was over.

There was something about the "simulative" quality of the CGI that entered my consciousness almost like a virus, that seemed opposed to my organic imagination, as if the technology was re-patterning my consciousness, layering over archetypal currents of energy with synthetic filaments. Leaving the cinema I felt the psychic equivalent of, say, bodily walking out of Dunkin Donuts: A few moments of very surface-level pleasure, but nothing of depth or nourishment, and left with a lingering almost dirty feeling.

As a teacher of high school students, I struggle with what is the "best" way to relate with media technology. Obviously we have to work within the cultural context, but if the cultural context is sick, how can we bring some degree of "health"? And how can we know what health is if all we've known is this sickness? I appreciate the technology that allows me to write this, and am excited about many of the possibilities of technological development, but I am quite wary about our (my) increasing reliance upon it and addiction to virtual worlds.

It is like first learning to write with a burning charcoal stick: what cost the capacity to write? What scars does it leave? We just don't know. Until we do, or at least until we know more, I can only try to protect my two young daughters as best I can and, in the end, follow the whispers of my intuition.

I do think that Steiner was essentially right, that "Ahriman" is incarnating now, in this time. Yet it is not so literal as fundamentalist Anthroposophists hope/fear, and probably not so clearly demonic (unless we see "demons" more in the sense as was described the movie Jacob's Ladder, as "undercover angels"). Rather, it may be--as I think you have said in some of your works--the sign of a new consciousness emerging, of further potentials of human experience and being.

Perhaps this "Ahrimanic incarnation" is merely the resistance that we need to overcome our current limitations and embody greater degrees of freedom and love. Yet nothing is assured; even Steiner, I believe, said that the intricate and often monolithic "divine plan" he illustrated is more of an outline. We may evolve or we may become further imprisoned in psycho-materiality. There are no guarantees, spake Dr. Steiner.

WIT (not verified) Posted 05:22 AM on May 21, 2012

Well, you are preaching to the choir, since as a cultural historian I have written to show how art is coeval with the evolution of technology. Also, because you seem to think ideologically, you missed the points of my showing how Fantasia is a historical marker and my defense of Cameron's use of the movie-cliche' and his prescience in dramatizing the shift in Obama's politics. Politics is now like TV and Superbowls, and Sarah Palin gets it and is becoming a perfomance artist rather than a thinker or Governor in this cultural shift from "representation" to "participation" in a noetic polity of superstitious technopeasants in a state of awe, rapture, and worship--that would be you--and Wissenskunstlers who serve as satellites observing what is invisible to pop culture on the electronic ground--that would be me. We Wissenskunstlers take it all in and can read Chaucer, Shakespeare, Goethe, Disney, and Cameron in the original.

Khürt L Williams (not verified) Posted 05:22 AM on May 21, 2012

When someone explains to me why an author writing in a long dead language (Shakespeare) is supposed to represent high-art in modern culture I'll start reading to the rants of intellectual snobs like you.

Popular culture is forever changing. Sharespeare and Goethe were popular for their day but that day has long passed. Move on.

If all us were to listen to people like you we would all still be speaking like Chaucer and criticizing Shakespeare for being too "populist"

I disagree that technology "has served to make humans less intelligent." It is not more intelligent to want to make fire from banging together two rocks. It is more intelligent to develop technology (matches, electronic igniters) that allow anyone to create fire at anytime.

Ah .. I'm talking to a Luddite who uses a computer to blog!

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
1 + 0 =
Solve this simple math problem and enter the result. E.g. for 1+3, enter 4.
Website by Mile Nine