It’s the wrestling event of the year (apart from Wrestlemania), tonight LIVE FROM NEW YORK, it’s SUMMERSLAAAAAM. And we aren’t there. Not even remotely. But we don’t need to be to have launched our new podcast Wrestling with Hegemony. With the boom of wrestling content on the site, and the huge window to presents us to further discuss dominant ideas and popular culture that interlinks with Hollywood and everything else, it seemed only logical for Jack Brindelli and Charlie Giggle to produce the only pre-show that matters. Byron Saxton, eat your heart out. If it goes well, it should become a weekly format where we can gather wrestling politicos to discuss heavyweight issues like capitalist ideology, nationalist rhetoric and John Cena wrestling a dead baby.
So without further delay, here is the very first episode. Enjoy.
In an article originally published on his own blog, Alex Hort-Francis examines the politics of The Walking Dead, and considers why, even in a post-apocalyptic society, we find it so hard to imagine a world without capitalism…
The author is a PDS suffer himself, and a keen advocate for undead rights…
I have written another repulsive, gushing love letter to Slavoj Žižek to review his new film, which you can now read on the Norwich Film Festival blog. Check it out in full by clicking here… or on the linking sample paragraph below.
“In order to understand today’s world, we need cinema, literally. It’s only in cinema that we get that crucial dimension which we are not ready to confront in our reality. If you are looking for what is in reality, more real than reality itself, look into the cinematic fiction.” – Slavoj Žižek
Slavoj didn’t actually say this about Robin Thicke… but we all wish he had.
It’s safe to say Slavoj Žižek’s reputation is anything but consistent. At times, his analysis can be spot on – even for films he openly admits he hasn’t actually watched (his review of Avatar, “Return of the Natives” was based on a viewing of the trailer I’m told), but this is also one of his most notable downfalls. He has a hard-earned notoriety for playing fast and loose with facts in his often-polarising essays, and is notably at the centre of an ongoing academic cat-fight with Noam Chomsky – having accused him of supporting the Khmer Rouge in Chomsky’s “Manufacturing Consent” (which having read, I can categorically state, Chomsky did not do). Combine this with the fact he has allegedly said some rather horrible things about the Roma, women and Tibetans, and you can see why the left might often flirt with abandoning him all together. With such a reputation, it is all too easy to reduce all his work to the ravings of a mad king – drunk on his own influence – but this in my opinion would be a tragic mistake. Continue reading →