ACT-UP

Question #1:  For your blog, in addition to reading the two of these, review at least two videos from theACT-UP Oral History Project.  Then write about the question of direct action.  Can it be justified?  Under what circumstances?  What tactics do you feel are legitimate?  Are these rules different for different causes?  ACT-UP was operating in an environment where the people they were advocating for were literally dying around them.  Does that change your impression of the tactics?


I watched several interviews until I felt that I saw two that I could correlate to each other and write about- those two are:



   Interview #006
   January 14, 2003
   Violence 


and



   Interview #008
   January 16, 2003
   Power and Privilege 


First, I watched Alexandra Juhasz's interview and she had several good points- some of which are: how the closet functioned during this time- allowing "those" men to be in the closet, and still have power (because of being in the closet) and then they got AIDS, were outed, and pushed away from their power. The way that power and privilege align themselves within the AIDS movement is very interesting and as Juhasz says, "You don't!" to the question of "how do you win if you don't have power?" She also brings up how this "counter culture" won. not in the sense that a lot of people lost their lives, but that it brought attention to the need for change within this cause. That is direct action- people started to move, to talk, to converse, to question and then to act upon their positions or beliefs.  Direct Action in this case, is being able to align oneself with privilege and power and thus having the necessary tools to be seen and be heard- and that is what ACT-UP did. ACT-UP changed the face of AIDS in the US. 


Next, I watched Patrick Moore's interview.  His piece was different from Juhasz's in the way that he spoke about change coming from violence.  One of the best points that he made was in saying that "it takes violence for America to take notice of something. anything."  This was seen with the fringe violent movement during the Civil Rights in the US, and also when things began to become violent with the AIDS movement during this time, people started to notice.  This is direct action, as well.  Obviously there is no one right or wrong way to go about direct action, but i think what matters is the intentions, the planning of such and the implementation- the outcome is a bonus.  Being heard, having a voice is a HUGELY different experience than many Americans know, so for that component to be there- no matter the legislative outcome, that can't be taken away. ACT-UP proved that there was support and a community while it seemed and very much felt like the rest of the world was turning a cold shoulder- further dehumanizing the LG communities (I exclude BTQ for good reason, as these are the identifiers that are pushed aside, because of their more "controversial beings")


Overall, direct action is a good tactic- the rules change for each movement, for each cause, as need be. all is relative and all is relative in "success" as well.  Listening to these two interviews amongst the others has not changed my opinion of the tactic of direct action at all.

Barbara Kruger

Barbara Kruger sets the standard for high political art because of a few reasons. Her work is aesthetically appealing- it's easy to look at in terms of her colors, medium, etc, but her work does a great job of allowing pieces of art to maintain a deeper, more controversial meaning- rising questions.  I learned in my Art as Social Action, that one of the most important aspects of an art piece is that it begins a conversation- a discourse between two or more persons or a conversation within oneself.  Art is about the message that the artist, as well as the viewers take away and take with them in their futures- Kruger's art absolutely conveys messages that are important, political and ones that speak loudly through her work, and would speak loudly if given the appropriate time of discourse in the political and public spheres.  Her art reminds me of a gallery i went to in Chelsea, NYC last October- the art was simple, but had a distinct message of intensity.

Adbusters!!

First of all, i was stoked to see Adbusters included as a blog option because this magazine is awesome.
I compared a physical copy that i had a home, from November/December 2007 to their website.  In terms of actual articles, i feel like the physical magazine does a better job of providing, more detailed, longer readings than the website.  However, this could be for several reasons- you are paying for this magazine and I think that people, generally have a longer attention span for printed readings as opposed to online ones.  Possibly for this reason, their website is where the majority of their spoof ads are located (ones that are super old too), as well as advertisements for events, campaigns, such as the "Buy Nothing Day."

I love Adbusters' spoof ads because they are obviously comedic, but serious in a way that makes you twinge for a second before thinking.. "well... that's true."
In the magazine that i have at home, there is a spoof ad, which consists of a photo of a female deer that has been run over by a vehicle, apparently, with it's bloody tongue out of it's mouth.  below this photo- there is a quote that states, "Every woman should have four pets in her life.  A mink in her closet, a Jaguar in her garage, a tiger in her bed and a jackass who pays for everything." - Paris Hilton.
Their juxtaposition of images and words provides a very blunt message by way of art as social action.

Little Brother

This book was surprisingly good.  I was nervous about because of a couple things- I have always been an incredibly inefficient reader and the kind to start a book and never finish it because i get frustrated, don't have the time, or it's incredibly boring.  Honestly, i started reading this book, and didn't put it down for a couple hours- it was really interesting and i was hooked on it pretty quickly.  The writing style was really effective for me, because it was suspenseful enough to keep my attention, and didn't stay on one thing for too long.  The narrative about Marcus' relationships was somewhat interesting, but i was more in to the plot with the DHS than his love life.  I definitely think that this book should stay on the curriculum for Social Movements and Community Activism because it does bring up the discussion of whether it is or not indeed a social movement and why, and also how social movements may change in the way that they look as we become more and more adapt to and dependent on technology.

Voting

My voting experience was overall uneventful.  It was much different than going to vote for the first time during the presidential elections, when i got up to be at the polls right when they opened, during the cold rain and waited in long lines and avoided buying baked goods from Woodson High School students.  This time, I left work and traveled in rush hour, trying to get to the poll before it closed, and luckily i made it- my  voting place is Woodson High School on Main St. in Fairfax.  I thought for some reason that the polls closed at 6, but it is 7 so i was actually fine on time.  There was plenty of parking, but no signs on where to enter the building- so I went in by the orchestra room and walked past the theatre kids all dressed up like some sort of plants?? i don't know. I got to the room, told them my name, realized i never changed my address on my registration card, from moving off campus- so i pretended that i still live there- don't think that's a big deal at all.  Then i chose between paper and electronic ballot- i chose electronic, because it's the sustainable thing to do right? When I was in line, one of the three polling stations broke and then there were two left and i was first in line.  I didn't care, but apparently, this was reason for some Fairfax people to freak out, because their time's so precious- so many people opted out of electronic ballot to get a paper one because they didn't want to wait.  I couldn't help but notice that the people who couldn't wait were white men, with plain english accents, and the two people at the electronic polling stations were women of hispanic decent- each with two or three children.  Is this coincidence? don't know, but i thought it would be noteworthy here. When i got to the polling station, i cast my vote for Connolly- duh. Fimian does not support abortion, even in cases of rape and incest, where as Connolly has voted for equal pay for women. That's enough for me! Then i voted on the three other things- amendments- they were somewhat hard to understand, but i did my best and am pretty sure that i voted for road improvements in fairfax, a tax exempt something for veterans or their surviving spouses (how about a partner, ahem?) and then some other tax thing, don't really remember what that was, honestly.
I'm definitely glad i voted since the Congressional one is STILL so close! ... crossing my fingers!