me and the food around me. i like to eat, so listen up.
Wednesday, March 5, 2008
was the theme of today. i define performativity as the assuming of specific roles in specific contexts. and as the contexts change so do the roles. performativity isn't static. and i didn't eat breakfast again. i woke up late and missed my brit lit class. i didn't have math today, but i did a lot of math homework. not to mention i left my wallet at maggots house and had to make my way to her house then try to catch one of the five busses that run through her neighborhood. once i got on the bus and got to school i was hungry. it was about 12:30 by then and i needed some solid rocket fuel. dining services was serving meatloaf today. scoff all you want but good meatloaf rules. and you can make meatloaf sandwiches. i love meatloaf sandwiches. lo and behold, uvsc makes an edible meatloaf. after the meatloaf and veggies and salty mashded potatoes and gravy i made my way to class. this is where the whole performativity thing started. in dada, performance was nearly essential, and in performing, a role has to be assumed. a person cannot play them self because the person has to decide how they want to be interpreted by others. as a student i have to assume the role of the student, but i decide what kind of student i will be. as a musician i have to play music to be a musician, and i have to decide what kind of musician i want to be. as a writer i have to write in an assumed voice to perform the act of writing. in each of these there are ways of performing the roles, and in each case it is up to the performer to interpret how the role should be played, with an audience in mind, to be interpreted as the performer wishes to be interpreted. in social contexts, performativity dictates how a person wishes to be regarded by peers inside and outside of social groups. in dada, performativity is a way to subvert social groups, art forms and performance itself. somehow no one really caught on to this idea in class. this is a 300 level class. wtf. don't get me started on the ritual aspect of this either. i'm of the opinion most of this started with ritual. after trying really hard not to berate my fellow students for an hour i went with grabbo and jason to the cafeteria to kick it for a while before i went to work. jason had a taco salad and it looked really really good. so i got one. it was pretty good except for the fact that someone in the higher echelons of dining services decided that they would not, under any circumstances, even in time of famine and trial, put refried beans on their taco salads. what bone head was behind this one? who doesn't put refried beans on a taco salad? like, its intrinsic to taco salad. i told maggot this and she said, "well, thats just total crap". right you are sister jones. after suffering through the greasy shell and minuscule amounts of shredded cheese, i got a phone call from the incredible julk asking me if i was coming to work or not. woops. so i headed off to work. i was the only one in the ofice most of the day because today was one of those days where julk wanted to kill people. and she left early. and i did math. and did my usual internet surfing routine. (my daily internet routine can be found on yesterdays post.) between that and math i wasted a good 4 hours. i decided to stay at work a little later so i could catch up on math because its due tomorrow and i'm probably not going to do any tonight. or tomorrow. told you i was lazy. i finally left work at around 6:30 to go to dada cinema. tonight we watched ordet. super good. on my way down to see the film i stopped at a food stand because i wanted something to drink. i got a sunkist. and i saw they had a few hot dogs left. and i can't resist a hot dog. with mustard. and sunkist to wash it down. i really don't know how to begin describing ordet. like i could look at it from so many angles that i kinda want to wait a day or so before i talk about it. i mean the easy dichotomies are there and while they are worthwhile to discuss i'd rather do a little closer reading of the film. in some regards it reminds me of kaspar hauser in the way that johannes is denied access to language by his family because of his madness, but simultaneously, his approach to communication is the only way the family can save itself. its the family's duty to "accept" johannes as he is and blame themselves for his madness (theres that assumed performative role) and in their acceptance of him they enable themselves to completely disregard what he says, because, since he is mad, his access to language cannot be founded on reason and rationality. after we finished watching the film i ate a few of the cookie things old man mike brought and i'm pretty much filled to the brim and ready to vomit. its now time for me to assume the role of the sleepy student and brush my teeth, say my prayers and go to bed.