Forum für akustische Kunst

Denken, Schreiben

CfP: Mediums of Trash/Trash Mediums

Der Müll geht um, auch und gerade in den Medien. Wer dies unterschreiben würde, darf das in Form von 5000-8000 Wörtern tun. Einreichungen für die “Trash Culture Edited Collection” sind bis zum 01. Dezember möglich.

Weitere Details aus dem Call:

” “The medium is the message”, declared Marshall McLuhan (1967) in his now
famous book of the same name. He writes: “Societies have always been
shaped more by the nature of the media by which men communicate than by
the content of the communication” (2008: 8). Seemingly, the elements of
Trash Culture have always prioritised the content over the medium, the
supposed vulgarity contained in objects such as comic books rather than
the aesthetics of the object itself, and the ‘crude’ programs on
television rather than the television as a medium of communicating
trash. The medium itself has therefore been a neglected element of Trash
Culture, and in this way the notion of ‘trash’ must be discussed through
lenses of technological and/or cultural determinism. The medium
associated with Trash Culture continues to transform; comic books, now
revered even in academic circles, were initially deemed juvenile
material. With the advent of television, a new brand of trash was
established amongst detractors. Newspapers have long been associated
with exploiting trash, but how is tabloid news now received with the
advent of online news? With the growth of social media and the internet,
the spotlight has been temporarily taken off the television and
newspapers, with Youtube, Facebook and Twitter now at the centre of the
debate. This leads us to ask what happens to trash content that appears
in non-trash related mediums, such as pornography in books or in the
theatre? And what happens to high-brow content that appears in
trash-related mediums, such as James Joyce’s Ulysses being adapted for
comic book form, or art photography on Tumblr? Does the medium make the
trash, or the trash make the medium?
While Henry Jenkins declares that old media never die, only transform,
so too does the medium of trash. Thinking of the way in which low-brow
content has persevered through various technologies, what can we glean
from the relationship between a certain medium and the development of
trash content? To what extent does the medium influence content, and
vice versa? Does something become more or less trashy in one medium over
another? Do certain forms of trash inform the aesthetics of the medium
used to exploit it? Or does the actual appearance of a certain medium
lend itself to the dissemination of trash? Crucial to this debate is the
notion of dissemination and absorption. How have our consumption habits
changed with the advent of newer mediums, and does this impact the way
in which we perceive and interact with society? Are we more susceptible
to messages through particular mediums? As Theodor Adorno would have it,
the culture industries have a negative impact on social conscious, and
yet others would advocate that we, as consumers/prosumers, are more
active than passive. But how does the medium change the nature of the
product? Are we more inclined to dismiss trash content from the digital
realm, or in tangible form, such as pulp comics and magazines? How does
the medium interact with and influence our relationship to the content?
Influenced strongly by McLuhan’s notion of the medium, this themed issue
of Trash Culture Journal (or for a possible book publication) aims to
discuss how certain technologies and media have influenced and shaped
the structure and development of content described as trash, and how
certain trash content has influenced the construction of various
mediums. Do we conceive of all elements of trash in the same way
regardless of how they are disseminated, or does the medium incorporated
truly alter the existential nature of the object/content itself? Are we
more forgiving of content depending on the medium used to communicate
it, or does content remain trash in all mediums? As we look to a
dramatic shift in the way in which individuals consume their media, away
from the broadcast model towards greater interconnectivity and
participation, how do forms of trash reflect or reject this
technological shift?

We are looking for academic papers (5000-8000 words) that address but
are not limited to:

-Assorted mediums of trash
-Thing Theory and the philosophy of things and objects
-Visual translation of trash content
-Technological Determinism and trash culture
-Print media/mediums and trash: books, comic books
-Electronic mediums: internet, phones, gaming consoles (Nintendo,
PlayStation, Gameboy)
-Visual mediums: television, cinemas, theatres
-Newspapers and the ‘tabloidization’ of culture through print media
-Musical Trash: records (vinyls), CDs, mp3, ipod, instruments
-Pornography: Playboy Magazine, internet, books, comics
-Marxism and theories of mediums
-Fan fiction clubs, and online
-Television as ‘idiot box’
-Older methods of Trash
-Histories of trash mediums
-Hierarchies of Trash (Comic, Radio, Television, Internet)
-Youtube and Viral Culture
-Philosophical approaches to content creation in the media
-Sociological theories of consumption
-Culture Industries and the re-shaping of consumption habits

As well as this, theorists relevant to this theme include:

-Marshall McLuhan
-Karl Marx
-Theodor Adorno
-Max Horkheimer
-Raymond Williams
-Henry Jenkins
-Hannah Arendt
-Noam Chomsky
-Slavoj Zizek

Please send completed papers or queries to trashculturejournal@gmail.com
by December 1, 2014, along with a brief bio and 5-6 key words. See
attached flyer.”

Hinterlasse eine Antwort