Page 152 - Flaunt 171 - Summer of Our Discontent - PS

tion, fast fashion world we live in. An interesting consider- ation of this is recent hardback book, Enchanted Modernities: Mysticism, Landscape, and the American West, out via Fulgur. The book, of which artworks are featured herein, explores themes of Theosophy and its presence in visual art and music, partic- ularly that of the expansionist American West in the twentieth century. “Theosophists believe there to be no fewer than six occult ‘planes of existence’ (astral, mental, Buddhic, spiritual, divine and logic) beyond the physical world, each characterized by finer rates of vibrational energy. Certain believers argued that “thoughts and feelings create vibrations, imperceptible to the untrained eye and ear, which manifest as various shapes, colors, and sounds depending on their clarity and spiritual content.”
So how does this connect to activist fashion? Well, put simply, we’re all unique beings. And the vibrations around us don’t have to be only the battery-powered hum of surveillance gear, but the colorific extensions of ourselves. And here’s a shocker: not only does CV Dazzle challenge individuals to cre- ate their own looks, it also encourages participants to not post their looks on social media. The reason is to encourage privacy and discourage mimicry. The fashion world relies heavily on social posting, but is that actually encouraging self-expression? Or is self-expression better reserved for those bright colors in your surrounds—the individuals that form what we know as community. Designing things for the benefit of yourself and safety, instead of for social media clout and trend confirmation, is arguably the first big step to contemporary self-actualization.
IN TIMES LIKE THESE,
WHO NEEDS HONEST
COMPANY?
Written by Constanza Falco Raez
Ok then. You’re up on whether police are using facial recognition software in your city or town. You’re styled out in a dazzle do that would would have the staunchest dazzle advo- cates dizzy with approval. Now there’s the question of who to advance your Saturday night out with. We’d recommend these the sort of relations where trust is not the backbone. You read that right. We’d recommend a good band of liars.
Because lying is sometimes ok, right? The plain truth
is not always the best choice. When one has someone’s best interests at heart, lying may very well be appreciated, if not encouraged, right? Is lying necessary? Research says: Yes! Mas- tering lying in the right way can actually help build connec- tions, trust, and businesses. This is the conclusion of Maurice Schweitzer, a professor at the Wharton School at the Univer- sity of Pennsylvania, who studies deception and trust, and he believes that “we should be teaching our kids, students and employees when and how to lie.”
50 years ago, someone’s personal information could only be found in phone books, and finding that in combination with an address would be a stroke of luck. Nowadays, with
just a google search, one can find almost everything about a person—from their education, career, and job to where their parents went on vacation last summer. Every action one takes online, on any website, leaves a path and stays on record, argu- ably forever. Think you’ve deleted your history? A court-issued subpoena—subject to even the most fractional kind of litiga- tion—would say otherwise, for instance, and mobile phone companies are exceedingly compliant in these circumstances.
Conversely, on the topic of being watched, today’s technol- ogy, of course, magnifies our capacity to invade someone’s pri- vacy. Lurking has become part of our day to day, and without even knowing someone personally, one could feel like they’ve
known each other for years.
Alas, technology is not bad in itself.
It can prevent fraud, bullying, stalking, among other wrong- doings. In her book Lurking: How a Person Became a User, Joanne McNeil writes of the human being’s agency in the otherwise benign internet; “I fear that the media’s delayed—and often misplaced—concerns about technology has fostered an endless ping-pong of surface changes and tactics, rather than focus on structural changes like decommodifica- tion and decentraliza- tion to enact a better internet.” The inter- net, in all its wonder, is more the land of desires and projec- tions, rather than the sober communication of the truth, which was presumably its initial intention.
During his presidency, Richard Nixon secretly taped every conversation that took place in the Oval Office. Accord- ing to Nixon’s Chief of, the “audio record- ings were the only way to ensure a full and faithful account of conversations and decisions.”
The Watergate
scandal began in 1972
when a group of in-
truders sent by Nixon
were caught wire-
tapping phones and
stealing documents in
the office of the Dem-
ocratic National Com-
mittee in D.C. Afterwards, a handful of Nixon’s aides testified before a grand jury concerning the President’s intent to spy
on the opposing political party, among other crimes. Nixon’s insistence on documenting all of his own conversation became his foil. The incident that followed is what is now known as the Saturday Night Massacre.
On Saturday, October 20, 1973, after Special Prosecutor Archibald Cox refused to cease his demanding of the incrimi- nating tapes from the President, Nixon ordered senior mem- bers of his team to fire Cox. Sound familiar? However, both men instead refused and resigned their positions in protest. Nixon’s unprecedented effort to flex executive power, as well
152