Table of Contents

2. An Excess ofReality -The Powerofthe StrikeRon Hanson

3. Towards a Theory oftheDistracted Image: Part OneAaron Tan

6. Local Time: Horotiu (16-Apr-2012, 0900 +1200)Local Time

8. Une autre raison de s'indigner(courrier des lecteurs du 1 juin)Sophie Le-Phat Ho, Kevin Lo,Faiz Abhuani, Amber Berson,Dominique Desjardins,Gwenaëlle Denis, Farha Najah

10. Buzz Off: Spatial ControlThrough Audio FrequenciesBopha Chhay

11. Sport, Shopping andWalkingShama Khanna

Editorial

The forms of disruption of public

space are manifold, from

demonstrations blocking arteries

for the circulation of goods and

capital accumulation, to

interventions into urban

infrastructure, state strategies of

control and affective dictates as

propagated by the media. The

past year has seen a variety of

forms of protest through the

reclaiming of public space in

marches and demonstrations, as

spurred by the implementation of

neoliberal imperatives within

academic institutions and the

increased pursuit of the state to

profit from selling off state assets

and freely exploit natural

resources, despite the long-term

repercussions this might have

culturally and environmentally.

Marches have often entailed a

manifestation of collectivity

transcending clear mandates and

identities, where demonstrators'

agency can rest in its reaction to

concrete state measures, but also

in its unfolding outside markers

of status, profession or identity.

The political manifestation of

these subjectivities having

rejected identities and conditions

of belonging have drawn the ire

of the state through their shared

commonality in public space. The

political agency of these

singularities can manifest itself in

unison across the built

environment in a way that calls to

attention possibilities for space to

be transfigured and freed from

the directions of capital.

These actions have come in the

face of economic imperatives

building on the spectacle of

capitalism. The spectacle is“capital to such a degree of

accumulation that it becomes an

image [. . . ] It represents a world in

which the forms of the State and

the economy are interwoven, the

mercantile economy attains the

status of absolute and

irresponsible sovereignty over all

social life.”1 It is this image of the

spectacle that methods of

transfiguring space through

dissent can render void. How can

the spatial apperceptions

determined by the image of the

spectacle economy turn into an

apprehension of space that is rid

of the spectacle' s influence?

Recent demonstrations across

commercial arteries and highways

in Quebec for example, have

shown through their performative

repetitions, the value of a

communal apprehension of space

outside the purely pragmatic

movements through spaces and

non-spaces formed by

commuting. The transgression of

speed and its prominence in a

regime of cyclical renewal and

forgetting can take hold, for

instance, as a pace set by a

collectively-defined trajectory

transforming an artery of

capitalism into a space

performing the common and

social. This pace sets in motion

an iconoclastic gesture for the

beginnings of a voiding of

capital' s images. In what way can

we understand this

transfiguration where the images

of capital circulate, from the re-

investment of space through

strikes, occupations, and other

livedspace issue 1

forms of struggle, to the way that

media have played a role in re-

fashioning the spaces of habitual

exchange?

Riots in August 2011 in London

have seen the images of capital in

its fetishized form taken literally,

through the shoplifting that

major news channels have called

“violent consumerism”. In the

face of this, the Olympic Games

of last summer – which took place

exactly a year after the London

riots – have had the function of

building a nationalist feelgood

sentiment, and by harnessing the

spectacle of this corporation-

determined event, attempt to

erase the injustices addressed by

a year of protests, riots and

popular uprisings.

The recurring idea of disruption

throughout the contributions

within this issue explore the

various ways in which spaces of

capital accumulation can be re-

invented, in defiance of the

spectacle. This defiance can take

the form of the strike and its

negative mobilisation reacting to

capitalism' s intensifying pace; the

possibilities of reassesing and

reimagining the uses of current

civic infrastructures taken for

granted, and a re-investment in

the media and images circulating

in the everyday.

1. Giorgio Agamben, ‘Shekinah’, The Coming

Community, University ofMinnesota Press,

Minneapolis and London, p.86.

An Excess of Reality – thePower of the Strike

by Ron Hanson

The punitive and repressivemeasures enacted by the Quebecgovernment in response to the2012 student strikes demonstratethe threat to institutional powerthat these strikes represent. Indisrupting the day-to-day flows ofcivil society what is revealed isthe functioning and structuringof society itself, rippling theveneer of naturalness that is theneoliberal state’s greatest power.Deleuze and Guattari describethe state as an apparatus ofcapture in which “work” is thecapture of “activity.” The

dissolution of work back intoactivity is revealing of itsconstitutive power and the limitsof the state, or of sovereign valueof any kind. The state can masterthe flows but it cannot controlthem once and for all. Implicit inthis act of capture is the effect ofthat which escapes its grasp. Ifnot effectively curtailed, thetrickle can become a tidal wave.Once it reaches a certain level offluidity, the apparatus can bereconstituted but not exactly as itwas before.

The effective strike disrupts thesymbolic order by creating a newsymbol, monstrous it itsdimensions and productive in itscapacity. It is interesting tocompare the effect of a large-scalestrike with large gatherings of

crowds of other kinds, say at afootball match or at anunderground subway station. Inthese later occasions, aschannelled as they are, energyalways threatens to overspill itsconstraints, but these are smallspurts rather than unregulatedflows. In the strike, energythreatens to overflow in alldirections in overwhelming force.There is a reconfiguring ofnetworks that presents a myriadof challenges to the technocraticorder. There is a feeling ofempowerment in realising thatone is not alone.

In the Occupy Wall Streetmovement and the Arab Spring,suddenly we were presented withempirical evidence of whatAntonio Negri and Michael Hardt

have theorised as the “multitude”.The multitude is opposed to theidea of the people – which Negriand Hardt say is a concept whichemerged with the state – thedissolution of the ensemble ofindividuals into the One. Themultitude by contrast is made ofnon-representable singularitiesthat are beyond measure. It is thisimmeasurability that makes itsuch a threat to a system ofcontrol. “If on the one hand weoppose the multitude to thepeople,” Negri writes, “on theother hand we must put it incontrast with the masses and theplebs. Masses and plebs haveoften been terms used to describean irrational and passive socialforce, violent and dangerousprecisely by virtue of its beingeasily manipulated. On thecontrary, the multitude is an

2active social agent, a multiplicitythat acts. Unlike the people, themultitude is not a unity, butviewing it in opposition to themasses and the plebs, we can seethe multitude as somethingorganised. In fact, it is an activeagent of self-organisation.”

The ability to self-organise, innew and unforeseen ways, iscrucial to the success of theemerging protest movement andmuch has been made of the useof social media in doing so. But afurther dynamism needs to beachieved if the movement is tobecome seriously consequential.Occupy Wall Street was anastonishing initial success in thesymbol it created in the centre ofthe financial district and the shift-

ing of thenationaldiscourse toincludesubjects,such aseconomicinequality,which werepreviouslybanished.But thefailure ofthe massiveconstell-ation ofpeople andenergies inZuccottiPark tomorph intonew formsandintervene inothersymbolicfields

showed a lack of imagination andunderstanding of the powernetworks. In the end the viruswas contained whereas it couldhave easily spread. The creationof alternative social andcommunication networks is moreimportant than any message oftruth a movement might spread.If the state can be viewed as anact of capture, more thoughtneeds to be given as to how tohijack and redirect its flows andgain agency within the techno-sphere. The energy of a massivestrike can so quickly dissipate.More thought needs to be giveninto how to enable such energy tocontinue to circulate after theevent so it becomes more forcefulthe next time round, until a truetipping is reached.

Towards a Theory of theDistracted ImagePart One

by Aaron Tan

The triumph of capitalistrelations lie in the completeaestheticisation and abstractionof its own tragedy: in the wake ofone of the worst financial crisis inmodern history we see thecapture and capitulation ofcontemporary modes of agitationand dissent to the single instantof a twitter hashtag. Theproduction and expression of thisaesthetic barbarity find itssustenance not so much incounter-forces of capitalistagency but in the mediatingtechnics of capitalistreproduction and its trans-mission of the social. In thissense, the locus of capitalism’sself-alienation can be found in itstechnical reproductive bodywhere mass culture works tostructure and colonise collectiveexperience. The communicativeand informatic regime, pushed tothe extreme in the Internet age, isan inhabited space of dispersedproximities, where differenttemporalities and geographiescollide in real time producing aradical distribution andparticipation of social andcultural life. Central to this newmodality is the production ofanother form of crisis, one thatcan be said to define thehistorical experience of capitalistmodernity itself: the crisis ofattentiveness. It is in this habitualspace of human perception wherethis essay is interested in trackingits collective character, in so faras there can be said to be anunprecedented global inha-bitation and reception oftechnological time with theInternet. I take my theoreticalpremise from Walter Benjamin’sformulation of a ‘reception indistraction’ and the ability of artto open up this psychic space tocritically reflect an image ofcollective experience.

The first part of this essay willexpand on the philosophicalstakes in Benjamin’s incompletetheory of distraction so as toanimate the centrality of thehistorical distracted form in bothhis writings on a politics of artand his philosophical system atlarge. The essay will claim that atheory of the distracted image will

have to be read ontologically anddialectically so as to formulate arevolutionary materialist force ofthe artwork. The second part(which must await a later date)will be the projection of thisexpanded theory of distractiononto contemporary conditions ofproduction. The question as towhether art can dwell in the timeand space of the Internet will bepushed beyond the mediumspecific articulations (i.e.‘Internet art’) into a dialecticalspace where the global characterof the Internet can find its criticalformulation and reconfigurationin the distracted image of art.

In his canonical essay “The Workof Art in the Age ofMechanicalReproduction”1, Benjaminpostulates the conceptualtransformation of the artworkfrom its traditional Kantianformat of contemplation to a newpost-auratic one in technicalreproducibility. For Benjamin inthe 1930s, it was film that couldembody this new transformationin both its technical structure andreproducibility, unlocking newmodes of affective, perceptive andtemporal connections thattraditional art strove to repre-sent. This radical shift of thefunction of art into a political onecontains the potential to mobilisea collective body through theappropriation of capitalisttechnologies, alongside theburgeoning formation of themasses in modernity. Industrialforms were surpassing thebourgeois, representative role ofart in society, be it the illusionarypower of advertising or thecommunicative immediacy of thenewsreel, shaping what we nowterm as mass culture.

Benjamin’s philosophicalinvestment in mass culture(although he never used thisterm) vis-à-vis the work of art washeretical to the Frankfurt Schoolthat he was associated with. Theschool’s caution against theideological domination ofmassculture in modern society can beseen in Theodor Adorno’swritings of the culture industryand its totalising administrativeeffects2, where he juxtaposed‘light art’ against his affirmationof the ‘autonomous artwork’which has an auratic basis3. ForAdorno, the disengagement ofthe ‘autonomous’ artwork fromsociety will foreclose theantagonisms of the latter, so as todialectically reflect its utopic

truth content and the gap ofreality- the non-existence of itsexistence. However, Benjamin’scompeting dialectical structure ofthe artwork, perhaps influencedby Bertolt Brecht, would seek tofuse the pedagogical possibility ofthe artwork into the technologicalbody of the masses via analienating mediation. Thismediation would be developed inthe alienated reception of themasses, or more precisely indistracted reception, that tilltoday remains largely undertheorized.

The conventional usage ofdistraction denotes a disengagedand partial reception to the objectof attention, used metonymicallyfor the abandonment toentertainment and its divergentforces in contemporary massculture. The negative, ideologicalfunction of distraction incapitalism has been the subject ofmuch scholarly research, both asa prolongation of work and thesuppression of proletarianpolitical consciousness. However,the positive theorization ofdistraction as a form of resistanceunder mass culture can solely beattributed to Benjamin and his‘work of art’ essay (onlyanticipated by the work of hiscolleague Siegfried Kracauer);although it must be noted thatBenjamin’s earlier writings onBrecht held the negativeorthodox view on the subject4. Alarge part of the reason as to whyhis theory of distraction remainsobscure is due to the fact that thetheory itself was never completed.In the ‘work of art’ essay,distracted reception occupies justa small part before the epilogue,but its theoretical significance toBenjamin lie in a notationalappendix to the second draft ofthe essay, entitled “Theory ofdistraction”5. For Benjamin,distracted reception in itsrevolutionary format had to beunderstood both dialectically andontologically, and his notes willserve to animate what will be coreto Benjamin’s historical materia-list project: an imagistic politicsof art.

Distraction and destruction(word conjectured) as thesubjective and objective sides,respectively, of one and the sameprocess6

For Benjamin, the new possi-bilities contained in thedevelopment of forces of

production have to be dialec-tically constructed in itsdestruction7 of the auraticartwork. Distraction as ‘sym-ptomatic of profound changes inapperception’8 was wearing outthe contemplative state that theauratic artwork was traditionallyreceived in, but this paves theway for a productivity of a newtype of artwork, one which couldseize the ideological mastery oftechnological forces and divert itinto a collective body to ‘mobilisethe masses’9. The fusing togetherof physis and technics towards arevolutionary aim was anticipatedin his earlier writings on thepoetic politics of the surrealistproject in his blueprint oftechnology, body and image:

The collective is a body, too. And thephysis that is being organized for itin technology, can, through all itspolitical and factual reality, only beproduced in that image sphere whichprofane illuminations initiates us.Only when in technology, body andimage so interpenetrate that all revo-lutionary tension becomes bodilycollective innervation, and all thebodily innervation ofthe collectivebecomes revolutionary discharge,has really transcended itselfto theextent demanded by the CommunistManifesto. 10

Crucially, “reception indistraction” will act as thefulcrum that serves to animate histripartite blueprint whenBenjamin begun work on the‘work of art’ essay. In one of thefragments in his theory ondistraction, Benjaminenigmatically writes:“Reproducibility – distraction –politicisation”11. The collectivebody formulated in Benjamin’sfirst blueprint will become adistracted one- as the productiveforces of reception acting undertechnical reproduction, distractedreception can express andconstruct a revolutionary imagethat was conceived by Marx. Inthe meeting of the two tripartitestructures, a new constellation inBenjamin’s politics of artemerges:

Technology = ReproducibilityBody = DistractionImage = Politicisation

The centrality of the collectivebody of the masses in Benjamin’stheory can only be articulatedand organized in the collectiveinhabitation of the artwork, morespecifically in the receptive

3

possibilities in the new mediumof film. In his discussion ofarchitecture as the prototype forthe distracted space of anartwork, Benjamin asserts thatthe tasks of organizing humanapperception cannot be achievedsimply in contemplation, butcrucially through a habitualreception that would fuse withthe artwork: “the distracted massabsorbs the work of art”12. Theconstant interruption of themoving images in film has thepotential to create a new type ofaudience, one in which “thecritical and the receptive attitudesof the public collide”13 into aheightened but distracted state ofmind. Art then, has a politicaland pedagogical function inwhich the image, both opticallyand philosophically, can liberatethe collective kinetic body underdomination in the cultureindustry, “correcting the processof reification which takes place ina work of art.”14 Benjamin locatesdistraction as the counter-discursive form immanent inmass culture, which theproduction of any revolutionaryart has to take into account. Thisdynamics between the receptionand production of the artworkhas philosophical bearings inBenjamin’s thought, and arethinking of the ontologicalconstitution of the artwork willtransport this writing of a politicsof art into the contemporarytechnological context.

The conceptual relationship ofproduction and reception in theartwork can be mapped ontoBenjamin’s idea of ‘forelife’[Vorleben] and ‘afterlife’[Nachleben] 15, conceived in hiswritings on Eduard Fuchs andexpanded in the ruins of hisincomplete opus, The ArcadesProject. For Benjamin, the truth

of a historical phenomenon isconstituted by its fore and after-life, which emerges as the objectenters into the present, and thesedialectical forces acts upon theobject in the social in as much asthey themselves are changed byit:

For the dialectical historian con-cerned with works ofart, theseworks integrate their fore- history aswell as their after- history; and it isby virtue oftheir after- history thattheir fore- history is recognizable asinvolved in a continuous process ofchange. 16

We see the philosophicalimplications for both the artistand the cultural historianinvolved in historical materialistresearch: for the work of art toinhabit the space of the presentand critically reconfigure itsconditions, both the productionand reception ontologicallyconstituting the work have to bedialectically engaged in order forthe historical force of the presen-tation to emerge. As a presen-tation in a state of social flux, theartwork has to critically refractthe historical experience of thework through its conditions ofproduction and vice versa, and itis here where distraction, as theproductive forces of receptionunder mass culture, can serve toontologically and dialecticallymediate the artwork “as thepresent instant interpenetratesit.”17 The inscription of themasses in distraction can congealthe dialectical forces acting ontothe authentic artwork, where theproduction of an image of thecollective can be possible. Thus,this essay’s claim that it is in thedistracted image where theproduction and reception of theartwork can collide forrevolutionary aims has to be

projected and brought intotension with the contemporarymodality of inhabitingtechnology. As the state ofdistraction is pushed to theextreme in web-basedtechnologies, we see that thecharacter of collectivity in theinhabitation of the Internet willdiffer from traditional modes oftechnical reproduction in massculture. In the global inter-connectedness of the Internetwhere communicative content isconsumed and produced in realtime, the relation of art to itsconditions of production andreception is radically challenged.The question as to how art candwell in these new modalities andcritically reconfigure this spatiallydiffused network of temporal(dis)connections will be exploredin the second part of the essay.

September 2012

1. Walter Benjamin, ‘The Work of Art in the Age of

Mechanical Reproduction’, Illuminations, Hannah

Arendt (ed. ) , Pimlico, UK, 1999, p. 211-244.

2. “But what is new is that the irreconcilable

elements of culture, art and distraction, are

subordinated to one end and subsumed under one

false formula: the totality of the culture industry.”

Theodor W. Adorno and Max Horkheimer, Dialectic

ofEnlightenment, Verso, UK and USA, 2008, p. 136.

3. “In the work of art that duplication still occurs by

which the thing appeared as spiritual, as the

expression ofmana. This constitutes its aura”. Op.

cit. , p. 19.

4. Howard Eiland, ‘Reception in Distraction’ in

boundary 2, vol. 30, no. 1 (Spring 2003), p. 57-58.

5. Walter Benjamin, ‘Theory of Distraction’, Selected

Writings, Volume 3, 1935- 1938, Howard Eiland and

Michael W. Jennings (ed. ) , Harvard University Press,

USA and London, 2002, p. 141-142.

6. op. cit. , p. 141.

7. In his discussion on the task of the historical

materialist, Benjamin formulates: “‘Construction’

presupposes ‘destruction’”. Walter Benjamin, The

Arcades Project, trans. Howard Eiland and Kevin

McLaughlin, Cambridge, Mass. and London, 1999, p.

470.

8. Walter Benjamin, ‘The Work of Art in the Age of

Mechanical Reproduction’, p. 233.

9. op. cit.

10. Walter Benjamin, SelectedWritings, Volume 2,

1935- 1938, Howard Eiland and Michael W. Jennings

(ed. ) , Harvard University Press, USA and London,

2005, p. 217-8.

11. Walter Benjamin, ‘Theory of distraction’, p. 142.

12. Walter Benjamin, ‘The Work of Art in the Age of

Mechanical Reproduction’, p. 232.

13. op. cit. , p. 227.

14. Walter Benjamin, SelectedWritings, Volume 3,

1935- 1938, p. 269.

15. These terms have also been translated into ‘fore-

history’ and ‘after-history’.

16. Walter Benjamin, SelectedWritings, Volume 3,

1935- 1938, p. 261.

17. Walter Benjamin, The Arcades Project, trans.

Howard Eiland and Kevin McLaughlin, Cambridge,

Mass. and London, 1999, p. 470.

4

5

Once a file is shared on the Internet, and thedivider becomes either publisher or co­author, itsvalue changes.In this project (an exercise in significance),downloaded files from The Pirate Bay aretransformed into physical printed copies. Now,the material does not only grow in quantity butalso in dimension. As the content is presentedinto a new metaphorical format, this way ofmultiplying digital property guides you to a newway to read the content.Manetta Berends

use during screenings, panels and workshops.* The gallery was used as a base for a student­ledproject to initiate a student group for Maori andPasifika AUT art and design students. Cora­allanWickliffe and Morgan Tahapehi served over 100guests in the gallery atrium in their “Fry For Kai”project supporting students on campus.* Water was collected daily from Te Wai Ariki springnear the Auckland Law School to share with readinggroup participants and other guests. Each morningbegan with a reading group on Gayatri ChakravortySpivak’s An Aesthetic Education in the Era ofGlobalization.* Tuesday evenings featured an open discussion ofthe project, clarifying our intentions, methods anddiscovering more about the knowledge of the siteheld in the school and community.* Later in the evening on Tuesdays three screeningswere held:

Local Time: Horotiu(1 6-Apr-201 2, 0900 +1 200)

Local Time1 are a collective of artists, writers and teachers based in Auckland,Aotearoa New Zealand. We facilitate site­specific art projects and events with aparticular interest in finding methodologies responsive to local and indigenousknowledge. While our previous projects have taken shape outside the gallery, ourfour week inhabitation of Gallery Two at St Paul St (16th April ­ 11th May 2012)investigated the site of this university­based gallery that sits above Nga Wai oHorotiu, “the waters of Horotiu”, a name traditionally given to the Queen Streetarea and the gullies that are bounded by Auckland University of Technology andThe University of Auckland.Taking the question of naming as our theme, we developed a multi­disciplinary,practice­based research investigation with a wide range of collaborators, using thegallery as a site for display, discussion, and hospitality. The project aimed toinvolve the artistic and academic communities that are part of the gallery’saudience, increasing all participants’ knowledge of the site while also opening arange of questions about the role of the gallery in the colonial university and ourown positions as practitioners, teachers, and publics between “educational” and“cultural” institutions.Local Time’s methods take a measure of the daily rhythms of where we areworking, and the values and practicesthat determine them. Working “at work”this time, within the university and thegallery, we found ourselves on afamiliar kind of contemporary “localtime”: one that involves early startsand late finishes to combine making artand making a living.The actions, public events and moreintimate gatherings that made up LocalTime: Horotiu are as follows.* A 1994 Toyota Hilux Ute was re­registered as “ARTUTE” the daybefore the Local Time projectcommenced. The ARTUTE enabledthe relocation of the Suite SevenCollective’s 14 custom­coveredmattresses and floor mats fromArtspace to St Paul St Gallery Two, for

6

The Hornsey Film (dir. Patricia Holland), a 60­minute 1970 film re­creating and reflecting onthe student­led occupation of the HornseyCollege of Art, May and June 1968.Bastion Point: The Untold Story (dir. BruceMorrison), a 44­minute 1999 documentary onthe 1977/78 occupation ofTakaparawhau/Bastion Point led by the OrakeiMaori Action Committee. This screening wasgraced by the attendance of Poppy Hawke, co­producer Sharon Hawke and photographerJohn Miller.Waka Huia, Series 2010/2011, Episode 21 | NgaWai o Horotiu ­ a 59­minute documentary on thedevelopment of Nga Wai o Horotiu, the marae2at Auckland University of Technology in theheart of Auckland's CBD.* On Thursdays, two panel discussions wereheld:On May 3rd a panel on contemporary Maoripublic art featured Carin Wilson, DesnaWhaanga­Schollum, and Layne Waerea. It wasaccompanied by a titi (muttonbird) boilup andbrisket boilup.On May 10th a group heard stories and oralhistories of what staff and student life has beenlike in the past at the local art schools of Elam, AUT (and ASA), and reflections onthe pacing and timing of teaching and learning between then and now.

7

* On Saturday April 28th Local Timeperformed a boat action on theWaitemata Harbour, flying banners andflags from the Mahi Kai thundercat insupport of the Aotearoa Is Not For Salehikoi3.* The climax of the occupation was aparty on Wednesday May 9th. For thework Two Hour Opening, AUT Facilitieswere commissioned to uncover threemanhole covers on the concoursedirectly in front of the Gallery Twowindow, providing a view of some ofthe waters underneath. The ARTUTEdid duty as a chilly bin, cooling the beerin gallery one while a BBQ was served.* Jonty Valentine contributed hisRisograph machine to make a number of posters during the exhibition (one ofwhich is reproduced below). Taarati Taiaroa and Nell May have worked with thedocumentation of the show for the online platform www.elevatorcopy.org

Throughout all these events, a continuous stream of archival research into thehistory of the site was undertaken by Taarati Taiaroa and shared in the galleryspace. This material, combined with information gathered during the other events,led to the development of a text written for the gallery’s written profile information,providing additional layers tothe name St Paul Street andthe history of its location.

Local Time are Danny Butt,Jon Bywater, Alex Monteith,Natalie Robertson. Weacknowledge the generoussupport of all who participated,and thank the St Paul St stafffor the invitation to work intheir space.1. <www.local­time.net>2. marae: a meeting area central toMaori customs and philosophy. Thecentral built structure is the wharenui ormeeting house, where ceremonial, socialand political meetings take placeaccording to that marae's specificprotocols.3. hikoi: a walk or march. The hikoi is asignificant form of protest in the history ofMaori activism for civil and politicalrights.

Une autre raison de s’indigner (courrier des

lecteurs du 1 juin)

Article publié dans le courrier des lecteurs du 1er juin de Métro, en réponse à

l’article de Catherine Girard «Un printemps québécois “pure laine”?» paru dans

le même journal le 28 mai 2012.

Malheureusement, c’est comme un sentiment de déjà vu… Encore une fois, les

non­«de souche» devraient justifier leur existence et se défendre face aux

préjugés véhiculés par un «pure laine».

Soyons honnête, les propos gratuits et sans fondement du sociologue Joseph

Yvon Thériault, qui prétend que l’actuel mouvement de contestation québécois

en serait un principalement «de souche», ne font que venir appuyer la cause

des fascistes du Québec. Appartenant au groupe majoritaire «pure laine», il

aurait pu se garder une «p’tite gêne» avant de se prononcer au sujet de

minorités dont il a démontré ne pas connaître grand­chose.

Premièrement, son intervention (qui pour une raison ou une autre bénéficie

d’une tribune) vient rendre invisibles les allophones et les anglophones qui

participent activement au mouvement actuel, mais a également pour effet

d’effacer le travail des militants et militantes issus de ces groupes (tel CUTV)

qui ont œuvré, aux côtés des autres Québécois et Québécoises, depuis de

nombreuses années, à préparer le terrain de la révolte en cours. Notons que

c’est dans ces milieux dits minoritaires que se trouve, dans sa forme la plus

élaborée une analyse anti­raciste et anti­colonialiste qu’ont adoptée les

associations étudiantes les plus engagées (à noter que celles­ci sont fondées

8

9

sur la solidarité… voilà un concept!). Est­ce que les policiers et policières qui

tiennent des propos et posent des gestes racistes envers des manifestants et

manifestantes auraient des hallucinations?

Deuxièmement, son commentaire témoigne de la dynamique malsaine au

Québec qui rend acceptable l’idée que des citoyens et citoyennes considérés

de seconde zone (dont une partie a vécu des atrocités que nul Québécois ou

Québécoise ne verra de sa vie) doivent se justifier en plus de devoir lutter

contre le racisme quotidien, c’est­à­dire systémique. Le «racisme bien

pensant», c’est l’angle mort de soi­disant progressistes «pure laine» qui ne

font que reproduire les relations de pouvoir du système dominant. Citer une

personnalité publique masculine (Amir Khadir, le bon immigrant) serait­il un

pur hasard? De plus, croyez­vous qu’Amir Khadir se lève le matin afin de

s’exprimer au nom de sa minorité culturelle?

Poser la question, c’est constater à quel point le débat sur l’interculturalisme

au Québec est rétrograde. Cela est d’autant plus insultant qu’une importante

partie des personnes qui prennent les transports en commun (et lisent ce

journal) sont issues de ces minorités culturelles. Ne croyez pas que le

mouvement actuel soit uniforme et homogène. Sinon, vous serez surpris de

nos revendications et de la manière dont nous voyons la société de demain.

Avez­vous entendu les casseroles dans Parc­Extension, dans Côte­des­

Neiges, autour de Concordia? Réveillez­vous!

Sophie Le­Phat Ho, Kevin Lo, Faiz Abhuani, Amber Berson, Dominique Desjardins,

Gwenaëlle Denis, Farha Najah

<http://journalmetro.com/dossiers/conflit­etudiant/80808/un­printemps­quebecois­

pure­laine>

for heightened surveillance andcontrol, which the state quicklydeems permissible under thebanner of ‘counter-terrorism’activities. Counter-terrorism actshere as a blanket justification forthe withholding of the law andcivil rights against anything thatcould be construed as a potentialthreat to the state. Thejustification of heavy surveillanceis a starting point in which toquestion responses by the stateand the control of the space ofthe city and its citizens. What arethe shared interests andimperatives at stake that call forheightened surveillance andcontrol of the city during eventssuch as the Olympic Games?6

The research of urbangeographer Stephen Graham hasfocused on what he describes asthe new military urbanism,technologies going beyond CCTVand online tools such as GoogleEarth, where military stylesurveillance means civilians aresubjected to constant scrutiny,leading to the subsequent controlof aspects of everyday life.7

Graham discusses how theinfrastructure of surveillance,while considered temporaryduring high profile internationalevents such as the Olympics, is infact left in place, withsurveillance technologiesbecoming imposed and part ofthe permanent security fabric ofthe city, and essentially part ofthe quotidian without littleawareness by citizens.Indiscriminate surveillancepresupposes a criminal potentiallying within the urban fabric.George Orwell' s fictive account ofthe all-seeing eye of the state in1984 resonates with Foucault' sdiscussion of the structure of ThePanopticon (designed by theEnglish philosopher and juristJeremy Betham) which influencedthe spatial planning andarchitectural design of prisonscharacterized by a model ofvigilant observation at its core.The continual deployment of theLRAD as an extension of lawenforcement against oppositionprotests and demonstrations atinternational events not onlyraises questions abouttechnological forms of spatialcontrol but also the right todemonstrate and democraticallyspeak in opposition to the ideasbeing espoused and reinforced atsuch international events.

The Mosquito is indicative of theway technologies of control may

not be immediately visible, butcan create deep seated feelings ofanxiety, determining one' srelation to oneself, constituting aform of biopolitics. Whilesurveillance technologies cancreate the illusion of security, italso has the ability to increasinglydefine the subject' s relation topublic space and its potential foragency. Foucault has describedthis violation of privacy throughthe infrastructure of surveillanceas a type of “colonisation ofspace”. Considered unproductive,the act of loitering is seen todisrupt the flows of capital. In itsability to deter loitering, theMosquito acts as an affective formof fortification, by forcing peopleto keep moving. Urban housingestates, shopping malls andbusinesses have reacted toloitering by employing suchdevices as the Mosquito,discriminating against certaingroups, predominantly childrenand young adults who frequentthese areas and public spaces.Strategies of surveillance haveregulated the behaviour ofcitizens and by deterring anidleness, has enabled anincreasing privatization of publicspace.

1. “‘Anti-teen’ security device ban”, BBCNews, 13

June 2008,

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/kent/745

3675.stm.

2. Tamasin Ford, “Sonic mosquito 'demonises

teens' ”, BBCNews, 12 February 2008,

http://news.bbc.co.uk/newsbeat/hi/newsbeat/newsid_

7241000/7241090.stm.

3. Ned Beauman, “Law and Odor: Scent as a

Chemical Weapon” In Cabinet, Issue 46, 2012, p. 36-

38.

4. Adam Blenford, “Cruise lines turn to sonic

weapons”, BBCNews, 8 November 2005,

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/4418748.stm.

5. Gavin Thomas, “Sonic device deployed in London

during Olympics”, BBCNews, 12 May 2012,

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-

18042528

and Richard Norton-Taylor, “London tower block

residents lose bid to challenge Olympic missiles”,

Guardian, 10 July 2012,

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2012/jul/10/residents

-tower-government-olympic-

missiles?INTCMP=SRCH.

6. While the philosophy of the games heralds unified

goals through sports, the Olympic Games itself has

often staged political forms of opposition through

boycott.

7. Stephen Graham, Cities Under Siege: The New

Military Urbanism, Verso, London / New York, 2010.

10Buzz Off: Spatial Controlthrough Audio Frequencies

by Bopha Chhay

In 2008, a sonic device known asthe Mosquito was being employedon estates in the UnitedKingdom, as a way to controlgroups or crowds of people. Itsutility would discourage anddisperse groups of teenagers fromgathering in certain areas, byemitting a high-pitch soundcausing physical discomfort.Referred to as an “anti” device,‘anti-teen’, ‘anti-gang’, ‘anti-loitering’, anti anything thatcould lead to potentialdisruption. The device emits atone between 17.5kHz and18.5kHz, which appears to beinaudible to people over 25,effectively exploiting the ability ofpeople under 25 to pick up thesehigher frequencies.1 After 5-10minutes of being subjected to thisfrequency, it becomes irritatingenough for those gatheringwithin a distance of 15-20 metersto promptly leave the vicinity. Acampaign - ‘Buzz off’- waslaunched in opposition to thedevice, on the basis that itinfringed human rights anddiscriminated by targeting youth.2

Despite these concerns therewere those who continued tosupport the implementation ofthe Mosquito within public urbanspaces, to prevent groups fromgathering, raising questions aboutthe right to occupy public space.

The overwhelming sensory attack,from audio irritants to invisiblepain is reminiscent of thetechnological speculation of ascience fiction narrative.Sensorial attributes havefrequently been harnessed for themeans of creating technologicalweapons and devices exploitingthe sensory system through eitherdeprivation or inundation.Similarly, smell has long beenutilised as a weapon. The Israelidefense has since 2009 employedSkunk (a combination ofchemical compounds combinedto mimic the foul odor of itsnamesake) against rioters andprotesters.3 Seemingly harmless,the chemical concentrationproduces an odor-based chemicalweapon. While thesetechnologies are often referred toas devices, they more accuratelypossess the attributes ofweaponry.

More recently, during this year' s

Olympic Games in London,another form of sonic weapon,the Long Range Acoustic Device(LRAD) remained on standby.While the mosquito was deemeda low-level sonic device, theLRAD upped the ante with itsability to actually harm. Officialstatements have referred to theLRAD as an acoustic device usedto communicate and transmitmessages over a greater distancethan an ordinary loudspeaker.This seems more a case ofmanipulating semantic nuances,as those standing within rangeand proximity of the device aresubjected to directed andintensified frequencies whichcause headaches and potentiallypermanent auditory damage. Theinstallation and the presence ofsuch weapons are legitimisedunder legislation enforcingcounter-terrorism measures.LRADs have become a regularsecurity feature on cruise ships,in which they have effectivelyprevented attacks from pirates.4

More often they are employed asan arm of law enforcement inopposition to protests anddemonstrations at large scaleinternational events such as theG20.

Alongside the hype andspeculation on the impendingsuccess of countries dominatingthe Olympic medal board as anindication of economic andpolitical global muscle, the newsduring the lead up to the gameswas also punctuated with storieson the security measures beingestablished throughout the city. Itis seemingly apt that discussionssurrounding the deployment ofsurveillance technologies such asthe LRAD and missiles stationedon civilian rooftops should beraised in relation to the OlympicGames held in London5, since asa city, London has longepitomised Orwellian ideas ofsurveillance and the subsequentcontrol of space.

Determined and justified byinternational events such as theOlympic Games, themilitarization of the city issomething Giorgio Agambenrefers to in State ofException,whereby during crisis situationsthe state is vested with anincrease in power to imposerepressive measures which mayoverride the individual rights of acitizen, to protect and safeguardthe interests of the state. Large-scale international events mayharness forms of dissent, calling

Sport, Shopping andWalking

by Shama Khanna

It has taken me longer than Iexpected to start writing about mythoughts on the Olympicdevelopment, and the Olympic-sized shopping centre recentlyarrived in Stratford. I’ve found ithard to reconcile my enjoymentof shopping and people watching,which are both much in evidenceat Westfield Stratford City, withmy other desire to connect with(to see myself within) the citythrough unfettered walking,passeggiata, Debordian derive,call it what you will.

In this sense, it’s interesting toconsider famous urban walkerIain Sinclair who writes as if he’sin the process of absorbing thecity into his consciousness as hegoes and when he rubs againstsomething as inorganic as theOlympics, he blisters. In a reviewof Sinclair’s latest book GhostMilk, Robert MacFarlanedescribes the title’s reference tothe bureaucratic effluviaproduced by Newham Counciland the Olympic DevelopmentAuthority in the name of top-down regeneration:

“Ghost milk” is Sinclair' s termfor the cultural ooze that suchprojects exude: all those deliverydocuments, those primarystrategic objectives, thosemaquettes and futuramas of theworld-to-be. “Ghost milk,” hewrites, means “CGI smears . . .Real juice from a virtual host.Embalming fluid. A soup ofphotographic negatives . . . Theuniversal element in which wesink and swim. . . . Ghost milkwill swill away ‘Ghost Milk’”1

Even by believing the bestintentions of Olympism, ofteamwork and sportsmanship,regeneration never seems to be inthe interests of developing theeconomic prospects of the peoplealready living there. CampaignerDavid Harvey speaks about howundemocratic these initiativesare, with developers simplyconfining their socialresponsibility to the appendicesof big building plans. Theaffordable housing madeavailable through the Legacy willonly be around 20% less than themarket price, which is more thanthe people who lived there beforecould afford. With the increasingprivatisation of public space – the

rise of gated communities andconcierge-assisted apartmentblocks, I doubt that those who domove in will feel the need to, orfeel safe to contribute to thestreet life of the place. Nor, Iguess will this concern registerfor the Qataris and other foreigninvestors who are now the newremote landlords ofmost of thesedevelopments sold off byNewham. In this climate,Harvey’s proposal of a “right toreturn” for evicted residents, ifthey would have anything of theirold communities to return to inthe first place, seems like nothingmore than a utopian pipe dream.

* * *

Sinclair talks generally about oursurveillance culture, the irony ofbeing filmed by CCTV cameras24/7, but as soon as wegroundlings attempt to takepictures ourselves we’re quicklyclamped down on. But during arecent visit to Stratford with artistNina Manandhar with the expressaim of taking photographs weweren’t interrupted at all. For methis was an anticlimax. My brain,

trained extensively in criticaltheory, recognised this situationas a neoliberal double bluff toincrease the sense of paranoia i.e.they’re allowing us rather thanwe’re getting one over on them. Irealised how defensive myreactions had become, myjourney rebranded according towhat MacFarlane perceptivelydescribes as “flâneurism radicallyrepurposed, a kind of weaponisedwalking.”

Analysing my reactions once I’dreached home, I thought perhapsrather than paranoia, it wasdisappointment I felt in failing toimagine whatever, or whoeverexisted in this space before thedevelopers started work just 4years ago. Other elephants in theroom include the pressing newsthat radioactive thorium, whichwas exposed and inadequatelycontained during the demolitionof the Clays Lane Housing Estatein order to make way for theAthletes’ Village, now blights thewhole site with low levels ofcontamination. And crowding theroom still further, the missilelaunchers positioned on rooftopsaround Hackney, pointingtowards the airspace above theenclosure, ready to intercept whoknows what, falling onto whoknows what? And finally, toppingthis list of depressing realitychecks, this week (29 June) a fatalstabbing incident took the life ofa young man while he walkedalong with friends on level 2 ofthe shopping centre. If it didn’t

sound so much like fiction, itmight be easier to take the wholesituation at face value.

* * *

Reading David Foster Wallace’sessay “How Tracy Austin BrokeMy Heart” helped me considerwhy sport might be as effective as“ghost milk” at deflecting politicalcriticism. Writing about hisdisillusionment on reading anobtuse autobiography by histeenage crush, child tennisprodigy Tracy Austin, Wallacerealises that there is noimperative for sportspeople toself-analyse their talent:

It is not an accident that greatathletes are often called “naturals, ”because they can, in performance, betotally present: they can proceed oninstinct and muscle-memory andautonomic will such that agent andaction are one. Great athletes can dothis even —and, for the truly greatones like Borg and Bird andNicklaus and Jordan and Austin,especially — under wilding pressureand scrutiny. They can withstandforces ofdistraction that wouldbreak a mind prone to a self-conscious fear in two.

Those who receive and act out thegift ofathletic genius must, perforce,be blind and dumb about it — andnot because blindness and dumbnessare the price ofthe gift, but becausethey are its essence. 2

So therefore we could say in

11

sport, when our bodies out-perform our rational minds, anyattempt at criticism falls away. Ican’t help but wonder if thisanalogy can be applied toshopping in a recession?Foucault’s theory of biopolitics,of control administered at thelevel of our bodies’ basic needs,points to an insidious realitywhere we’re not sure why we endup following a certain pattern ofbehaviour, craving accessories toidealised lifestyles we can’t attain,or discriminating against peoplewithout recourse to knowing why.

Less metaphysically, Rule 51 ofthe International OlympicCommittee’s official charter (lastupdated in 1992) outlines how“No kind of demonstration orpolitical, religious or racialpropaganda is permitted in anyOlympic sites, venues or otherareas.” Increasing in strength, itseems the Stateʼs growingrepressive force is perceived as anecessary sacrifice to live ourlives free from hostility which weare told is a constant threatanyway. Looking at an overviewof the Games, the clamp down onfree political expressioncommensurate with the rise in

security measures and capitalistmotivations seems to have begunsome time ago: since the Gamesheld in Berlin in 1936, wheresporting perfection was marketedas synonymous with the ideals ofthe reigning fascist ideology;through to the politically fraught1968 Olympics in Mexico Cityremembered for the Black Powersalutes of the victorious USathletes, and the brutallysuppressed protests of studentsoutside; the police violenceagainst the Israeli team and theirPalestinian captors in 1972; andthe anti-apartheid and Cold Warboycotts by key sports teamsduring the 70s and 80s3, theOlympics have now becomeknown as a cash cow, rather thana place of non partisan sport.Lucrative broadcasting deals,sponsorship by the biggestbrands (the Stratford flagshipbranch ofMcDonalds is probablythe only one you can see fromspace) and merchandising are themagic words which open doorswithout, in Wallace’s words,“self-conscious fear” of thelivelihoods existing on either side– before and after – thedevelopment.

Although for the most part thetrip was disappointing, the act ofwalking we performed atWestfield, taking pictures andtalking to people who seemed tobe taking ownership of the space– canoodling on the seatingoutside, parading around incurlers in anticipation of thenight out ahead, relaxing in theindoor piazzas – helped me toconnect a little with this peculiarurban scene. But at the sametime, it seems important to beable to form a mental picture ofthe frame before and after – afuture and a past — just as youwould in any journey, which forthe reasons laid out here, andafter the news of the stabbing thisweek, I find it near impossible todo.

1. David Foster Wallace, “How Tracy Austin Broke

My Heart” In Consider the Lobster and Other Essays,

Little, Brown and Company 2005

2. Robert MacFarlane “Iain Sinclair' s struggles with

the city of London,” Guardian 15 July 2011

http://www.guardian.co.uk/books/2011/jul/15/ghost-

milk-iain-sinclair-olympics

3. Jules Boycoff, “The Anti-Olympics,” New Left

Review 67 Jan – Feb 2011

http://www.newleftreview.org/II/67/jules-boykoff-the-

anti-olympics

12

1. Photo: Sydney Hart

2; 8-9; 12. Photos of the popularmovement in 2012 in Quebec byThien V Qnquelquesnotes.wordpress.com

4-5. These images are part of alarger Graduation Project byManetta Berendswww.manettaberends.nl

6. Photo: Local Time; Mapdesigned by Taarati Taiaroa andJonty Valentine from action byLocal Time

7. Floating Easement by MelissaLaing; Special Event, posterdesign by Jonty Valentine fromimage by Local Time

11. Photos: Nina Manandharwww.ninamanandhar.com

Colophon

livedspace issue 1Fall 20122nd edition

Editors: Bopha Chhay and Sydney Hart

Design: Sydney Hart

Publisher: LIVEDSPACE Publications#102, 349 East 7th AvenueVancouver, BCCanadaV5T 1M9

ISSN 1929-9508

Thanks to Jaz Halloran, Jeff Khonsary, Brian McBay, Layla Tweedie-Cullen and Asumi Mizuo ofsplit/fountain.

livedspace is a research and publishing organisation investigating the social production of space in relation tomodern and contemporary cultural production

www.livedspace.orglivedspace@livedspace.org

Printed by the Newspaper Clubwww.newspaperclub.com

All content © 2012 the authors, artists and contributors