After reading the Zizek intro, I decided to research more about Laibach and NSK by watching interviews and going to their respective websites.
After this research I have come to the conclusion that, although I understand the Laibach and NSK's approach and their aims (i.e the use of pastiche in regards to the representation of fascism and totalitarianism), I still find that their method can be likened to a double edged sword.
While to people of a certain demographic Laibach's mimic of totalitarian modes of expression can be seen to point out the flaws, absurdity and the damaging effects of these kinds of regimes, to others, this might not be so obvious.
As it is mentioned in the Arte interview (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EnedtySn3KU), the interpretation of the meaning/aims/actions of Laibach are left entirely up to the viewer, or as Ivan says "we give people the freedom to chose their point of view". With the ever increasing speed of the rise extreme-right political movements in Europe in the past decade, it seems that this is a dangerous game to play seeing as many people might take Laibach's 'ideology' at face value.
For me, on the one hand Laibach is preaching to the converted (fascism/totalitarianism = bad), and on the other providing the viewer with material that is ambiguous enough that people might not see that there is an underlying meaning or implications to said material, and hence, not engage in the process of analyzing exactly what it is that is being said.
Laibach is never pastiche. But i agree with you issue with the approach - it has been voiced often. In the docos andclips you dont have to look far to see the skinheads etc. Also the alarming rate of movement to the far right in Europe is a concern, but political groups such as NSK have in the past caused change...
ReplyDeleteWhy do you say it is never a pastiche? Because of the lack of apparent humor? When I said pastiche I meant something that imitates or mimics the style of a previous author, artists, or in this case political system. I was not implying that Laibach was a satire or a parody, both of which would imply humor, mockery or derision.
ReplyDeleteAlthough, it could perhaps also be argued that Laibach is a form of satire, but in an 'inside joke' kind of way.
I do find the subject very interesting though and look forward to hearing more about it in class tomorrow.