This weeks reading follows last week's perfectly for me, because it complements the questions that Keeling's article (and our class discussion) brought up for me. I have a lot of frustrations about how questions of representation are even framed, and it's very much related to Osucha's arguments around the construction of white privacy (and invisibility). I'm just going to list some of my thoughts while reading that article.
1. How does individualism relate to privacy and publicity? Is it reliant on one or on elements of both?
2. I'm intrigued by the idea of turning the "self" into property. It makes me think of Benjamin's work on mechanical reproduction. When art can be reproduced it loses its ties to tradition. What happens when one’s self can be mechanically reproduced? Images of ones private life? Videos?
3. Whites have racial invisibility, but as Gilroy argued, there is oppression in this as well.I think this is an important point to keep in mind. It's a great way of framing the problem.
4. "they fall outside the categories of publicity mobilized within privacy doctrine, which is strictly concerned with representations of individuals, not types" - Great point about blacks here. I think that the circulation of "types" has become a typical source of tension in the black community. It creates questions of authenticity, euro/afrocentricity, etc.
No comments:
Post a Comment