How many times, in your lifetime, have you heard the phrase, "Knowledge is Power". Probably, like me, too many to count. After the Baudrillard reading this week, "The Illusion of the End", I'm beginning to ask, "In what dose?". Baudrillard suggests in his Acceleration/Deceleration theory that we are being bombarded by information and yet with all this knowledge, we have become increasingly apathetic. Significance requires reflection but the acceleration process makes this almost impossible. All the information and "simulacra" that bombard us everyday are moving at such a rate that image and reality are collapsed and simulated images become reality. Baudrillard calls this space a Hyper Reality where there is no original copy, everything is a simulation of reality. As all this information hits us, and we absorb it in our hyper reality, deceleration occurs. It is impossible for a human being to react to all the simulacra, or to feel that tactile shock everytime an image affects her or him. To counteract this attack, we withdraw, we become apathetic, we are neutralized.
I see the vast array of knowledge we are presented with as more of a false conciousness where we, the people, see this limitless supply of information all for the taking. With all of the information we have access to, we can't possibly think that anyone is hiding anything from us... right? Knowledge is no longer power when it is readily available on your front step each morning, nor is it power when millions of people hear it while they eat supper every night. I believe knowledge is only powerful when it's something we find out for ourselves, when we feel we have the responsibility to do something about it, because 500 million other people don't know yet.
Saturday, October 14, 2006
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
When I hear "knowledge is power" I think of School House Rock on Saturday mornings. I think to some extent Baudrillard's argument about the acceleration and deceleration of simulacre is a bit far fetched, but after further thought it seems plausible. My favorite quote from the piece was as you discussed how "significance requires reflection". Because if you think about it in an everyday sense, how many images are thrown at us, and how many of those do we simply ignore and do not give significance to because we don't think about them long enough. I agree with you in this sense that "it is impossible for a human being to react to all the simulacra, or to feel that tactile shock everytime". I also agree with how you say that "the vast array of knowledge we are presented with [is] more of a false conciousness...this limitless supply of information all for the taking".
However, when you say that this knowledge is no longer power when it comes to our front door, or when everyone hears it while watching the evening news. I feel that one earns power from the initiative to do something with the massive amount of information we are given. Sure, there are those that take the simulacre and behave as neutralized, apathetic beings, but there are also those that take the same information and become reactionary. I don't know that we necessarily need to find this information out for ourselves though. Take this week's feministeppin' competition. I think its pretty awesome that Tapley's idea (a bricolage as it may be) put into action four groups to do something that I think is pretty revolutionary. The idea may not have come from each of us, but we sure are doing something about issues that we find important, and refunctioning those ideas into somewhat of an antagonistic discourse of our very own.
Oh yeah, and conjunction junction what's your function? ( I loved those cartoons).
Post a Comment