Infant Sexuality and Techno Fetish as Expressed Via Teletubbies

In his essay, “Teletubbies: Infant Cyborg Desire and the Fear of Global Visual Culture,” Nicholas Mirzoeff discusses the implications of producing and subsequently marketing television for infants between the ages of one and three. This in turn raises questions of the very nature of childhood, as well as, the marriage of man and technology. I found the Freudian implications of Mirzoeff’s article to be particularly interesting, specifically its relevance to Freud’s notion that the child has sexual desires right from birth. The attribution of a gay teletubbie by members of both conservative religious organizations in addition to progressive gay rights activists and the ensuing commotion that developed amongst parents struck me as particularly interesting, given the fact that these same people would probably deny any notion regarding the proclivity of their children to think and fantasize in a sexual way. This in turn led me to consider Freud’s analysis of dreams and the idea that dreams are our way of subconsciously acting out our desires that would otherwise be considered inappropriate by society. I thought next of technology and the way in which technology must inherently be the manifestation of human ambition and accordingly, at some level, of human dreaming. This intrinsic relationship between technology and human fantasy is evocative of technology’s newfound purpose as an outlet for human sexuality, whether that means having sex via the computer/phone or the considerable availability of porn by means of the television and internet. Is it possible then that since the use of technology has replaced much of what once required real face-to-face contact between people that the next step is the actual physical melding of man and machine? I was reminded of David Cronenberg’s film Videodrome, wherein people actually develop slits in their stomachs, which then act as literal VCRs allowing them to be programmed through videotapes that are directly inserted into these openings. This image bears a startling resemblance to the teletubbies and their monitor stomachs on which they are able to receive broadcasts of “’real’ television pictures, showing children at play” (Mirzoeff 441). Thus, I am again led to wonder about the original concept of infant sexuality and to what extent our perceptions of childhood innocence actually exist.

Reflections of Benjamin and Adorno in Dennis O’Rourke’s Cannibal Tours

In his review of Cannibal Tours, Edward M. Bruner speculates that it is the “vicarious brush with danger” derived from visiting a land where cannibalism was once practiced that draws tourists to Papua New Guinea. These people’s desire for the “unpolluted, the pure, and the original” drives them to make the long trip to explore what they view as “the forest primeval”. As Brunner points out, the irony in this is that, had the native’s original culture not been “intentionally altered or destroyed” by colonialism, then the tourists would not have been able to have their faked experience of the indigenous people’s civilization. Interestingly, this process wherein the colonists’ “’yearn[ing] for ‘traditional’ culture” causes them to destroy that which they crave, closely mirrors aspects of the development of modern media. Specifically, Brunner’s reading of Cannibal Tours parallels the obliteration of and subsequent quest to reconstruct the aura of the original work of art in the age of mechanical reproduction a la Walter Benjamin’s famous essay. Photography and to an even greater extent film are both the outcome of art’s longing to create the most perfect illusion of reality possible. However, with the advent of such ideal mediums wherein this conclusion is so closely achieved, the original becomes cheapened to the point where, in the case of film, it no longer exists in any sort of conceivable form. As with the colonist’s longing for authenticity of culture, the connoisseur’s yearning for the same quality causes art to cannibalize itself.

Eisenstein's Influence in "Another Brick in the Wall"

After watching the music video for Pink Floyd’s “Another Brick in the Wall,” it occurred to me that it bears some striking similarities to the work of Eisenstein (again, I am thinking explicitly of The Battleship Potemkin), both stylistically, as well as, in what I believe to be the intended effect of their shared stylistic elements. In both the music video and the film there is a clear hero with whom it is apparent that the audience should sympathize, as well as, an obvious villain for whom they should feel contempt. Furthermore, it is apparent that the film and the music video are not only intended to serve as revolutionary propaganda, but that they do so in a manner which is so overt that it boarders on the satirical. In terms of editing, the video for “Another Brick in the Wall,” borrows heavily from Eisenstein’s theory of montage. The combination of conflicting imagery that was prized by Eisentein can be seen in the alternating high and low angle shots of the teacher and the student. The Battleship Potemkin’s “Odessa Steps” sequence uses this same technique in order to make implications about power wielded by the soldiers in relation to the clearly defenseless townspeople. Additionally, the soldiers’ unvarying march in Battleship Potemkin closely resembles that of the students in “Another Brick in the Wall;” however, there is a slight, yet very telling difference between these two images. In Battleship Potemkin, the uniform shots of the soldiers are juxtaposed with those of the townspeople fleeing in utter chaos, where as in “Another Brick in the Wall,” the homogenized students are seen crosscut with images of their cruel and fascistic professor who is himself in the midst of some sort of crazed power trip. The resulting effect of this subtle disparity is the implication that this sort of unquestioned adherence to any one leader or ideology is completely idiotic. Regardless of how Eisenstein may or may not have felt with regard to this sort of fanaticism, he could not make such an overt statement given the context of working within Soviet Russia.

Adorno and Eisenstein

During today’s class, I was especially engaged by the question of whether or not it is possible for one to exist within Adorno’s “culture industry,” without necessarily becoming completely engulfed by it. In particular, I found the discussion of film to be exceptionally relevant given that the medium itself is capable of being utilized to produce both works of great artistic merit, as well as, products that have no value other than shear entertainment. Furthermore, it struck me as significant that the ability of film to create such an accurate illusion of reality could in turn be used to achieve artistic and commercial aims. Specifically, the work of Sergei Eisenstein occurred to me as an example of a director who attempted to utilize these two conflicting aspects of film in order to create a revolution within the culture industry. While Eisenstein recognized the power of the illusion that film creates and thus, its ability to be used as propaganda (his own ideologies are clearly on display in much of his work), he felt that through a “dialectic approach to film form,” it was possible to use montage in a way that presented an idea to the viewer without rendering him or her entirely passive. By juxtaposing conflicting imagery in the “Odessa Steps” sequence of his film, The Battleship Potemkin, Eisenstein creates a strong statement in favor of the revolt; however, he also forces the audience into a state of heightened awareness that makes them incapable of simply accepting what they are being shown. As the technology of film improved and consequently, its ability to depict reality, Eisenstein warned other filmmakers to use the power of illusion responsibly. In his “Statement on Sound,” Eisenstein encourages the use of the new innovation in a manner that is similar to his use of montage, with the aim of creating an accurate representation of the world without going so far as to dupe one’s audience.