CINXE.COM

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Transitional//EN" "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-transitional.dtd"> <html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"> <head> <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1" /> <title>k-punk: Why K?</title> <link rel="stylesheet" href="http://k-punk.abstractdynamics.org/styles-site.css" type="text/css" /> <link rel="alternate" type="application/rss+xml" title="RSS" href="http://k-punk.abstractdynamics.org/index.rdf" /> <link rel="start" href="http://k-punk.abstractdynamics.org/" title="Home" /> <link rel="prev" href="http://k-punk.abstractdynamics.org/archives/005355.html" title="NECROPOLIS NOW" /> <link rel="next" href="http://k-punk.abstractdynamics.org/archives/005361.html" title="Innocynicism" /> <script type="text/javascript" language="javascript">  </script>  </head> <body> <div id="banner"> <h1><a href="http://k-punk.abstractdynamics.org/" accesskey="1">k-punk</a></h1> <span class="description"></span> </div> <div id="container"> <div class="blog"> <div id="menu"> <a href="http://k-punk.abstractdynamics.org/archives/005355.html">« NECROPOLIS NOW</a> | <a href="http://k-punk.abstractdynamics.org/">Main</a> | <a href="http://k-punk.abstractdynamics.org/archives/005361.html">Innocynicism »</a> </div> </div> <div class="blog"> <h2 class="date">April 16, 2005</h2> <div class="blogbody"> <h3 class="title">Why K?</h3> <p><img alt="voicelogo-181.gif" src="http://k-punk.abstractdynamics.org/archives/voicelogo-181.gif" width="181" height="90" border="0" /></p> <p>Well, I'm still enough of a neophyte to be thrilled by <a href=http://villagevoice.com/arts/0515,edsuppdayal,62903,12.html>a mention in Village Voice</a>. I suppose it is ironic that Geeta describes k-punk as 'cultural studies', given my notorious antipathy to cult studs. On the other hand, though, k-punk is cultural studies as I'd always thought it should be practised (much of my hostility to cult studs stems from a disappointment when faced with the depressing, guilt-mongering reality of cultural studies in the academy).</p> <p>Any way, here is the full text that I sent to Geeta:</p> <p>1. Why I started the blog? Because it seemed like a space - the only space - in which to maintain a kind of discourse that had started in the music press and the art schools, but which had all but died out, with what I think are appalling cultural and political consequences . My interest in theory was almost entirely inspired by writers like Ian Penman and Simon, so there has always been an intense connection between theory and pop/ film for me. No sob stories, but for someone from my background it's difficult to see where else that interest would have come from. </p> <p>2. Because of that, my relation to the academy has always been uh difficult. The way in which I understood theory - primarily through popular culture - is generally detested in universities. Most dealings with the academy have been literally - clinically - depressing. </p> <p>3. The Ccru as an entity was developed in hostile conditions as a kind of conduit for continuing trade between popular culture and theory. The whole pulp theory/ theory-fiction thing was/ is a way of doing theory through, not 'on', pop cultural forms. Nick Land was the key figure here, in that it was he who was able to hold, for a while, a position 'within' a university philosophy department whilst dedicatedly opening up connections to the outside. Kodwo Eshun is key as someone making connections the other way - from popular culture INTO abstruse theory. But what we all concurred upon was that something like jungle was already intensely theoretical; it didn't require academics to judge it or pontificate upon it - the role of a theorist was as an intensifier. </p> <p>3. The term k-punk came out of Ccru. 'k' was used as a libidinally preferable substitution for the California/ Wired captured 'cyber' (the word cybernetics having its origins in the Greek, Kuber). Ccru understood cyberpunk not as a (once trendy) literary genre, but as a distributive cultural tendency facilitated by new technologies. In the same way, 'punk' doesn't designate a particular musical genre, but a confluence outside legitimate(d) space: fanzines were more significant than the music in that they allowed and produced a whole other mode of contagious activity which destroyed the need for centralized control. </p> <p>4. The development of cheap and readily available sound production software, the web, blogs means there is an unprecedented punk infrasctructure available. All that is lacking is the will, the belief that what can happen in something that does not have authorisation/ legitimation can be as important - more important - than what comes through official channels.</p> <p>5. In terms of will, there has been an enormous retrenchment since 1970s punk. The availability of the means of production has seemed to go alongside a compensatory reassertion of Spectacular power. </p> <p>6. To return to the academy: universities have either totally excluded or at least marginalized not only anyone connected with Ccru but also many who were at Warwick. Steve 'Hyperdub' Goodman and Luciana Parisi are both Ccru agents who have managed, against the odds, to secure a position within universities. But most of us have been forced into positions outside the university. Perhaps as a result of not being incorporated ('bought off'), many in the Warwick rhizome have maintained an intense connection and robust independence. Much of the current theoretical drift on k-punk has been developed via a collaboration with Nina Power, Alberto Toscano and Ray Brassier (co-organizer of the NoiseTheoryNoise conference at Middlesex University last year). The growing popularity of philosophers like Zizek and Badiou means there is now an unexpected if rogue and fugitive line of support within the academy.</p> <p>7. I teach Philosophy, Religious Studies and Critical Thinking at Orpington College. It is a Further Education college, which means that its primary intake is 16-19 year olds. This is difficult and challenging work, but the students are in the main excellent, and far more willing to enter into discussion than undergraduates. So I don't at all regard this position as secondary or lesser than a 'proper' academic post.</p> <a name="more"></a> <span class="posted">Posted by mark at April 16, 2005 05:35 PM | <a href="http://www.abe1x.org/movetype/mt-tb.cgi?__mode=view&entry_id=5358" onclick="OpenTrackback(this.href); return false">TrackBack</a> <br /></span> </div> </div> </div> </body> </html>