The Ethics of Nostalgia

The way we represent history on screen and on blogs has very little to do with the way ‘it really was’, but with the way we want it, and need it, to be. A few months ago, a new television drama called Puberty Blues, set in a 1970s Australia, was shown on Australian television. It was extremely popular and very similar to the American Mad Men series in its exploration of the sexist culture of the past. For me, Puberty Blues had little to do with sentimentalising or aestheticising the past. Yet, like Mad Men, it was sold as a nostalgic trip into a ‘better’ and ‘simpler’ time, and was used as an avenue to regurgitate 1970s fashion and sell vintage wares to modern audiences. I don’t doubt there are many people who viewed the series as just that: an aesthetic nostalgia. But there were probably also viewers who saw it for what it was: an exploration of the cultural context of sexism that has little to do with buying vintage jeans from the 1970s, or reviving fondue parties.

It all depends on how you look at things. And I guess that’s the point that moves things beyond a purely postmodernist engagement with the past, into a metamodern one. Because as much as we may still love to superficially aestheticise history as a ‘style’ and a consumer ‘product’, we are also witnessing an engagement with nostalgia that is about ethics rather than simply style. Like postmodernism in the 1980s and 1990s, our current engagement with the past is consciously aware of what Fredric Jameson has termed its own “random cannibalization of all the styles of the past”, yet nevertheless seeks to say something beyond style in the process. [2] We will always return to the past, and perhaps less energy needs to be spent thinking about whether this is a ‘new’ phenomenon, and more on how we choose to see, represent and interpret the past as producers, consumers and viewers, moving towards a more balanced love of aesthetics coupled with an increasingly conscious understanding of history and the present.

From here.

I find myself thinking a lot about nostalgia from a pop culture point of view, and I have to shamefully admit that I’d never really considered it as an ethical (or unethical, really) exercise in flattening the past at all. This piece is food for thought that I’m going to be chewing over for awhile, I suspect.

He’s Been Here For Years

This week’s Time piece is something that still feels a little unfinished, as if I’m writing around the subject as opposed to about the subject, if that makes sense? I didn’t quite find the magic bullet that allowed me to put everything together properly in time before the deadline (I am mixing metaphors there, I know), and as a result, I’m somewhat frustrated with myself. Still, the nature of the Internet beast: This time tomorrow, no-one will remember it and I’ll already be at work on the next one…

It’s a piece about the seeming revival for Peanuts and Charlie Brown, and how it’s not exactly what it seems. At least I got to marryPeanuts and LL Cool J in the headline, and create this wonderful piece of Google dissonance:

Platforms Are Important

What the findings suggest, Holton said, is that the news platforms a person is using can play a bigger role in making them feel overwhelmed than the sheer number of news sources being consumed. So even if you read The Huffington Post, BuzzFeed, The New York Times, and ESPN in a day, you may not feel as inundated with news if you read on your phone instead of on your desktop (with 40 tabs open, no doubt). The more contained, or even constrained, a platform feels, the more it can contribute to people feeling less overwhelmed, Holton said. A news app or mobile site, for instance, is an isolated experience that emphasizes reading with minimal links or other distractions. Compared with reading on the web at your computer, your options seem smaller.

“There was no connection between the number of news outlets people were using, so it made us think it was the device,” Holton told me. “You see less of a statistically significance between outlets and more between platforms.”

From here.

Hmmm.

Post Script

Another day of just outright exhaustion – I’m wrapping things up now, but I’ve been working for almost 12 hours on and off, thanks to insomnia brought on by stress about how much I had to do (Hello, irony) and I’ve reached the point where my fingers aren’t always typing the letters that I want them to, which isn’t helping matters at all – but I shouldn’t miss the traditional linking to my Time Entertainment essay; this week’s is here, and is all about the greatness that is the Hallmark Channel’s Christmas movie line-up. As with last week’s, it was one that didn’t quite come together the way I’d hoped, in part because I couldn’t get my brain into the right gear to write it the way I wanted to (I wrote before about my exhaustion, right…?). Hopefully, after this almost entirely holiday weekend – I should be working a little on Friday, but that’s it – I’ll be recharged and more ready to handle the next one.

Regrets He’s Unable To Lunch Today, Madame

For those who are curious: Yes, I am relatively silent right now. It’s the traditional crush of the holidays, where the time available to work on things shortens, but the amount of stuff to work on doesn’t… Not helped by the fact that, thanks to terrible timing by the fates, it’s the week of the month that I have to write catalog copy for Comix Experience as well as Thanksgiving. Every spare moment is being spent creating content and trying not to go mad in the process… but, on the plus side, I’m hoping that I can just take Thursday off almost entirely if not completely so that I can actually have a holiday for once. We live in hope…

Random Thought

One of those ideas that comes to you when you’re half-asleep, and then by the time you’re awake, you realize you have neither the time nor the financial wherewithal to make it happen: I imagined a pop-culture digital magazine (As in, Kindle single or Apple Bookstore thing, or both) anthology called It Can’t Be…! But It Is! that I would curate, with each issue featuring, say, five longform essays by writers I love centered around one particular subject.

File Under: One Day, Maybe.

The Story That Never Ended

Somehow, I forgot today was Wednesday, which means I almost didn’t link you to my Time Entertainment piece for the week: High (Concept) Anxiety: Are Big Ideas Bad for TV?

This was the piece I was complaining about yesterday, the one that just felt as if it coming together on Monday; ironically, this ended up being a weird week for my editor at Time, leading to the rewrite process going all the way up to 8pm last night, which is unusually late for this kind of thing (There actually weren’t a lot of rewrites, it was just all happening later than usual), giving me a feeling of the whole thing just never, ever ending. Normally, I try to finish writing by 6 or 7pm at the latest (Hey, I start at 7am or so, don’t look at me that way) but this piece had ended up running past that two nights in a row, with me doing drafts and rewrites while on the couch in the living room with my laptop just because I couldn’t bear to be in my office any longer that day. I’m not sure if something you end up creating yourself can actually feel oppressive, but this definitely came close.

(For those curious: It was written with all the “fuck”s in there, and then had to be edited because that’s apparently a verboten word on Time.com. I can never quite understand language restrictions and what’s cool and what’s not; I don’t get why “shit” is allowed, but “fuck” isn’t, for example, but these are just the ways of the Internet world…)

“Oh… So You’re Also a Student Then?”

It’s tempting to point to this and just say “This,” but that’s a little too reductive. Instead, I’ll say that that strip is a wonderful summation of the weirdness of not only being a freelancer, but being a freelancer who works for online outlets. In particular, this bit –

– rings all too true in my brain.

Reading it was oddly comforting, and made me think that Internet freelancers should start a support group, or something.

Obsessive Compulsions

I guess the main difference people are noting is that obsessions are narrower – in scope of the topic, or (geographic) space, or in time. A crime beat is a broad category. Obsessively following every detail of a particular crime for a while until it’s solved (or there is nothing more to say), is an obsession. Once the story is over, obsession is closed, and the reporter moves to a new topic.

But another way the difference is explained is that an obsession is actually broader, not narrower, by being multidisciplinary. Instead of looking at many stories from one angle, it focuses on a single story from many angles. This may be a way to solve some Wicked Problems. So, looking at the Big Picture of crime, e.g., causes of crime and what measures potentially reduce crime in various parts of the globe, cultures, past eras, etc, from every angle possible, is also an obsession.

From here.

The idea of “obsessions” as journalistic beats is, in itself, becoming an obsession for me. The idea of following an idea and continually coming back and coming back and coming back to it, exhausting it, is one that I – ironically? – keep coming back to. It’s in my head recently because I have been criticized by editors lately for doing that very thing too much, and I’m not sure whether to apologize or argue the case for doing so…