THE HANDSTAND

FEBRUARY2007


_____________________________________________________________________
 CTHEORY:        THEORY, TECHNOLOGY AND CULTURE        VOL 30, NOS 1-2
        *** Visit CTHEORY Online:
http://www.ctheory.net ***

 1000 Days 050    07/02/2007    Editors: Arthur and Marilouise Kroker
                        
 _____________________________________________________________________


 
Fear and Loathing in the Bay State
 

 ~Dion Dennis~





 Prologue
 --------

 Over the last six years, at midnight, six times per week, the  dadaist fifteen-minute cartoon series, ~Aqua Teen Hunger Force~  chronicles the absurdist adventures of its three anthropomorphized  leads: Frylock (a goateed McDonaldesque sleeve of French fries),  Master Shake (a self-absorbed generic milk shake outfitted with a bent pink straw) and Meatwad (a smallish, speckled, and decidedly  unappetizing specimen). ~Aqua Teen~ is popular with the 18-34 year
 old demographic.

 With an ~Aqua Teen Hunger Force~ film due for release in early '07,  Cartoon Network's corporate parent, Turner Broadcasting, hired New  York-based marketing firm, Interference Inc., to produce a viral  marketing campaign in eleven U.S. cities. In late 2006, Interference  Inc. hired two young Boston-area artists, Belorussian immigrant  Peter Berdovsky and Sean Stevens to place 38 LED signs (of one of  two villains of the show, either Ignignokt or Err, defiantly  gesturing with the middle finger) in the Boston area. By January  29th, all of these quasi "lite brites" (the ensemble consisted of  printed circuit boards and other easily accessible electronic  components, with LEDs and a pack of D-Cell batteries to power these  2.5 sq ft. signs) had been installed around high-traffic sites in  the metroplex.

 During the January 31, 2007 rush hour, a transit employee spotted  one of these signs on a supporting beam of I-93, near Downtown  Boston. Mistaking the "Mooninite" for an explosive device, the  Boston Police Department closed the northbound lanes of I-93. By the  early afternoon, other "Mooninite" sightings led to two major bridge  closures, and boat traffic on the Charles River was banned. It  wasn't until the late afternoon that the public knew that these were
 part of a benign viral marketing campaign. Turner issued a press  release, and soon after, Berdovsky and Stevens were arrested.




 So this is what it has come to: Two young artists (their demeanor an  echo of 1960s creative expressiveness), paid a pittance to playfully  market a surrealist cartoon movie starring several talking  base-level consumer commodities, have been labeled semiotic  terrorists and criminals by official reality. What does this  political panic reflex, played out in the gerontocratic and the  politically correct Commonwealth of Massachusetts, tell us? [1] What  are the object lessons that can be drawn from this emotive, mediated  and bureaucratic externalization of early 21st Century nightmares  and demons? According to the criminal statute applied, these crude  LED "Mooninites" that literally flipped Boston "the Bird" were  legally defined as "infernal machines." [2] Among the eleven cities  targeted by this particular guerilla marketing campaign, only in  Boston were these innocuous "lite brites" perceived to be objects of  terror. Only in Boston did official reality shut down major parts of  the city, deploy the Bomb Squad, and make ritualistic arrests and  arraignments. Therefore, the question can, and should, be asked:  What does this say about the current ~conscience collectif~ in the  land of the Puritans, Kerouac, and Kennedy? What is going on in this  stubborn bastion of a once optimistic state-centered liberalism, as  it reacts to signs that oddly refract images of a Vietnam-era  collective self? Official and local media reactions constitute a
 classic case of what psychologists call "hostile attributional  syndrome." In this syndrome, subjects inappropriately react to  neutral stimuli as if such stimuli were signals of real hostility.  Appropriately decoded, these reactions have significant diagnostic  value. As a public event, the response of official organs displays  complex patterns of displacement and condensation, as befits such a  symbolic event and product. Below are some (hopefully) heuristic  disentanglements of a couple of these very complex threads.


 Puritan Remix
 --------------------------

 First, we can see the historical and hysterical echoes of the 17th  Century Salem witch trials. The two artists, the long-haired, bearded  Belorussian immigrant Berdovsky and his sidekick, Stevens, stand  publicly accused of producing, as defined by Massachusetts General  Law, Chapter 266, Section 102, an "infernal machine."  (Etymologically, the term "infernal" refers to Hell and the
 identities and products of the demons of said residence). So, like  Arthur Miller's John Proctor, they will undoubtedly be asked to "make  a deal" with official reality, to acknowledge their "infernal"
 (demonic) specific intent (as defined by the statute) and, in doing  so, externalize the demons of the populace as they reaffirm the  dominant symbolic order. [3] Contemporary ritual exorcisms will be
 performed in court, press conferences and press releases, and remixed  and expanded by local and 24 hour news media, as they are archived  for subsequent use.

 Like the Puritans, such forms of punishment have a public and semiotic function, through a display of overt signs of stigma and  discredited identity. Rituals of moral condemnation and public  shunning no longer take the form of the stocks and the wearing of a  Scarlet "A." Rituals of exclusion and continuous surveillance replace  public shaming and shunning. They take multiple forms, these days:  Electronic monitoring, voter disenfranchisement for felons, the  presence of names on "no fly" lists, the posting of discrediting  billboards outside of homes as court-ordered punishment, and, in the  case of the most notorious, real-time GPS tracking, available to a
 hyper-vigilant public via Google maps, and so on. And, there is  always the potential for ubiquitous and sensationalized media  attention, given the insatiable appetite for stories of deviance.

 The absurd (and unfounded) criminalization of Berdovsky and Stevens  is part of an ~uber~ moral
tale with a discernible target: General  deterrence, as rationale and goal. Here, it takes the form of overtly  sending a signal about policing the speech and conduct of the  Millennial Generation; speech and conduct that is a palpable  behavioral and expressive remix of the deterritorializing ~elan~ of  the 1960s. Injecting a self-policing function deeper into the psyche  of the children and grandchildren of the Boomers is one use for this  LED scare. "We prohibit unauthorized echoes of what we did. You play  and you express yourself at your own risk." Certainly this is one of  the covert messages of the Zeitgeist police, newly installed State's  Attorney General, Martha Coakley, as exemplified by her actions  (arrest warrants) and her February 2, 2007 press release. [4]

 Coakley's means and ends are not so very different than the goal of  17th and 18th Century Puritans: They, too, intended to deeply inject  a self-policing function into the congregation. Then, the push was to  restrict the psyches and social expression of women, as well as of  those men less committed to a patriarchal fundamentalist order.

 Social, technical, demographic and cultural transformations over  three centuries have repositioned the Puritan impulse. The rush to an  ~ersatz~ criminalization of two young artists all-too-accurately
 exemplifies Richard Ericson's recent (and plaintive) summary of the  pathologies of early 21st Century life:

      [There's] an alarming trend across Western countries of treating  every imaginable source of harm as a crime... This urge to criminalize is rooted in neo-liberal political cultures that are     obsessed with uncertainty... Catastrophic imaginations are fueled, precautionary logics become pervasive, and extreme security measures are invoked in frantic efforts to preempt  imagined sources of harm. [5]

 Apparently, key points of the local social imaginary include criminalizing the placement of child-like and benign "lite brites" in  locations proximate to Massachusetts Bay. While Ericson's insights  constitute a critical element for understanding the root causes of  this particular event, one other element, I believe, is required to  make fuller sense as to why such media-fed, institutionally expressed  hysteria occurred in Boston and not in other locations across the
 U.S.


 The Generational Warfare Strategies of a Greying Populace
 ---------------------------------------------------------

 This remix of Puritanism and the neo-liberal imaginary (obsessed with  what Ericson dubs "the myth of certainty and security") is a  necessary but not sufficient set of conditions for declaring this
 peculiar "state of emergency." [6] The remaining variable is  demographic. It pits an aging, declining and reactive population (the  third or fourth generation descendants of Irish, Italian, German, and  English immigrants) straining to secure the slipping remnants of a  mid-20th Century state-centered set of expected benefits, against a  more vigorous and adaptable creative subculture within the Millennial  Generation. Not surprisingly, there's been a steady outflow of  educated Millennials from the Bay State to points South and West,  where a younger, educated demographic is welcomed and treated with  greater public courtesy. [7] The Bay State response to a benign set
 of LED graphics, when compared to how these crudely drawn Mooninites  were viewed in other venues across the U.S., makes the point  unusually clear. [8]

 The fear and loathing doled out to Berdovsky and Stevens is a vivid  displacement and condensation of the fears of a vocal and local  demographic convergence. There's an entire archeology of cultural  ghosts. These "John Proctors" of the moment, Berdovsky and Stevens,
 serve as a projection screen. [9] As icons, the many ghosts of the  collective past merge with a palpable fear of the present and the  future. So clearly discernible, behind all the self-congratulatory
 "politically correct" rhetoric that so freely and routinely floats  across the Bay State, is a deep distrust, a distrust that damages  spontaneous practices of freedom, practices that are so necessary for  growth.


 Notes:
 ------

 [1] "Suspicious objects found throughout Boston after morning bomb  scare," in the January 31, 2007 online edition of the ~Boston  Globe's~ website, John R. Ellement, Mac Daniel, and Andrew Ryan,  byline.
 
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/city_region/breaking_news/2007/01/
 suspicious_obje_1.html

 [2] See "The General Laws of Massachusetts," Crimes Against Property,  Chapter 266, Section Section 102A1/2, Subsection B, that legally  defines such "infernal machines" as a constitutive element of the  crime. 
http://www.mass.gov/legis/laws/mgl/266-102a.5.htm

 [3] Miller, Arthur. _The Crucible_. New York: Dramatists Play Service  Inc., 1998.

 [4] See Mark Frauenfelder's repost at BoingBoing.net: "State of  Massachusetts insists on calling ATHF ads 'hoax devices'," February  2, 2007.
 
http://www.boingboing.net/2007/02/02/state_of_massachuset.html

 [5] Richard V. Ericson. _Crime in an Insecure World_. Malden, MA.  Polity Press. 2007. The excerpt is from the Introduction on p. 1.

 [6] Ericson, p, 219.

 [7] "Most Who Left State Don't Plan to Return," in the May 14, 2006  online edition of the ~Boston Globe's~ website, Michael Levinson,  byline.
 
http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2006/05/14/
 most_who_left_state_dont_plan_to_return/

 [8] See these "suspicious objects" on BoingBoing.net: "Boston Channel  photoshops Mooninite LED signs," Mark Frauenfelder's post, on January  31, 2007.
 
http://www.boingboing.net/2007/01/31/boston_channel_photo.html

 [9] To see a video of Berdovsky and Stephens, discussing hairstyles  at their initial news conference, see the Alternet Media site:  "Pranksters Give finger to the Media:"
 
http://alternet.org/blogs/peek/47507/


 --------------------
 Dion Dennis is Assistant Professor of Criminal Justice at  Bridgewater State College (MA). He teaches courses on emerging  technology, new forms of  property and equally new forms of social
 control; neo-liberalism and 21st Century policing and corrections;  and justice, media and crime. Dennis' essays have regularly appeared  in _CTHEORY_. His essays and reviews have also appeared in  _Postmodern Culture_, _The Education Policy Analysis Archives_, _the  Academic Exchange Quarterly_, _Rhizomes_, _Culture and Agriculture_,  _Fast Capitalism_, and _First Monday_, as well as in new and  reprinted form in several print anthologies.

 _____________________________________________________________________

 *
 * CTHEORY is an international peer-reviewed journal of theory,
 *    technology and culture. Articles, interviews, and key book
 *    reviews in contemporary discourse are published weekly as
 *    well as theorisations of major "event-scenes" in the
 *    mediascape.
 *
 * Editors: Arthur and Marilouise Kroker
 *
 * Editorial Board: Jean Baudrillard (Paris), Paul Virilio (Paris),
 *   Bruce Sterling (Austin), Siegfried Zielinski (Koeln), Stelarc
 *   (Melbourne), DJ Spooky [Paul D. Miller] (NYC), Timothy Murray
 *   (Ithaca/Cornell), Lynn Hershman Leeson (San Francisco), Stephen
 *   Pfohl (Boston), Andrew Ross (NYC), Andrew Wernick (Peterborough),
 *   Maurice Charland (Montreal), Gad Horowitz (Toronto), Shannon Bell
 *   (Toronto), R.U. Sirius (San Francisco).
 *
 * In Memory: Kathy Acker
 *
 * Editorial Assistant: Ted Hiebert
 * WWW Design & Technical Advisor: Spencer Saunders (CTHEORY.NET)
 * WWW Engineer Emeritus: Carl Steadman

 _____________________________________________________________________

                To view CTHEORY online please visit:
                     
http://www.ctheory.net/

            To view CTHEORY MULTIMEDIA online please visit:
                
http://ctheorymultimedia.cornell.edu/

 _____________________________________________________________________

 * CTHEORY includes:
 *
 * 1. Electronic reviews of key books in contemporary theory.
 *
 * 2. Electronic articles on theory, technology and culture.
 *
 * 3. Event-scenes in politics, culture and the mediascape.
 *
 * 4. Interviews with significant theorists, artists, and writers.
 *
 * 5. Multimedia theme issues and projects.
 *
 *
 * The Editors would like the thank the University of Victoria for
 *   financial and intellectual support of CTheory. In particular, the
 *   Editors would like to thank the Dean of Social Sciences, Dr. C.
 *   Peter Keller, the Department of Political Science, the Dean of
 *   Engineering, Dr. D. Michael Miller and Dr. Jon Muzio, Department
 *   of Computer Science.
 *
 _____________________________________________________________________
 *
 * (C) Copyright Information:
 *
 *   All articles published in this journal are protected by
 *   copyright, which covers the exclusive rights to reproduce and
 *   distribute the article.  No material published in this journal
 *   may be translated, reproduced, photographed or stored on
 *   microfilm, in electronic databases, video disks, etc., without
 *   first obtaining written permission from CTheory.
 *   Email
ctheory@uvic.ca for more information.
 *
 _____________________________________________________________________
 *
 * Mailing address: CTHEORY, University of Victoria, PO Box 3050,
 *   Victoria, BC, Canada, V8W 3P5.
 *
 * Full text and microform versions are available from UMI, Ann Arbor,
 *   Michigan; and Canadian Periodical Index/Gale Canada, Toronto.
 *
 * Indexed in: International Political Science Abstracts/
 *   Documentation politique international; Sociological Abstract
 *   Inc.; Advance Bibliography of Contents: Political Science and
 *   Government; Canadian Periodical Index; Film and Literature Index.
 *
 _____________________________________________________________________

_______________________________________________
ctheory mailing list
ctheory@lists.uvic.ca
https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ctheory