“Besides being a THEORY, subREAL is a group which is supposed to propagate it.”
(subREAL are a collective from Romania which operated under and survived that country’s brutal and repressive administration. subREAL are: Calin Dan, Josif Kiraly, Dan Mihaltianu.)
“Our emergency is SURVIVAL. Each day a new generation comes to life, brilliantly pushing us toward the inevitable. Avoiding the end of the century: survival versus human proliferation; millenaristic hysteria versus the free acceptance of replacement; sterility versus the inflationsim of creation. Survival at any risk, beyond and behind the limits of good senses. Our indicator is CYNICISM. Funny cynicism against professional seriousness. Skeptical cynicism against enthusiastic dullness. Obvious cynicism against secret cruely. Sexual cynicism against the hypocrite rejection of biological desperation; political cynicism against the obsessional fight of the Power for the Power; biographical cynicism against the massification of the individuals; lethal cynicism against the exploitation of death as a token image. Cynicism, a hopeless medicine for the terminal disease. The cynicism of survival. An international trend in a nationalistic context.”
The recognition of media as weaponry, what is that if not the recognition of the place of mediation in war. All war is mediation surely, but is all mediation war? If so, then war is a gestural term, for war must be, then, a constant thing and it is only referred to for the sake of certain specifics. To mediate is to be at war. The question, for the sake of identifying differences (i.e. choosing sides), is, what kind of war is it, or, how do you fight? These are merely qualitative questions.
And then, what is manipulation? Only a serviceable rendering. In war, all sides attempt to render or proffer a version of reality (of life of how to make a living) and represent it in a persuasive (if not seductive) manner.
Spreading information is like spreading butter on toast; what is covers, it augments. The world is made through augmentation it is made as we speak.
Controllers are we all, big and small. The small speak often of the big, especially if they consider themselves to be at a disadvantage. Anyone can describe someone else from either vantage point, and to be so targeted in worlds where the image (the imaginary) has high social and political currency is to be metered or gauged in relation to power amplitudes. Think of wealth within such a paradigm as intensity.
A well known image can serve as a battle-ground where determining its meaning (and using an expose of the fabrication the imbuement of the signification, is the strategy) is the fighting procedure. Indeed, Draculaland is a term which means to indicate that both images and lands share conceptual borderlines, and are, hence, both contrived and invested in for the sake of fortifying and advancing principles.
Draculaland, also, is likened to a fairy tale in that its basic parameters are mutable and easily accommodated by shifts in general social concerns. They are adaptable, in other words, to various genres of representation. In this case, Dracula’s efficiency as a tale and figure to capture the imagination is considered in light of a current preoccupation with a sub-genre (although very popular) of science-fiction known as Cyberpunk (where punk-rock aesthetics are intermingled with cybernetics and in this way, it illustrates, by the very entertainment of such a merger, a software/hardware dialectic so very much a part of industrial concerns and which has also been, as of late, extended intellectually so as to more or less create the following formulation: software = aesthetic or idea, and hardware = tool or practice* The language, too of philosophy’s concerns with dialectics has been conscripted or imported into computer-science vernacular such that the term “dialectic” itself has been exchanged with “interface”). But the particulars of the meaning of such a translation are, of course, contentious.
If motive or intent are to be registered as an issue, it is in relation to a notion of coincidence. Here, it would seem that coincidence figures as what one might call the fortuitous condition of an arbitrary sign (symbol, icon, image, whatever), for being mobilized for the colonization of the imagination. The sign, then, as a thing in itself, is considered a gamble in its deployment, and its effectiveness is deemed lucky only after its usage proves to have great potential for contradiction (for the more neutral or empty it is, the more it can be given meaning). Coincidence, in this game, therefore, is procedural, it is that which allows meaning to be provisionally, yet intensely, attributed to something after the fact of its appearance, and which allows intent to be always vague and, hence, always moot and contentious. Coincidence, in this respect, can operate as a provocateur of war. And this might be a rather large purpose in itself.
Dracula in particular, and vampires in general, allow(s) for the fundamental war between life and death to function and register itself at all levels (individual and collective or societal) at once. It can be your struggle, his or her struggle, our struggle, their struggle, it can be abstract, concrete, public or private, aesthetic, functional, metaphoric, economic or territorial. In a certain way, it can function as the site of the war between dialectical transcendentalism and a species of nihilistic cybernetics, or it could thereby be the site of war itself.
A dictionary is presented. Here are some of the lexical items: America, blood, bluttworst, Bucuresti, buttock, can, castle, Coca-Cola, entropy, Erzesbeth, exorcism, garlic, graveyard, hermaphrodite, indicator, map, mititei, orphanage, stick, vampire.
There are footnotes and there are pictures.
What does it all mean?
A dictionary can be a battle-ground for the ascertainment of sense. Imagine that such a thing is not innocent. Imagine that the denotative and the connotative are yet to be sorted out. And while your at it, you might imagine different ways of thinking about cynicism.
How many words are the pictures worth? It could be a hypertext (the preference for tangential and associative reading). The proliferation of a variety or expanse of meaning could be like scattering shrapnel.
If cynicism can in any way be typified as a disavowal of the preciousness of the melancholy of meaning (indeed, in the wake of the 19th c., the disavowal of the Gothic), then perhaps its value is pugnaciously recuperated, re-determined and restated against the thought of being dismissed on the grounds of its being too hard, too cold, too insensitive (too machine-like or too abstract), and done so by way of a sympathetic collusion with hardware as the open potential for software application what might be called the mechanics of play. Cynicism, in this regard, could treat sensible objects (be they image, text, music or whatever) as envelopes whose aesthetic (or interest) is developed (as much as you like) by modification. It could be said to be a politics against fixity, which somewhat fixates itself upon (others’) fixation.
Draculaland, in view of this formulation, perhaps like its similar (if you will allow) namesake Disneyland, is a contestable playground which means to highlight and represent certain ecstatic and utopic icons of possible worlds and entertaining as well as awesome and amazing productions and developments within it, and by so doing, allows itself to have exposed, certain peculiar contradictions which both undermine and secure its mandate. If Disneyland could be said to be an utopia bred by the industrial revolution and an American pioneer spirit which has tagging along with it a history (or function) of destructive waste production, demolition, and genocide (as well as the trivialization by way of a commercial glorification of sentiment and collective good will), then Draculaland could be said to be an utopia bred by a Gothic melancholia and consumptiveness, industrial failure, darkness and predatorial politics rooted in superstition and paranoia which becomes overlaid with a victimization superiority complex ecstatic like St. John’s revelation for its imminent transcendent moment. An utopia of deliverance. Draculaland is where the feasted and preyed upon await the coming of the Disneyland gods to feast and prey upon them some more, but with the difference that these gods will pay for their meal and extend invitations and enlist and initiate the food into the ranks of the eaters. Bite me Dracula and give me eternal death. For God’s sake, let us at least become forever adolescents like you, so that we too can wrestle to defer adulthood (that great transcendental inconvenience and what could be worse in America then an inconvenience?).
But hearken to this: what is waited for has already arrived. Didn’t you notice? No, for vampires cast no reflection.
Here they agree with McLuhan: “blood: 1. A medium; 2. A message”.
And the body and the machine (like a mirror and a Hollywood movie) are not simply metaphors of one another, but interpolations of one another.
Erzebeth Bathory and Vlad the Impaler.
It’s like Bataille and Deleuze through McLuhan and Baudrillard under the collaborative production assistance of Zone Books and Semio-text(e), with cover/liner art by Duchamp and Bunuel whilst trying to do a social-realist rendition of Guernica for an Einsterzende Neubauten video. Yeah Johnny, but does it rock?
Give it a spin, kid.
Oh, and there’s a nod, I guess, to John Cage by way of reference to a possible video piece which would be titled 2’33”.
So, here’s the flip: the simulation of reality to the reality of simulation; fantasy park to reality park. This could be understood as the kind of ironic reversal which reveals not so much a difference as the kind of similarity which only confirms Baudrillard’s seduction thesis (i.e. seduction as the infinite reversibility of signs). Which is to say that again the matter is precisely one of mediation and an operative capacity for distributive effects, whatever its target (its feigned agency). Whether the thrust is on reality or on fantasy, power and authority are exercised by a virtual command upon virtual bodies in virtual space. So then, why bother making the distinction? Because in the realm of the virtual, gesture is everything, and the particularity of the gesture in this case allows for a feedback mechanism vis-a-vis the imagination a loop which secures the imagination as the true haven, and thus, as the best space for colonization. After all, if reality park is as horrific as its said to be, then it only begs comparison to that comfy gestural inside it plays outside to. Reality could be thought of, therefore, as a scapegoat to the virtual a ritual sacrifice to the gods of the hologram (the holo-deck). Not to say that there aren’t certain advantages to this; some people go out of their way in industrial (and so-called post-industrial) nations to obtain disability allowance and infamy often pays just as well as, if not better than, fame itself.
Hey, maybe Romania can be the playground for Ballard-Crash aesthetes.
Draculaland as the holo-deck programmed for genuine interactive dependency and the reaffirmation of the beauty and correctness of the technopolis.