Discussion 5 - Las Vegas by Tom Wolfe

Wolfe’s article gives a straightforward introduction to the signal figures of the early 60’s in Vegas from the show girls to the gamblers. He looks at the emergence of intriguing art forms & styles of life from the bright fluorescent lights of the signs to the underlying architectural symbol of them that have nothing to do with the ‘elite’ culture of the past. We see through Wolfe’s eye the new world’s most stupendous manifestation of the back-lit plastic city of Las Vegas. Wolfe’s style is all go & wow and breathy expectancy and he makes his crazy mannerisms look easy. His work is hypnotic allowing his readers follow on into a world of bright, shiny verbal imagery.

Wolfe sets Vegas out as the city it is, ‘a city that never sleeps’ from the gambling to entertainment, from art to drugs. The image portrayed in ones mind is a place of insomnia where people almost go insane with the 24/7 life style of Vegas from the noise of the craps table to the slot machines ringing. More than 3-4 days here would possible not be healthy for one sanity. However in Dave Hickey ‘Air Guitar’, he underlines the very place as home. He states that many would not feel at home here at first yet when they touch the essence of Vegas it could possible become home more than any the other place in the world. He sets Vegas as a place where anything can happen. He believes Las Vegas is the most honest place in America where one can evoke Art. Is this true? Perhaps it is as in the slight moment of the rolling dices one holds the anxiety and hope of anything is possible.

Discussion 4: Social Space; ‘The Production of Space’ by ‘Henri Lefebvre’

Lefebvre idea of social space seems to be embedded with the concept of Marxism. I must be honest and admit when I first read this text I was baffled and a little confused about what Lefebvre was trying to say. In order to get some idea of what Lefebvre was trying to say I had to look at Marxism to get an understanding of where his idea of production of space is coming from. So here it goes, my interpretation of he’s writing...

Space is based on society which is based on production; therefore would space not be a product? Lefebvre analyzes space through form, structure and function of something he calls ‘social space’ and explores how such spaces have been produced. It would appear that his idea of social space consists of a certain configuration of actual space in actual time. Space takes in physical objects that take part in discourse and therefore become a container of relationships of the society of its people. Does space produce society at the same time of producing space? Lefebvre believes that as a space is produced so is a society. He sets out in his writing the different kinds of social space and the modes of their production into a theory. He believes that social space is produced by power to serve a goal. I believe this could be true in many cases as a space is a product of design around what the people want and what people want usually reflects on the society in which they live.

Discussion 3: 'The Politics of Amnesia' by Terry Eagleton

Postmodern cultural theorists are in the habit of declaring the end of theory itself including Eagleton as he declares the end of the Golden age of Cultural Theory in the opening line of ‘After theory’. He argues that no one has come to rival the theoretical innovations of the cultural theorists such as Williams, Habermas and many more. Theory has been mutated with time. Eagleton believes the crucial crisis with postmodern thought is that it has given up on asking the big question. Instead it celebrates difference, to such an extent that we cannot see ourselves be part of any unified whole, we cultivate in our small groups and primarily consider the questions that are important to our own selves. This has led to an increasing interest in the humanities on the body and sexuality. It would appear that Eagleton believes that students nowadays write uncritical, reverential essays on Friends. This has led to him moaning about a rise of a generation ignorant to the matters of exploitation, poverty and violence. The main objection, I’ve come to understand, is that the contemporary cultural studies have become obsessed with the debris and wreckage of contemporary culture, mistaking the ins and outs of culture for the earth shattering.

Will I ever finish reading this book? I not going to lie and say yes I will read it tomorrow as that’s not going to happen but in the near future I hope I would. It’s not the type of book I’d just pick up and read but after reading the first chapter I believe it is a book I’d finish.

Discussion 2: Fear & Money in Dubai by Mike Davis

Al-Maktoum wants Gigantism, to be bigger and better than anywhere else. The place of Dubai seems far to overpowering for me, why anyone would want to look out their window to see a landscape of 600 skyscrapers. There is no process behind the way of living, it would appear that Dubai stands as a contemporary nomad, a city that doesn’t build on the processes of its history but stands alone as a prototype of futurism. Dubai is a city built on the modern boom of the 21st century, it’s a development in overdrive which is bound to hit its peak and fall. But perhaps Al-Maktoum really has found the secret of eternal levitation.
Who’s going to occupy the property that is vastly being developed or is it going to become a ghost city? The rich want to own a piece of everywhere and will invest but what shall happen if this becomes a flop? Is Dubai going to survive on the oil and terrorism? As terrorism holds fear as gift to the oil producers, would this alone be enough for Dubai to keep developing?

The labourer’s living conditions puts a new outlook on this dynamic shiny city. These workers are living in inhuman conditions, no air-conditioning and in some case no toilets. These conditions have altered my opinion of such a high tech city. Don’t get me wrong Dubai is still a city I would like to visit and experience the monstrosity of the skyscrapers. However one can’t turn a blind eye to the sweat, hardship that has gone into building it. Is it right that a city should be built by slavery? What’s happened to human rights? On the outskirts of this vast city people are living in slum conditions. Do the rich people investing in these properties see the sad life of the workers behind it? It seems preposterous that people be treated in this way.

Discussion 1: Zaha Hadid: The First Great Female Architect by Jonathan Meades

The structure of the working environment of Hadid’s staff seems hostile and unpleasant. They work in an unsociable environment like machines with the only connection between them being intense concentration. Hadid likes such an environment as she sees it as the way of the digital industry. However, I believe people/ work benefit from the spirit of an organisation, which is one thing Hadid’s office lacks. Hadid believes her staff are connected through digital knowledge; she believes the computer is more than a tool as it increases knowledge and resources and opens a connection to everyone. In my opinion though it is a tool, just as a pencil is; if one does not have the knowledge to use them they will not be connected and achieve their standards.

Hadid doesn’t like to relate to the context of historicism yet lives and works in quite a historic part of London. It seems to me she is quite comfortable with her location because she doesn’t acknowledge the old, she doesn’t look upon history to influence her work as this would restrict ones design. Hadid is not one to share her processes of work as she believes it would jeopardise them. If she doesn’t pass the knowledge on it will evidently die and the immortality will be lost.