Feedback 1

So we are four sessions in, and hearty congratulations to those who have kept with the program, as you do so you will feel the task getting easier, and similar remonstrations to those of you who, quite predictably, stopped just when the going got tougher. My first advice then is bog weekly on the subject given, do not let it slip, so those of you yet to offer your thoughts on Eagleton, get on with it NOW!
I do not think blogging about something is explaining it, at this stage it is more having a view on it, contextualizing it into your world, and thats where this process works. Remember if you are frustrated with the task, you say exactly that, and then expand on your view, after all we do all need to be ENTERTAINED even if by the look of it Robbie Williams thinks looking like the Incredible Hulk on X Factor last night will do the job.
Remember whilst we are writing in the present, your study texts are already firmly set in the past. They are not likely to cause you immediate pain, there is no reason to be scared of them. Perhaps though, going backwards as we are leads you down tunnels where you cannot yet see the light, where the context is unclear. This venturing takes a bit of faith, but even from what I've read, few of you seem exactly enthralled by our crappy present so what is there to lose?
So in short, recalcitrants get on board, while those beginning to sense freedom in the word- bring it on.

Session Cancelled (Again)

This is a notice for tomorrows PT students due to read Lefebvre tomorrow morning at 9am in K604. I'm incredibly sorry to have to cancel this session due to illness.
Luckily whilst in bed, I can still use the computer and shall use the time going over your blogs so far- working from the back of my list so I hopefully catch the PT students first- so you should get feedback by lunchtime and time will not be wasted. I am also very happy to respond to your carefully worded questions by e-mail at davies.vegas@virgin.net tomorrow morning. Please note the new reading as set below for your next session.
This is a most unfortunate announcement to make, and made most reluctantly. I'm sorry for any inconvenience. Paul

Session 5

For this reading we look at the easily downloadable Howl (1956) and William Burroughs The Job. The  Job is something to dip in to rather than read solidly, the structure of Burroughs thought being not unlike poetry itself. Here the interview structure helps us understand a hugely complex personality. Margaret Thatcher once said there was no such thing as society, there were only individuals and family. She announced this as she became prime minister in the seventies. 

It's interesting that she felt pushed to make such a statement, and if we hold it in our mind, and consider the political thought and popular movements of the preceding twenty years, all may become clear. We shall be considering especially our literal and metaphorical appreciation of the machine and the consequences of a breakdown in social order that created the 'swinging sixties'. In architecture this might be illustrated in the rather different work of Archigram and Superstudio.

Helpful post

I've just blogged on Lefebvre and Hickey in Architecture and Other Habits under the title 'What is Perspective' (pauldaviesarchitecture.blogspot.com) and some of you may find it helpful.

Downloadable Lefebvre

Here's a downloadable text for Lefebvre:
http://selforganizedseminar.files.wordpress.com/2011/07/lefebvre_production_space.pdf

Session 4

This weeks reading is from this book, Chapter 2, Social Space, pages 68 to 85. Despite the text hardly being the easiest read, it is quite reasonable for you to get the basic drift of what Lefebvre is on about (the consideration of 'space' in a more specific way than 'nice space' and also a broader conception of it's formulation according to perhaps better criteria than capitalism applies) and be able to make some inroads in to an understanding of what might for instance be the difference between a 'work' and a 'product' and further wonder at what precisely he finds good in Venice.
Given our discussion of Eagleton, it is perhaps worth considering that the inquisition into the real as exemplified in the work of Roland Barthes, Caude Levi Strauss, Michel Foucault and so on was also a response to the abuse of truth manifested by Nazi ideology with such horrific consequences in WW2, as well as our need to come to terms with the new consumerist world characterized by an onslaught of advertising.  

Session 3

To make sense of the confusion we might feel now, Terry Eagleton makes it clear in this book that something has changed, but what from? Eagleton provides at least the brass tacks here, and does it in a very readable and humorous way. Why indeed are todays grad literature students concentrating their studies on S&M when there might be so many more useful things to do?

Whilst it would be useful for you to read the whole book, plus any number of others Eagleton has written of the same type, including 'Literary Theory' a standard text, and 'Why Marx was Right' (just Google him) I would expect you to enjoy the first few chapters for the benefit of this session. 

Session cancelled

With apologies the 9 am session for part time students on 8th October has been cancelled due to illness.  We will pick up again next week.

Session 2

'At Home in the Neon' by Dave Hickey from Air Guitar, and 'Sand Fear and Money' in Dubai by Mike Davis. You need to find the book for Hickey, but Davis's piece is easily downloadable.
We move backwards from our quandry about reality; Badiou and Meades were wrestling with it, but Hickey and Davis knew where they stood writing these pieces.
Hickey writes lyrically about Las Vegas, using everyday observation and personal history to establish his positive view. Davis doesn't like Las Vegas, but he dislikes Dubai even more. He's an orthodox Marxist if there can be such a thing. I wonder what Hickey is other than a great writer? It is for you to decide whether the small time victories Hickey cherishes are worth what he invests in them. Similarly it is for you to decide whether you can enjoy Davis' geopolitical critique, obviously forgiving his initial prologue of SF, which only shows he can't write that sort of stuff very happily.