Impulse – Volume 10 Number 3, Spring/Summer 1983

Impulse – Volume 10 Number 3, Spring/Summer 1983
Author: Eldon Garnet, Carolyn White (Eds.)
Publisher: Impulse [b]
Language: English
Pages: 58
Size: 28 x 28 cm
Weight: 214 g
Binding: Softcover
ISBN: -
Availability: In stock
Price: €33.00
Add Items to Cart
Product Description

Publisher: Eldon Garnet.
Editors: Eldon Garnet, Carolyn White and Judith Doyle.
Contributing Editors: Sylvère Lotringer (New York) and Joan (Adair) Brouwer (London).
Art Direction: Ken Baird.
Business: Carolyn White.
Advertising: Cindi Emond.
Legal Council: Gerald Owen.
Mascot: Bunny.

Table of Contents:
Terence Sellers, ‘The Correct Sadist’; Dr. Henry Morgentaler vs. Dr. Bernard Nathanson, ‘To Be Or Not To Be?’; David Lake, ‘Executive Targets: Industrial Espionage’; Robert Stewart, ‘Causation Of Abstract Relations’; Judith Doyle, ‘Rate Of Descent’; Roger Peyrefitte, ‘Baron Wilhelm Von Gloeden’; Joel Peter Witkin, ‘Penitente’, ‘Angel of the Carrots’, ‘The Sins of Juan Miró’; Lori Spring, ‘Western Perspectives On Japanese Cinema’; Vincent Tangredi, ‘Of The Four Considerations’; Anne Turyn, ‘Lessons and Notes’; Eldon Garnet, ‘Caves’; Jody Berland, ‘Re/Percussions: Drumming In The Age Of Electronic Reproduction’; Jean Baudrillard, ‘Nuclear Implosion’; Sylvère Lotringer Interviews Jean Baudrillard, ‘Dropping Out Of History’.

Editorial:

I’ve stood in front of so many self-centred answers only to discover dead centres.

So many polarities.

The opportunists and the power hungry.

On one side are the opportunists who appropriate liberalism to hide their personal ambitions. On the other side are the possessors of current power who defend their rights in the name of capital.

Both have their allure but both are false.

First: the pseudo liberals, the media liberals who perform for public acclaim; these are not the daily, grassroot workers who are directly effected by the suppressive situation, who know the situation first hand. The pseudo, media liberals are those firetruckers who complain their way to a position of power by demanding esteem for themselves in the name of “socialism”, “collectivism”, and “Marxism”, in the name of people, of the workers, of the oppressed minorities. This group attempts to exorcize their minor feeling of guilt while simultaneously promoting their individual power-seeking ambitions. The noise of their constant denial is prevalent; many uncommitted members of the same group hear their complaints and become slightly more guilty and so lend them more support, more power and ultimately aid in the suppression of who they profess they want to champion. The truth is: who they want to free is themselves, to ingest as much power as possible for their individual egos.

Their articulate denial of the established power group is initially very attractive in that their critique is directed against the “correct” groups. But this critique is nothing more then rhetoric. Once the power centre has been replaced by their power center, there is no substantial change, merely a minor transformation from one elitist group to another who nepotistically support their own constituency. These so-called liberals champion the suppressed only to attain their authority, only to suppress once again and exercise their position of power to further their own worldly ambitions.

Second: those who are presently in power, the current executives, those whose central concern is to maintain the status quo and establish profits for themselves and their organizations.

This power group is the accepted object of attack of the non-power group – the pseudo liberal can always make points by finding weaknesses in the power group’s superstructure and articulating them to their followers.

This group is basically responsible for the current state of misaffairs and is intent on preserving their own position at all costs. Change except for gain is their constant enemy. They have worked hard to establish themselves in their current position and are not about to allow themselves to be easily removed. Worst of all, they passionately believe in what they have achieved.

The scenario developed here is a dead end: the false liberals confronting the entrenched established. Historically it is the sound of this conflict which is heard by the media and the populace; stances are taken in relation to the individual’s interpretation of this conflict; the individual deciding because of personal necessity on which side they will stand. A dead end situation: I have no desire to side with either of these parties: neither hypocrisy nor bureaucracy interests me. What has to be found is a third state. A third group, another viable direction. What must be found is a form of liberalism which is based on genuine compassion, which is self-directed and must not unfairly co-opt the effort of others, which is not hypocritical, which is not based on old ideologies, on male/female differentiation, or old dialectics, which is not racist, not based in class priorities, or on historical analysis of examples outside our present situation. It must be based on a system of rational, humane judgement which is situationally oriented and problem solving directed; it must have a language of its own not one borrowed from another’s ideological position whether that position be from the right or the left. We can only continue to search, to plot new directions based outward from the moment. When a solution has been found, beware. At best we can only hope to be frustrated investigators. Once again.

-Eldon Garnet-