>Well, I'd just like to point out that it's *your* post about the Everready
>Bunny that is refreshing my memory of it. I'd quite forgotten about it, it
>doesn't engage my attention from day to day. In other words, advertizers
>do not have a power to appropriate time that is not theirs. They get their
>30 second spot same as all the other advertizers, there is no power to
>capture attention indefinitely.
sorry i couldn't think of a more contemporary example, brandon, but then
again: 10 years is not a long period of time in the historical scope of
advertising; but to the point: i think the example illustrates fairly
precisely the way in which a simple media device can be deployed toward
'appropriating time that is not theirs' (from where did i refresh that
image in you?); although maybe i'm not being so clear... i think brian used
the term 'adhesion' for the occurance... it's the latency of an image that
matters here, and how we carry that with us, how we inhabit it/it inhabits
us... it's not so different from the way, for instance, a serial killer
appropriates urban space in terms of fear: his actual presence far less
important than his potential presence...
regarding the transference of this media device to the parallel sites of
freeway and mall (if we can consider them so), i proposed that more as a
vehicle to examine potential tactics which weren't necessarily dependent
upon the advertising image; the thinking goes: if these (infrastructural)
sites share common temporal conditions, what potential tactics might be
revealed by taking ones which work in one field and transposing them to
another; what would we find out through the way the tactic would need to
mutate to engage the (very different) context it now found itself in?
i agree that the success of most of these devices lies in the simplicity of
their mechanics; understanding the terms of the negotiation (and not
simply 'tuning out the noise') is more complex... (not)mere repetition is
an important politic on one side of this negotiation... but maybe jordan is
more primed than me to elaborate on this:
>It might begin with a simple movement, a simple vector. This might
>become recurrent, repetitive. Then there is a certain point where that
>repetitive movement is internalized, habitualized. That's the goal.
>
>It could operate in the realm of recognition, but its goal is to operate
>below cognition, so you're not aware of it at all. You just find
>yourself doing it, like all of a sudden finding yourself humming an
>inane product jingle, or buying Fritos.
>
>An internalization, habituation (in/habituation, form of dwelling), that
>is accompanied by the appropriate refresh rate.
and/
department of public works
-------------------------------------------------------------
a forum on spatial articulations, perspectives, and procedures
texts are the property of individual authors
for information, email majordomo@forum.documenta.de with
the following line in the message body: info blast
archive at http://www.documenta.de/english/blasta.htm
or http://www.documenta.de/deutsch/blasta.htm
documenta X Kassel and http://www.documenta.de 1997
-------------------------------------------------------------