Home
Archive
Columnists
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Register to Vote: Rock the Vote, powered by Working Assets Wireless
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Why Do We Love Being Shocked and Disgusted?

By Anneli Rufus, AlterNet. Posted September 15, 2006.


The appetite for blood porn, zombie flicks and sicko sideshows in America is endless. Is capitalism to blame, or is it a natural extension of a free society?
Advertisement

Hooks pierce her flesh. Ten steel hooks, stout as the tops of coathangers, jut through her knees, thighs, waist and arms. They link to chains that suspend her in midair, her shaven head arcing, fairytale-pretty mouth making an O. A rod skewers both of her breasts: straight through their cores. You think of metal shearing lobes and ducts and slippery fat. You cannot help but picture shish kebabs. Blood courses past her ribs. It seeps into the black wrap on her crotch.

Applaud.

Because nothing shocks us anymore. We pick our favorites from among real photos of real feces at ratemypoo.com: blood-streaked; posed in pretzel shapes; smeared to spell HI. With a click, we watch decapitation videos. And nearly every new movie has a puke scene. Haven't noticed that yet? Now you will.

We've raised the bar so high on what we can stand to see, what we want to see, and will pay to see but seize upon for free, that we'll even watch those videos at work. Click. He's screaming.

Were the hook-girl hanging in another context -- say, a prison -- we would call for a war-crimes tribunal. But it happened at a London club last Christmas. Part of an act staged by Finnish body-mod artists Samppa Von Cyborg and Baawo Bee, it competes for your leisure hours with countless sicko sideshows -- from Dallas's Circus Della Morte to Seattle's Zamora the Torture King -- that let you watch real people nailing things to themselves and scarfing broken glass. For years, sideshows were declassé: slackjawed-yokel relics. Now they're back and so middle-class.

Saying this, I sound like such a priss. But hey. I didn't find out about these shocking things on some arcane research mission. I know about them because I look at them. I'll leave you in a minute and view suicide-scene photos at ogrish.com, pictures of goiters at rotten.com. I've got both bookmarked. We all have our limits; I refuse to rate poo.

We have our limits, but average them out and the collective bar, our median gross-out flashpoint, will be higher than that of our parents, who fainted watching John Waters films or pictures of the Holocaust -- even higher, I would wager, than that of the kids who babysat us.

Somehow, sometime, our aesthetics got grosser. A priss would say they've been poisoned. But by whom? And why?

Annalee Newitz blames capitalism. In "Pretend We're Dead," the Wired writer asserts that this system so alienates us from each other and our true selves that we create -- and consume, and become -- ever-more-shocking pop-culture symbols of our own misery, from the zombies on "Night of the Living Dead" to Ted Bundy to vampire games.

"Capitalism creates monsters who want to kill you," Newitz contends. Our North American pop-culture murdering-machines and their real-life counterparts "tell us more or less explicitly," she writes, that "capitalist work implies a symbolic death. It is the death of individual freedom, of pleasurable, rewarding activity, and of a rich social life." Salaries spawn zombies. "Identity constructed under capitalism is a nightmare."

This nightmare haunts even doctors, who earn some of the system's biggest salaries for doing some of its most crucial and morally implacable work, but whose role in Newitz's view is now that of the "menial mind drone," alienated like the rest of us, "forced to sell his own thoughts on the market." Thus we surround ourselves with mad-doctor movies, explicit surgery shows, and a mainstream fixation on forensics. We tell ourselves it's educatainment, watching tweezers and rubber-gloved fingers prod blood-glutted tubules in a facial reconstruction or maggots beading a corpse. Sheer fetishism, fed by our own sense of deadness, in Newitz's view.

Although fond of academicspeak -- e.g., "contemporary audience reception theorists posit a dialectical relationship between ideological change and material change" -- and although she squanders at least two opportunities for scoring two different kinds of cred by mispelling the names of both Snoop Dogg and Bertolt Brecht, Newitz assembles bold ballast to bolster her thesis. When dismembered crack whores wreak havoc on the anatomy buff who murdered them, "the body parts ... develop a kind of class consciousness, acting as a group to get revenge." Zombie films are about imperialism: self-examination at a moment when "the supremacy of whiteness seems about to rot away" as "whites ... are haunted by a knowledge of a distant past when people of color were free and powerful. And they anticipate a future when whites have become ghosts." The ancestral memory of slavery is a "stain" -- and "is certainly what seems to have saturated the flesh of the rotting, cannibalistic, undead whites in George Romero's 'Night of the Living Dead.'"

Certainly?

It's not race or class that informs Romero's films but specieswide sin, argues religious studies professor Kim Paffenroth in "Gospel of the Living Dead," his discourse on zombie films as warnings about how low you can go: "We, humans, not just zombies, prey on each other, depend on each other for our pathetic and parasitic existence, and thrive on each other's misery." Romero's jump-cut shock shots of shopping malls packed with the undead are actually visions "of hell on earth" -- of what would happen if we were even greedier, more selfish, more secular. "More than any other monster, zombies are fully and literally apocalyptic," writes Paffenroth, a liberal Christian scholar who adores Judas Priest. "They signal the end of the world as we have known it for thousands of years," as they "bring the complete breakdown of the natural world of food chains, social order, respect for life, and respect for death, because all those categories are meaningless" after we transgress too many thresholds and lose sight of each other and what matters most.


Digg!

Anneli Rufus is the author of several books, including "Party of One: The Loners' Manifesto."

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Media and Technology! Sign up now »


Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
end point
Posted by: rsaxto on Sep 15, 2006 12:28 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We are near the endpoint of an American Empire that is even more gross than the endpoint of the Roman Empire. What could be more gross than dropping atom bombs on civilians as we did in Japan or dropping 500/1000 lb bombs in civilian areas as the US routinely has done in Iraq. That this criminal behavior is acceptable to most Americans is proof of how low a society can get when it is near its endpoint. Bushie torture is another proof. The solution to this situation is to revert back to decency and morality and impeach our monstrous leaders.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: end point Posted by: talkville
» RE: end point Posted by: rsaxto
» RE: end point Posted by: talkville
» Exit Republic, Enter Empire Posted by: Artkansas
» NOT Posted by: fifthworld
» Have you checked your address lately? Posted by: Conservasaurus
Reality TV
Posted by: DataDoc on Sep 15, 2006 12:36 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I've heard it described as "Schadenfreude" - pleasure at the suffering of another. Maybe it's a way of feeling like we got back at somebody. In the end, it may be one of the biggest causes of suffering in the world, because it does dehumanize others, and results in neglect and shaming for the sufferer.

This may be the hallmark of our age. Think of how many reality TV shows thrive on suffering. Fear Factor runs year after year, putting people in harm's way and laughing at their suffering. You don't need the internet to see people eating pig penises, or trying to breathe with their face covered in animal guts. How about Chef Gordon Ramsey calling his potential apprentices "cows" and "fat pigs?" Is he planning to barbecue them? On the lighter side, is it OK to watch a couple scream at their kids on Doctor Phil? Or to watch someone try to punch someone else out after swapping wives in prime time? Or would it be better to watch someone starving while the cameraman eats?

When we associate with the suffering of others, these shows become painful to watch. Even willing participants, getting paid, have a big problem, because you may sell yourself into slavery, prostitution, rape, and even cannibalism, but you cannot escape the reasons you devalued your self. Suffering began there, and the negative effect is that we begin to see others as potential victims, ready to be burned for profit and our "pleasure." However, no one else's suffering can relieve one's own demons. A more peaceful future world will look back on this as a decadent carnival of pain.

P.S. Those who suffer become the butt of jokes. Remember the one about the starving Ethiopian? I'm still not laughing.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» On the other hand Posted by: DataDoc
A voyage to the dictionary
Posted by: talkville on Sep 15, 2006 2:09 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Somehow, sometime, our aesthetics got grosser. A priss would say they've been poisoned. But by whom? And why?"

Not an 'expert', or a 'specialist', or an 'arcane academic', I walk to The American Heritage College Dictionary (4th Edition, 2004) over on my coffee table and read that 'aesthetics' in sense 1 refers to 'that branch of philosophy that deals with the nature and expression of beauty, as in the fine arts'.

It would seem that this issue is more an exact antithesis of aesthetics rather than just a 'grosser' variation of it. It reflects more the denial and repression of aesthetics more than any reflection or representation of an aesthetic view.

We're just so full of ourselves we've become empty.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: A voyage to the dictionary Posted by: alternetrose
» RE: A voyage to the dictionary Posted by: talkville
» RE: A voyage to the dictionary Posted by: Steve Adair
» RE: A voyage to the dictionary Posted by: talkville
It Is Not Capitalism
Posted by: ChristopherLL on Sep 15, 2006 3:50 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The three characteristics of almost all cultures are human sacrifice, canabalism and incest (Joseph Campbell). It has nothing to do with "capitalism." What we have added to these characteristics is the necrophilia that results from technology that has displaced us from nature. We must examine death and the dead in an attempt to discover our living humanity. And when even the crucifixtion becomes and example of extreme sadomasichism what more can be said? It is all the reaction to the suppression, distortion and exploitation of our natural sexuality and aggression.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Christopher hit the bull's eye. Posted by: jreinhart1
» RE: Christopher hit the bull's eye. Posted by: ChristopherLL
» RE: Christopher hit the bull's eye. Posted by: redstarwraith
» RE: Christopher hit the bull's eye. Posted by: ChristopherLL
» Mythology is not backwards. Posted by: Artkansas
» Look at Mythology Posted by: Artkansas
» RE: Look at Mythology Posted by: ChristopherLL
» RE: It Is Not Capitalism Posted by: cosmicgold
Americans are zombies enslaved a mutant version of Dr. Evil
Posted by: mat38 on Sep 15, 2006 4:21 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I liked this article because it has real implications that explain our national mindset today. Take the Iraq war for instance, it can't be shown to us on tv because we are supposed to be to delciate to see such monsterous human behavior. However, we can see 28 Days Later and the new Dawn of the Dead - (and other less artistic crap on network and cable like 24 which is made to scare the shit out of you and make you hate Arabic people) both of which I loved even though ten years ago I would have never considered seeing such crap. But aplly a context to the moveis such as Evangelical Christianity taking over America, or disease like zombie neocon Bush loving white male madness and try to avoid such craziness while maitaiing your sanity and horror flicks become more interesting to watch. Than thrw ina mix of O'Reilly, Savage, Hannty, Coulter, Rush, Tucker, Novack, Miller, Snow, and well, you get the idea. Propaganda is the zombie washing over us and trying to whitewash our brains.
America is a horror show and the Zomibies have arrived. I'm afraid there is only one way to deal with themm too - you figure it out or live under their bully breath.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

GROUNDLESS SPECULATION?
Posted by: BobbyGreyFriar on Sep 15, 2006 5:48 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I admit that I am simple-minded when it comes to "theories" of this sort (my impression of Critical Theory is that it's mostly bollocks). However, I think that in this case there is some truth in what the authors are saying. The types of films/media in question are certainly symptomatic of some peculiarity of our culture. Obviously, as a nother blogger notes, there are frequent historic examples of cultural institutions (e.g. canibalism) that resmble the ones of interest in this article; as to whether these similarities are more than superficial, the verdict is still out. The fundemental problem (and a vary serious one that needs to be regarded is that once you start "theorizing" you can come to any conclusion you want. Does this mean that ideas that don't stand up the level of scrutiny required in the natural sciences should be rejected? No, in my opinion, but we must be honest about how doubtful they in fact are (Marxist theory is a prime example of a theory that used to be given way too much credit amoung intellectuals -- to the point of being religious, in fact. Ditto Freud.). I was skeptical of Freud until I actually read him. Now, I don't think he's a fraud, but clearly the merits of his work raise serious questions (questions his enthusiasts usually beg). I think agnosticism is wise re: these topics untill (and if) we understand psychology in a great deal more depth than we do at present.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: GROUNDLESS SPECULATION? Posted by: redstarwraith
» RE: GROUNDLESS SPECULATION? Posted by: talkville
No morality, or too much?
Posted by: YogiBear on Sep 15, 2006 5:52 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I wonder: If there were nothing to backlash against -- no norms or religious morals, would we become more chaotic, or less? Seems like people are always pushing the limits of what their societies permit. If we didn't have such arbitrary moralities, perhaps we'd behave more "normal."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Dr. Frankenstein's monsters
Posted by: Lincoln fan on Sep 15, 2006 6:08 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Opining from the position of a person who thinks that capitalism and corporations are beneficial (No, I don't own one share of stock) I don't think that capitalism can be blamed for every ill. There are only two entities that can amass the capital to do the big projects we need in our lives. Corporations and government. Corporations can be seen as a means of managing projects. The profit motive does in most cases engender efficiency. The government is a means of managing people. It has evolved , at least in theory, from a hierarchal system that benefitted an elite to a democracy that benefits the citizens. I believe that both government and capitalism are desirable.

We have two mindless beings with tremendous power created by people. We have two of Dr. Frankenstein's monsters. If either or both get out of control by the people we are in trouble. The corporations will kill for profit and the government will kill for control.

I believe that is our present situation they have both run amok. The only entity that can control the corporations is government. In a democracy the people are in control of the government and would keep the corporations from harming people. The profit motive has driven the corporations to buy their way out of government control. Through the bribery of campaign funding and expensive lobbies the corporate establishment controls our government.

It's my opinion that unless we the people take control of our government and force it to control the corporatocracy we are headed for destruction. The corporatocracy owns both political parties and it can't be voted out.
Bob Reichenbach,
Director, The Lincoln Inititive.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Dr. Frankenstein's monsters Posted by: Lincoln fan
Boxed in, Boxed out
Posted by: wineandwit on Sep 15, 2006 6:48 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We work in a cube, drive in a box, shop in a big box and go home to a box within a gate among identical others, settle down relax with a box that communicates with us one on one, (though only in one direction) and we wonder why we feel alienated, empty and unidentifiable. As the song states: "we bleed just to know we're alive".

Capitalism? Big, unfeeling, multinational capitalism anyway.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Boxed in, Boxed out Posted by: edhowes
» RE: Boxed in, Boxed out Posted by: wineandwit
» RE: Boxed in, Boxed out Posted by: kittynboi
The Wrong Question
Posted by: ptcruiser on Sep 15, 2006 7:43 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I would like to see folks on the left address a slightly different but, perhaps, related question: Why do some of us who have genuinely progressive or left-liberal bona fides view most, if not all, of the images etc. discussed in the essay not as shocking but as disgusting trash that is largely a waste of time?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» The Right Answer Posted by: Rask
» RE: The Wrong Question Posted by: TerryS
but how to be a Mother in the face of this madness???
Posted by: Loopylafae on Sep 15, 2006 7:49 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...can anyone answer me that?? S'truth, even just a decade ago, I believed that I would teach my kids ( then infants) that the world & the people in it are mostly good, that most humans have an inherent understanding of what is good & an innate desire to be good ( or at least usually/mostly good!) But in these last few years, watching human culture has been like watching a train wreck --or more aptly, like watching that man falling from the towers ...Hollywood-ized culture is repulsive, mind-numbiung-cruelty engendering mind-control!! We have already ditched the cable & I strictly censor the movies we watch ...but I now feel compelled to teach my children to distrust ALL humans, until they know them really well ( & possibly, even then ) Is this healthy?? Is this fair?? I do feel surrounded by zombies --materialistic, self-absorbed, uninformed (by choice) unthinking, soulless zombies ... and as a Mother, it full out terrifies me!! I live in a small city ( the one where i was born, though have not always stayed) & have felt first hand the ostracism reserved for those of us who dare to speak the truth about politics, about the effects when the local union wage earners travel afar to the walmarts etc to spend their income ...soullessness trumps spirituality in the popularity game, always!! ( & ya know, travelling afar together to big box stores can be such a "bonding experience " ...ugh!) ...but as a critical thinking, goddess-worshipping feminist -- the churches aren't an option for us ... are churches the last bastion of morality?? ( i mean, aren't they the freaks that voted in Bush down there & Harper here?? Is THAT where current "morality" leads???) ...Where is left?? I chose Motherhood because I wanted to raise kind, open-minded, confident kids that would grow into the kind of adults that would contribute to a better world --- Is this even possible anymore in this disgusting, repulsive, sick, twisted messed up society?? What have I done in bringing two beautiful sweet souls into this ugly ugly world??? Can my crime be redeemed???

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» thank you ... Posted by: Loopylafae
» As Are We All Posted by: Artkansas
» Thank You!! Posted by: Loopylafae
» Awesome Idea!! Posted by: Loopylafae
» Just Be Thankful Posted by: Artkansas
» True that!! Posted by: Loopylafae
» TAKE HEART Posted by: LMNOP
» RE: TAKE HEART Posted by: LMNOP
» RE: TAKE HEART Posted by: Loopylafae
» Why mother in BFE? Posted by: BlueTigress
Sick warmongering society
Posted by: Kuber on Sep 15, 2006 8:37 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"The appetite for blood porn, zombie flicks and sicko sideshows in America is endless. Is capitalism to blame, or is it a natural extension of a free society?"

How about the unnatural extension of a sick warmongering society of mentally warped citizens (often with drug-ravaged brains) who pride themselves in harming and destroying humans on a massive scale?

Trust me; the appetite for these small time gruesome flicks pales in comparison with the devilishness of those American minds that conjure up and design highly destructive bombs that can kill tens of thousands of humans at a pop!

Many Americans were sharing collective glee the other day while their highly destructive bombs and fire bombs were being rained relentlessly on women and children in Lebanon; so let’s not allow the obsession with small time flicks to cloud our minds to the greater evils we crave as a nation.

In time that devilish desire to harm and destroy humans naturally includes as victims, oneself and those who are near and dear.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Sick warmongering society Posted by: kittynboi
» RE: Sick warmongering society Posted by: kittynboi
Is this dissertation research?
Posted by: owleyes on Sep 15, 2006 9:16 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If so, good luck. It looks like you're really on to something.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Playing to pigmentation/color/race prejudice?
Posted by: Kuber on Sep 15, 2006 9:24 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
One is very curious as to why the female in the picture is so pale and the male is of much darker pigmentation?



Isn't a pale female most likely to be attacked by another equally pale male?

Haven't pale males being the most destructive on the planet; alexander, napoleon, hitler, stalin, thruman, churchill, bush etc, etc -- on account of the UNMATCHED millions of humans they have destroyed?




Let's get real, people, represent the real world more accurately. And cease continue the ingraining of ignorance into the minds of Americans -- less we wind up with leaders that are certified idiots and a laughing stock to the rest of the world.. LOL

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Another point
Posted by: albrechtkrausse on Sep 15, 2006 9:53 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
1) The only difference between society's voyeurism/blood-lust/prurient-interests now and any other time in the past is that the technology allows easy access and 'special effects' technology makes it more realistic. All societies were obsessed with death and sex. Its natural. Think of all the legends, religions, and art from the past. Very bloody: themes of incest, death, war, etc. If you read ancient Greek plays and some Shakespeare you're amazed that you were allowed to read it in school! Worse than the internet/hollywood filth that is put out today (in terms of content. Much better in terms of plot, eloquence, etc.)

2) I had an acquitance who once uttered "as soon as you start seeing midgets featuring prominently in film/music/tv you'll know its the end of the society". Well, I say no more on this but, like Rome, 3rd Reich, Royal France, Greece, once the freaks and perversion become order of the day you're done.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Public Hangings, anyone?
Posted by: redjenny on Sep 15, 2006 10:04 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This sort of thing is not exactly new. I think there's something in us that seeks out limits. In the middle ages the public hangings were such a spectator sport - can you imagine that happening now?

I don't think this sort of thing is a sign of the times... the media have changed but the message is more or less the same: some of us like some nasty stuff and will seek it out. The ease at which consumable media travels makes it appear so much worse.

That doesn't mean it isn't harmful of course, but understanding the reality means avoiding nostalgia for some sort of golden past.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Public Hangings, anyone? Posted by: edhowes
» RE: Public Hangings, anyone? Posted by: Lincoln fan
jherne
Posted by: jherne on Sep 15, 2006 10:12 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Am I the only person alive who is offended by the paradox of branding sex obscene while glorifying everything demeaning to the human spirit?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: jherne Posted by: edhowes
» RE: jherne Posted by: babs
» RE: jherne Posted by: kittynboi
» RE: jherne Posted by: zooeyhall
is this really uniquely american?
Posted by: preissner on Sep 15, 2006 11:48 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
its a good article.. but i find it somewhat problematic that in the article lead up its mentioned how this is an american condition, and then the first segments labors a specific example which is later revealed to have taken place in London. Perhaps an american example should have been used? or the scope could be widened to include societal cultures beyond our shores. after all, beheadings and executions were often significant public events.

A futher example of cultural curiosity is the addiction and fascination with war.. people love to watch war on TV, and the US civil was was often attended to by people dressed up and making picnic lunches while they watched the "festivities" occuring on the hills below.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Shocking AND Disgusting part of the sub-culture
Posted by: Reader11722 on Sep 15, 2006 1:39 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is the depth to which we have sank. The book "America Deceived" is a disgrace even though it denigrates Foxnews anchorwomen. This book is a repulsive '1984' attempted clone and adds to the cesspool of our culture.
I found it on Google Books (a 'friend' actually recommended it) and read sample chapters here:
America Deceived

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

THIS SEEMS WAY OFF THE MARK TO ME
Posted by: LMNOP on Sep 15, 2006 1:40 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
With all due respect, I disagree with the basic thesis and assumptions of this piece.

I doubt that the images of women in hooks or zombies everywhere has any ill effect on American society or is a sign of sickness in its society. These are, in my opinion, harmless diversions. What is disturbing is not the presence of these, but the relative absence of the images that ought to be present as well, those which embody the finer values present (or absent) in a culture.

America is spiritually dead, and evidence of its vitality is correspondingly absent. Look at all the failed churches, the craven statesmen, the shabby heroes. Were the news also filled with virtuous examples – people of real character doing great things rather that ordinary people doing things of no real importance or value like demagoguing, hitting home runs, dating celebrities, disappearing or having babies by the litter. These are not heroes, they empty icons.

The reasons given in the article such as capitalism are reasons given for irrelevant presence of the harmless, not the vicious absence of the spiritually necessary which American culture clearly lacks.

Capitalism isn’t to blame for anything. Unbridled capitalism is a big problem, but don’t blame an economic system that is an engine to creativity, efficiency and industry. Blame the bridle that isn't there - the government that is responsible to control and limit capitalism’s influence to just those arenas where it is constructive, such as developing better technologies, not letting it control that government and run roughshod over what really matters like pristeen wildernesses and stable climates. Blame the members of that government and, in this case, the electorate that put them there, not capitalism.

Why is America spiritually dead is the question. It was murdered. Deliberately. Along with the American political good sense. The author alludes to the spiritual death of physicians. They didn't individually wilt on the vine. They were systematically corralled by government and by industry (HMOs) with government's help. The profession was systematically sucked dry of its rewards - the chance to help, high income, autonomy, social status and esteem - all gone. In its place are preauthoriations, less income, more liability, rising malpractice rates, the war on pain medicines, electronic records and federal patient pricacy statutes - it's no wonder.

“Because nothing shocks us anymore.”

That is not true. The administration has found that images of reality – torture, deformed or dead children, maimed and fallen soldiers, caskets under US flags – they are too shocking to release. The images of 911 still haunt most – so, we still respond to images, just not to ones that we know are fictitious.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Blame the bridle that isn't there Posted by: Lincoln fan
Best zombie movie
Posted by: YogiBear on Sep 15, 2006 1:49 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
To me, Night of the Living Dead is still the creepiest. But for the hands down coolest social commentary-turned zomboid flick, I'd go with Shaun of the Dead.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Best zombie movie Posted by: albrechtkrausse
» RE: Best zombie movie Posted by: YogiBear
» RE: Best zombie movie Posted by: albrechtkrausse
Body Mods = societal evil!?!?!
Posted by: mmeetoilenoir on Sep 15, 2006 2:15 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Thanks, Grandma (eye roll). I'm going to go out on a limb and say that this person has never spoken to a piercing or body mod enthusiast before.

I have some friends who have done pierced suspension, and it's one of the most amazing things they've ever done. Many people get mods done for the sheer beauty of it. It may not be your definition of beauty or catharsis, but it is for some. I love, LOVE, getting piercings, and I think that the metal looks lovely in my body.

Remember, too, that many people who get these things done aren't going to PaineWebber for work on Monday mornings. Quite honestly, they don't give a flying fuck what the hell you think, especially the people that are into body mods to the point of getting implants, forking, and other procedures. They live thier lives surrounded by people who accept them, and who appreciate what they've done.

It just angers me that this haughty author is sitting here lumping body mod lovers with people who do stupid things like rating shit and watching people die! Are you saying that their spiritual or bodily pleasures are on the same par as gruesome death made into spectacle? That's pretty low. True, there are people who are doing it in a "Look at meeeeee!" way, but that's true of so many things in this world. The people I know did it for the experience- like someone who goes hang-gliding, or parachuting. They're not all Jim Rose types who are doing it to make a buck and repulse the vanilla yuppies. Many people do it with practically no audience, and with little or no profit.

Certain personal matters are just that...personal. They are lifestyle choices- way different than what this author is saying. I'm sorry that you can't relate to our mods, but don't lmp us in with people who love to watch death, or hold humanity in little or no esteem. That's just wrong. Many wonderful things do get co-opted in the name of profit (note all the spooky children in the mall...thank you, Goth and Go), but don't lump the genuine fans with people who are opportunists.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Body Mods = societal evil!?!?! Posted by: albrechtkrausse
» Body Modification Ward No. 6 Posted by: YogiBear
» RE: Body Mods = societal evil!?!?! Posted by: mmeetoilenoir
Remember all those medieval martyrdom stories?
Posted by: medstudgeek on Sep 15, 2006 4:22 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This is nothing new. With technology, the visual arts have gotten a lot better.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Overstated
Posted by: Logic's Edge on Sep 15, 2006 6:44 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I doubt that this sort of crap is any more prevalent than it's ever been. The only difference is that there are media such as the internet and the increasingly desperate networks (Show Case, anyone?) that sometimes shove it in your face unexpectedly as you flip through the channels, making it seem more common than it is. Just like you'd get the idea that everyone is into threesomes and lesbian orgies if you made the internet your point of reference.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Not new; just more available.
Posted by: monkeywrench on Sep 15, 2006 6:49 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It's interesting that in Sweden, sex, the natural, pleasurable acts between two (or more) consenting adults is openly shown in the media, whereas violence is restricted. What do they know that we don't, and why do they, a capitalistic society, behave so much more rationally than we do? Maybe we – and those in other societies that enjoy bloodletting and brutality – are simply genetically flawed. After all, our ancesters used the Rack, the Wheel, the Iron Maiden, burning alive, and other tortures too disgusting to mention; and the Bible advocates acts that would sicken some strong stomachs today (the difference being that the Bible didn't come with a DVD.)

Our genetically FUBAR'd history is worse than we realize, but it is nothing new. What is new is the number of people that can be titillated by acts of depravity, and the level of profit that can be made. Let's just hope that the spreading of brutality-as-entertainment doesn't operate like a nuclear chain reaction. We all know how those turn out. . .

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Hear, Hear --True that!! Posted by: Loopylafae
Please pardon my ignorance...
Posted by: Torgo on Sep 15, 2006 8:13 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
but what is "morally implacable work"?

As in This nightmare haunts even doctors, who earn some of the system's biggest salaries for doing some of its most crucial and morally implacable work

I'm aware of implacable foes that cannot be pacified, and implacable hostility, which according to Wikipedia is defined as follows: What differentiates implacable hostility from the typical hostility that may arise after separation/divorce is that the deep-rooted nature of the hostility cannot be justified on rational grounds and measures taken by third parties including mediators and the family courts are to no avail.

Has anyone else used the phrase "implacable work" ever? I'm a word geek (and it got me into and through school) but I'm confused!

Thanks for any ideas/help.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Please pardon my ignorance... Posted by: mmeetoilenoir
Bad argument
Posted by: BlueTigress on Sep 16, 2006 8:42 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I found the whole argument to be poorly structured.

Arguing that the popularity of zombie movies is only because of the "soullessness" that we feel as parts of the capitalist machine is patently silly. Part of the reason there ARE so many (and we're talking what maybe half a dozen in the last 10 years?) zombie movies is the lemming-like mindset of Hollywood. "Look, a zombie movie made lots of money! Let's make a zombie movie so WE can make lots of money!"

The best way to deal with offensive images one finds on the web is to click away as soon as you see it. Then never visit that site again. Duh.

There is a fascination with shock imagery because America is so bloody sanitized. You can go for days and not encounter anyone with so much as a scab visible on their skin, so seeing someone who is in the middle of a pierced suspension ritual is fascinating because you can't imagine why they're doing that. I understand it is an intensely personal and spiritual experience. Plus, a lot of the country is safe (despite what the Bushites say), so doing something like watching a scary/bloody movie is a way to experience the fear without risking your personal safety.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Bad argument Posted by: YogiBear
A good book
Posted by: fifthworld on Sep 16, 2006 1:48 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Dark Eros: The Imagination of Sadism - s good book by Thomas Moore giving imaginative/archetypal soul-understanding to all these phenomena.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

It seems to have really started in the '80s
Posted by: zooeyhall on Sep 17, 2006 9:07 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I have always enjoyed movies, and consider myself an amatuer "expert" on American cinema. This phenomenom of seems to have started in the "slasher" movies of the early 1980's. It is true that prior there were movies that had gross elements, but it was during this decade that the overt cruelty to the explicit violence came to the fore. Also, many of the earlier "violent maniac(s) on the loose" (such as Night of the Lving Dead, the first Halloween and Friday the 13th movies) had shock elements. But they showed the hero (or heroine) triumphing over the villain at the end.

Then we started getting movies like "Maniac", the "Hellraiser" series, the "Freddy" series and many others, that just seemed to glorify the cruelty and sadism---period. At this time, I remember a very incisive article written by the great Sci-fi writer Harlan Ellison about this trend. In his article, he remarked how these movies especially seemed to take pleasure in showing WOMEN being the victim of the antagonist. And usually, it was a woman character in the movie who had sex, or who seemed to display independence and fortitude. Ellison, in his article, suspected a connection between this and men who were against the growing women's liberation trend of the 70's and 80's. Seeing these types of women getting shafted (or worse) in these mad-slasher flicks made many young male viewers say to themselves "yeah, that'll show the bitch".

Like I said previously, this seems to have started in the early 80's, beginning with Reagan's election. (I know that lots of conservatives think that you should get on your knees and genuflect when mentioning "Saint Ronnie").

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Can only blame myself but answer is nigh
Posted by: bobalter on Sep 18, 2006 2:37 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Dear Anneli,

You write and ask:
Somehow, sometime, our aesthetics got grosser. A priss would say they've been poisoned. But by whom? And why?
Then you say one blames capitalism. Maybe another blames fascism, or socialism, or progressivism, or conservativism.

I think you are correct at the end of your article: “Capitalism didn't start this, but it will not bite the hand that feeds it.”

It’s really not all that difficult to understand why so many are so bent on doing, viewing, and thinking about the “gross.” Long ago, at the time of Jonah (you know, in that old-fashioned book in which it says Jonah was supposed to go do something but would not at first), the Ninehvites did not know their right hands from their left. It’s a good bet they were in a cultural state that found them doing all things “gross” because they really, both persons individually and the society corporately, didn’t know which way to go. Without a vision for and a conscious decision to think about and move toward the honorable and uplifting, humans “naturally” drift toward the “gross” and unseemly. On this note, none of us may get away with blaming any corporate or societal –ism. Long ago, we were reminded that whatever is true, whatever is noble, whatever is right, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is admirable—if anything is excellent or praiseworthy—think about such things (Philippians 4:8). And Paul, who wrote this, pointed to the only answer to the obvious problem of drifting toward the ever-more “gross,” seeking after and relating to the the perfectly glorious, Jesus the Christ, so we can move in the direction of the lovely, not the “gross.” Without this, no one will be lastingly joyful.

--Brian
in Oregon

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

A bit of perspective
Posted by: pixiequix on Sep 18, 2006 3:01 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I find it unfair to place Ted Kazcynski among uncomfortably looney sociopaths like Gacy and Lucas.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

doublelibra
Posted by: Doublelibra on Sep 18, 2006 3:41 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
This all seems so sad to me. Somebody please tell me what is worthwhile with this mutilation? It seems that one must be self-hating or self-absorbed to do this. I have a disability and have suffered a great deal in this life. Why would anyone seek out suffering, when life deals out more than enough? Or why seek out ever more desensitizing material to inhabit your psyche?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Does this tell us anything?
Posted by: A-Junky on Sep 19, 2006 10:09 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
For me the real issue here is more in terms of how these acts function to precipitate a question rather than in trying to state an all inclusive answer at this point. I have thought about the move to body piercing, tatoos, body mods, etc. over the last few decades in or society (note this is different from other older cultures and is peculiar to this system) and I think what this really does is begs the questions -- what is taking place to motivate people to do this. I don't want to attempt an answer to this here (I think it is way t