Mayashanti5282046’s Blog

自我不在,書寫的都是他者及其他

Archive for the ‘釋義’ Category

爱国,F

Posted by mayashanti5282046 于 八月 10, 2009

Patriotism is the virtue of the vicious.
Oscar Wilde
Irish dramatist, novelist, & poet (1854 – 1900)

爱国主义是堕落者的美德

 王尔德

Oscar Wilde

Posted in 釋義 | Leave a Comment »

一个马来西亚,八种堕落方式

Posted by mayashanti5282046 于 五月 25, 2009

000009作者:发克米

新闻、通讯、文化与艺术部长莱益斯雅丁透露,除了国营电视台、电台之外,政府或会指示私营电视台及寰宇电视(ASTRO)配合,传达政府的讯息,特别是首相纳吉的“一个马来西亚”概念。他说,“一个马来西亚”概念具备八个价值观——卓越文化、毅力、谦卑、认同、忠诚、精英管理、教育及诚信。这些价值观,提供了一套方针,以便新闻、通讯、文化与艺术部的官员能通过电视台、电台、文化、艺术节目等,传达首相的“一个马来西亚”概念。

国营电视台早已率先贯彻上述八大价值观,现诠释如下。

(1)卓越文化

国营电视台今年年初将华语新闻从第二电视台的晚上8点黄金时段换到第一电视台的非黄金时段后,收视率降了50%,这真是不屈服于观众要求,也不必考虑市场的,一意孤行的卓越企业文化

(2)毅力

国营电视台和电台明明有数不清的室内会议厅,会场,礼堂等等。可是几乎每星期,他们都要在户外让不为人知的承包商搭起临时帐篷,设宴款待数不清的政府食客。这些官员对制作节目的懒散,以及对凑办宴会的毅力,真让人佩服得五体投地。

(3)谦卑

新闻部每换一次部长和副部长,国营电视台和电台的人事就出现大变动,那些得势者对部长和总监等表面上鞠躬尽瘁,背地里狐假虎威的谦卑态度,叫所有电视剧的演员都要汗颜。

(4)认同

新闻、通讯、文化与艺术部副部长黄赛芝在今年4月尾和国营电视台华语新闻,前线视窗,以及华语电台制作人进行较流对话。听取新闻从业员的意见后,恼羞成怒的苛责大家;“要记住,你们不过是国家的宣传工具”,这句经典,反映了副部长和新闻从业员之间对新闻行业的认同落差。

殊不知,在新闻从业员的认同里面,国阵不等同于国家,宣传管道也不等同于宣传工具。黄赛芝在第一次的交流会中就迫不及待的要让有自主性的新闻从业员认同自己是工具,似乎反映了他的思考本身,并没有太大的自主性,或许她本身认同的对象只是失去了民意的国阵,而他只是国阵的宣传工具。

(5)忠诚

纳吉上台后,国营电视台多了一个专门为协助他监督电视节目而设的耳目。此人上任后就颠覆一个马来西亚主张人民为先的原则,而贯彻政府为先的条规。所以,他向某制作人发飙,规定今后所有节目,尤其是中文节目,特别是前线视窗的节目,一律只能是对政府说好话和对政府忠诚的节目,不能容忍半点批评。

(6)精英管理

留意国营电视台节目,特别是国语节目的观众,大概都不会相信如此水平的制作需要任何精英。所以精英管理在国营电视台的实行,就向要在国阵里面找忠臣一样,枉费心机。

(7)教育

莱益斯雅丁列下了媒体报道的七宗罪过后,凡是政治,性,宗教,种族,特权,王室的课题都不许出街了。所以剩下的或许只有教育,而且还必须是不涉及性的教育,所以往后所有节目都要漂白为UMUM,没有任何成年人的成分。看这些节目长大的下一代,永远只能停留在一个幼稚,弱智,无知,无聊的马来西亚。

(8)诚信

媒体报道的就是真理,还需要诚信干嘛?国营电视台只需要正确报道官方的所有说词,那就是诚信,歪曲所有在野党团和人士的说词,因为我们相信,对没有诚信的政党和人民不需要诚信

Posted in 釋義, 言論自由 | Leave a Comment »

一个马来西亚

Posted by mayashanti5282046 于 五月 22, 2009

000019一个马来西亚

一个害怕真相的马来西亚

一个马来西亚

一个败坏法纪的马来西亚

一个马来西亚

一个典当人民利益,残民自肥的马来西亚

一个马来西亚

一个钳制媒体的马来西亚

一个马来西亚

一个败坏国誉,亵渎宪法,出卖尊严的马来西亚

一个马来西亚

一个骑劫议长,纵容议员喷胡椒的马来西亚

一个害怕黑衣,黄衣的马来西亚

一个允许九流警察逮捕一等律师和国会议员的马来西亚

一个马来西亚

一个逮捕记者,扣留议员,恐吓平民,羞辱原住民的马来西亚

一个马来西亚

一个百里透红的马来西亚

一个杀人不偿命的马来西亚

一个比冤魂更凶恶,比杀手更冷血的马来西亚

一个随意更改出入境纪录的马来西亚

一个让证人陆续消失的马来西亚

一个举重若“卿”的马来西亚

一个允许杀戮者和佛教界最高领导在神圣的卫塞节共进素宴的马来西亚

作者:法克优

Posted in 釋義 | 1 Comment »

abjection

Posted by mayashanti5282046 于 十一月 6, 2008

jackson pollock's woman

jackson pollock

The term Abjection literally means “the state of being cast off.” The concept of abject exists in between the concept of an object and the concept of the subject, something alive yet not. In contemporary critical theory, it is often used to describe the state of often-marginalized groups, such as women or homosexuals. This term originated in the works of Julia Kristeva. Often, the term space of abjection is also used, referring to a space that abjected things or beings inhabit.
Following Kristeva’s formulation of abjection in Powers of Horror – An Essay on Abjection, abjection can be seen as letting go of something we would still like to keep. In the case of blood, semen, hair and excrement/urine, we recognize these as once being a part of ourselves, thus these forms of the abject are taken out of our system while bits of them remain in our selves. When one encounters blood, excrement, etc. outside of the body, one is forced to confront what was once a part of oneself, but no longer is. Dismemberment compels the same kind of heightened reaction when one confronts the horror of detachment. A dismembered finger or limb is identified as belonging to one’s own body and is ‘missed’ while at the same time repulsive to the viewer for no longer being a part of the whole. Because humans frequently shed skin and blood etc. there is a higher tolerance to it and we are not as horrified as we would be in the case of dismemberment, yet most are not willing to engage with excrement or blood due to its detached nature. In a way, we exist in abjection: the process of creating our self (identity) is never-ending. The act of “selfing” (“identifying”) ourselves is the only common feature of all people.
According to Kristeva, since the abject is situated outside the symbolic order, being forced to face it is an inherently traumatic experience. For example, upon being faced with a corpse, a person would be most likely repulsed because he or she is forced to face an object which is violently cast out of the cultural world, having once been a subject. We encounter other beings daily, and more often than not they are alive. To confront a corpse of one that we recognize as human, something that should be alive but isn’t, is to confront the reality that we are capable of existing in the same state, our own mortality. This repulsion from death, excrement and rot constitutes the subject as a living being in the symbolic order.
This act is done in the light of the parts of ourselves that we exclude: un-namely – the mother. We must abject the maternal, the object which has created us, in order to construct an identity. This is done on the micro level of the speaking being, through her subjective dynamics, as well as on the macro level of society, through “language as a common and universal law.” We use rituals, specifically those of defilement, in order to maintain clear boundaries between nature and society, the semiotic and the symbolic. This line of thought begins with Mary Douglas‘ seminal book, Purity and Danger.
The concept of abject is often coupled (and sometimes confused with) the idea of the uncanny, the concept of something being “un-home-like”, or foreign, yet familiar. The abject can be uncanny in the sense that we can recognize aspects in it, despite its being “foreign”. An example, continuing on the one used above, is that of a corpse, namely the corpse of a loved one. We will recognize that person as being close to us, but the fact that the person dead, and “no longer” the familiar loved one, is what creates a sort of cognitive dissonance, leading to abjection of the corpse.

Posted in 釋義 | Leave a Comment »