The Spirit of Resistance

Posted by: Fats in: Fats, Vitamins & Minerals > Wika at Hirap

One of the most persistent (and personally unconvincing) remarks I have heard from many artists when asked about what they do or are trying to do is that “art mirrors life.” Whatever this might mean to artists, many of them expound that art is just an expression and a sentiment towards what is going on around us.

I asked a very well-known and awarded artist once what he felt about the problem of intellectual property rights especially as it touched upon the medium and process of his work (film), and again, he simply said that he only wishes to express his creativity.

A very similar explanation is given by quite a number of people, not necessarily artists, when they are confronted about what they are doing (or not doing). For example, recently, I have a friend who refused to translate a document because he knew it would be used to allow people in the rural areas to submit to tests of new drugs. For the solicitors of the translation, it is just a job and the task is simply to find another translator.

Another friend of mine is currently in correspondence with someone in America who seemed to routinely explain away each sign of cruelty in society as either unstoppable or inconsequential, thus this person explains: “the world is not perfect, it is important to understand it, and we cannot do anything about it.”

When a colleague asked a Dutch woman about how the Dutch, who have often refused to cooperate with each other, might be able to deal with the problem of water which needed cooperation, she explained it away: “Everybody should express themselves and have a right to an opinion. I think that we should listen to minorities such as women, but I don’t know anything about the problem of water, that is for the government to work on.”

Milton Mayer, in “They Thought They Were Free: the Germans 1933-45″ eloquently described these mostly imperceptible compromises, and their consequences:

“What happened was the gradual habituation of the people, little by little, to be governed by surprise, to receiving decisions deliberated in secret; to believe that the situation was so complicated that the government had to act on information which the people could not understand, or so dangerous that, even if people could understand it, it could not be released because of national security. . . . (Mayer: 1955, 166) To live in the process is absolutely not to notice it–please try to believe me–unless one has a much greater degree of political awareness, acuity, than most of us ever had occasion to develop. Each step was so small, so inconsequential, so well explained or, on occasion, ‘regretted’ . . . .(168) Believe me this is true. Each act, each occasion is worse than the last, but only a little worse. You wait for the next and the next. You wait for one shocking occasion, thinking that others, when such a shock comes, will join you in resisting somehow. . . .” (169)

“Suddenly it all comes down, all at once. You see what you are, what you have done, or, more accurately, what you haven’t done (for that was all that was required of most of us: that we did nothing). You remember those early meetings of your department in the university when, if one had stood, others would have stood, perhaps, but no one stood. A small matter, a matter of hiring this man or that, and you hired this one rather than that. You remember everything now, and your heart breaks. Too late. You are compromised beyond repair.” (171) - From Milton Mayer, Quaker Hedgehog, A Review and Profile, by H. Larry Ingle, 2003.

The “gradual habitation of the people”, one time I likened to a frog in a pot of water with temperature rising little by little, until, unknown to the frog, it had already been cooked. ;)

In relevance to current times, Ingle explains:

“So Mayer’s answer to the age of Bush-Ashcroft amounts only to an reiteration of his central insight: principiis obsta, resist the beginnings, lest institutions like the state overwhelm you. George Fox, the founder of Quakers in the seventeenth century, did not use these exact terms, but he certainly knew how to denounce and disengage from the apostasy he saw all around him, the one he believed stretched back sixteen centuries.” - From Milton Mayer, Quaker Hedgehog, A Review and Profile, by H. Larry Ingle, 2003.

As we now admittedly live in very confusing and confused times, relevant also is Mayer’s note on this habituation of the people “to believe that the situation was so complicated that the government had to act on information which the people could not understand.” Such complications, when taken into the private visions of the intellectual elite, and the elites, like those of the Bead Game “are engaged in exchanging their esoterica with one another in the game.” … “The world outside the community is convulsed by riots, wars and revolutions, but the players of the Bead Game have lost all contact.” (V. Papanek, 1970, on Hermann Hesse’s “Magister Ludi”)

But the world, as Papanek then saw, has now been reversed. The intellectual elites of the Bead Game have now evolved into a much much larger community of “doers”, no longer a small community of thinkers with their own esoteric private visions, but a global community of sheltered people:

“You have lived sheltered lives,” he (Milton Mayer) explained, “but you have had no one to shelter you from your parents or teachers. Your parents have done what they could to adjust you to the deplorable society to which they, as their advanced age testifies, have successfully adjusted themselves.”

In time, he warned, “You won’t even know that you are corrupt. You will be no worse than your neighbors, and you will be sure to have some that you won’t be as bad as.” He remembered that his own “education prepared me to say no to my enemies. It did not prepare me to say no to my friends, still less to myself, to my own limitless need for a little more status, a little more security, and a little more of the immediate pleasure that status and security provide.” - From Milton Mayer, Quaker Hedgehog, A Review and Profile, by H. Larry Ingle, 2003.

In our current society of adjusted citizens, there is little difference between the ‘artist-intellectual’ of the cultural cold war era who has the babbling eloquence to describe a flat surface as “disinterested painting … aware of nothing but art, absolutely no anti-art” and the ‘artist-doer’ of the current age who has the same babbling eloquence to say “art is simple, life is simple, art is just self-expression, a visual tool for communication, mirroring life.”

While the artist-intellectual was seen as a snob who assumes superiority for his own thoughts outside relevant human experience, the artist-doer is a noble slob who is just expressing himself through a purely visual statement without responsibility for ‘complicated things.’

In “What Shall the Responsible Intellectual Do?” (1963), Chomsky made clear that the intellectual is not to engage in esoteric games by himself, and “that I am by no means taking any sort of self-righteous attitude to all of this. I meant it quite sincerely in the article, when I referred to the page of history on which we find our proper place, those of us who stood by in silence and apathy as this catastrophe developed and who continue, today, to look away and to restrict our protest.”

The spirit of resistance, though marginalized, still lives in those who in their judgment and conscience take responsibility for what they do or refuse to do. For certain, I consider it important not to succumb to the overwhelming helplessness of a society of victims, of people who seem wholly convinced that matters have become too complicated for either informed action or responsibility.

While with a few friends we take heart in the thought that at best we could still plant our vegetable gardens, we take responsibility in that which we do or refuse to do, to take note and criticism of the apostasy around us, not simply to mirror it or echo the propaganda of media, the church and our useless politicians.

In all this, principiis obsta, our obligation to resist the beginnings.

3 Responses to “The Spirit of Resistance”

  1. trevor Says:

    It seems to me (after a quick web search on Mayer’s book) that Mayer’s text can be just as easily co-opted by the American left as the American right: Thus providing evidence of their own mutually sustaining life and death struggle against each other (which reflects perhaps on a much weaker scale, Mayer’s reflections on the symetry (on some levels) between Communism and Fascism). Each being locked in mortal combat with its own reflection too.

    However, what most American excerpts and commentators seem to prefer to ignore are the perhaps much more fundamental criticisms of the American de-Nazification process, especially its own similarities with the original Nazification process practiced by Hitler and his friends. Perhaps (on one level) the two opposing projects only differ (in the use of social engineering techniques) through the American policy’s lack of internal and temporal consistency. The way (according to Mayer) the Americans indocrinated and re-militarised Germany (despite their own laws forbidding this) in order to use the Germans in general (and certain Nazi specialists in particular) in the fight against Communism -one sees a frightening similarity to the debacle of America’s de-Ba’athification and social engineering project in Iraq many decades later. Add in Guantanamo Bay -and one can probably agree when Tony Blair in the BBC report “Iran backing terror, says Blair” warns about the world facing a situation similar to “rising fascism in the 1920s”. Although some (who have perhaps read Mayer’s book) might disagree as to the location of the epicenter.

  2. roger malina Says:

    Fatime

    I very much appreciated your post and the concern about “habituation”.

    I recently heard a talk by Barbasi where he talked about the ‘inevitability’
    of total surveillance. As both police cameras and personal cameras proliferate
    and more of this is dumped on line, it will become routine to be able to dial
    up any locatioon and time on the planet and find who was doing what at that
    particular place. Our cell phones with GPS will keen a record of all our movements.

    Disconnecting is not enough because our friends have cameras and the walls see.

    So what are we do to as slowly all previous ideas of privacy erode ? I think
    that the work of artists in this area can be one element of resistance- inventing
    new kinds of privacy and ways of subverting surveillance systems.

    Even a work like Listening Post which makes visible on line chat,
    hadsa subversive effect = overhearing all the conversations going on in line and realising their convergence to the mean.

    What kinds of artists and scientists projects can contribute to not onlsy resisting but creating new ideas for a saner world

    Roger

  3. Fats Says:

    Hi Roger,

    The emotional and psychological acceptance and trivialization of surveillance (and other things like violence) is also done through the work of artists (in tandem with other people, particularly those in academia, entertainment, mass communication, and certainly, science).

    One very recent, on-going and hugely popular example is Endemol and their programs (i.e. Fear Factor, Big Brother, etc.) Have you ever seen Big Brother? As the joke goes, if Orwell was alive today he’d be rolling over in is grave!

    Stimulus such as “Big Brother” are very effective in the habituation process, such that later, it will become easier to, for example, implement a national ID system (with RFID) without question or debate, because the resistance will be limited to only a small marginalized minority that can efficiently be ignored.

    In Amsterdam, I noticed that shops that had surveillance cameras made it clear that there are such cameras by displaying stickers on their shop windows. People there are also very sensitive about being photographed. I don’t know if that is still very true. In Singapore surveillance systems are not very easy to spot - until you do something. While there, we joked that if we threw a piece of gum to the ground in a shopping mall, police will fall from the ceiling. If you honk your car horn out in the streets you will get a traffic ticket in your post tomorrow. If you e-mail your friend a file made through an illegal software Big Brother will be knocking on your door in the morning. Surveillance in Burma wasn’t even that bad!

    In many places, resistance is futile (you will be assimilated). So yes, artists can provide new insights and new forms of resistance in these situations, insofar as they take great effort in understanding how the system works, and that their works enable others to understand how the system works too, and not just be auto-therapeutic visual statements made at the expense of the public. (If I was a fascist dictator I’d lock up Endemol people for crime against humanity).

    Now there is renewed artistic interest and activity in the field of nanoscience. The Institute for Soldier Nanotechnology at the MIT is doing groundbreaking work in this field, and artists are encouraged to “play” with these research. Several years ago, biotechnology started to become a very active field of play for artists. The extent of scientific research in this field is now so enormous that artists will find the limitless possibilities almost tyrannical. Imagine the use of living organisms for detection and identification: from land mines to infected water to people of specific racial types.

    One field that the US military and its allies do not seem to have enough research on is network-centric warfare, now broadly and safely called “network science”. What the military needs is a grasp on the rules of network beahvior, a formalization behind diverse systems that exhibit group behavior. I can imagine how important the contribution of social networks such as Facebook and Friendster are in this field. Imagine that - 60 million people, 60 million free guinea pigs for your research.

    A very sensitive artist (and scientist) knows that his/her work is a double-bladed sword, it will cut both ways. How I “play” with GPS or nano-technology or bio-technology or complex networks will inevitably promote these mediums/technologies to levels that I may personally despise. When that happens, the artist (as surely the scientist) should be aware and responsible for the outcomes.

    I had a colleague, whose father was dying of cancer, cursing science for spending so much time and resource in the invention of such things like Viagra.

    Much worse, I heard that the American Cancer Society has “copyrighted” the word “Cancer” such that individuals (who are often cancer survivors) who wished to help others by campaigning, making wigs, etc., are being asked to cease and desist from their activities, and not use the word “Cancer”.

    It appears that if something does not link to established industry profit or the war effort, then it must be illegal.

    I have an on-going thought about what to do with these… More later as I resume my other conversations with dead people… ;)

Leave a Reply