Having been colonised by merchants from the renaissance i can only
assure you that espresso remains the only 'soft' drink apart from
Belvedere Vodka worth bothering with... If you must engage in disgusting
american soft drinks, to the exclusion of other more interesting
beverages, the coke, pepsi or fanta (invented by the Nazi arm of the
coke empire) then I'd presume the society of spectacle has infected you
completely...
The libidinal investment referred to previously is perhaps (?) related
to the great ephemeral skin.... and to the structuralist difficulty of
cutting up elements of 'reality' and the re-production of meaning.
regards
sdv
Sukhbir Garewal wrote:
> Soumya Guhathakurta is right about the Indian 'Thums Up' which tastes
> a lot
> like sweetened rusted water. An awful drink by any reckoning. The ads
> of the
> three colas however are a lot more revealing. Pepsi is all about
> star-addicts - people craving for more. It is as if an entire people have
> been reduced to begging, stealing and cheating to experience the ultimate
> joy of not sharing their Pepsi or for that matter not letting others have
> theirs. Coke is about superstition - the stars keep opening bottles of
> Coke
> and not drinking from them in the fond hope of their cricket team - which
> has by now earned a somewhat of a reputation of never winning matches
> against Pakistan, Sri Lanka, South Africa and Australia - doing well. Or
> conversely, it is about craving where the star-addicts look for the last
> drop of Coke in cans left behind by other people. Thums up is all about
> growing up. If you don't drink Thums Up you are not man enough. Girls do
> look upto you if you drink Thums Up. So you have niche consumership. The
> drink is strictly out for eunuchs, gays, children, rural Indians, and
> perhaps even for girls.
>
> Sukhbir
>
>
>> From: Soumya Guhathakurta <[log in to unmask]>
>> Reply-To: Film-Philosophy Salon <[log in to unmask]>
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> Subject: Re: qualifications, coke vs. pepsi, better, brain,
>> correction,meeter reader, TX
>> Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2001 13:24:24 +0530
>>
>> Coke v.Pepsi has been going on long in this salon and for a longer time
>> around the globe. In, fact during the cold war days, it was said that
>> the
>> world is not divided between two power blocks but between Coke and Pepsi
>> drinkers. But we proud nationalist Indians have a good competitor and
>> its
>> called 'Thums up'. The 3 way war has been going on for long on the media
>> and the advertisers are raking the moolah( MNC s again).Quite often
>> when I
>> hear Pete Seeger sing 'Which side are you on ......' I feel confused.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> pierre guyotat <[log in to unmask]>@JISCMAIL.AC.UK> on 24/11/2001
>> 13:12:32
>>
>> Please respond to Film-Philosophy Salon <[log in to unmask]>
>>
>> Sent by: Film-Philosophy Salon <[log in to unmask]>
>>
>>
>> To: [log in to unmask]
>> cc:
>>
>> Subject: Re: qualifications, coke vs. pepsi, better, brain,
>> correction,meeter reader, TX
>>
>> I like so much of what you say; but I prefer Brio. But
>> then coke has its place too; like Andy Warhol
>>
>> --- Susanna Chandler <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> > Yes, our preferences have been colonized. Let's talk
>> > about that, especially
>> > since this is a forum for cinema as well as
>> > philosophy. The message is the
>> > mass-age, yet still I prefer Coke to Pepsi too.
>> > Actually, I don't like soda
>> > except for the rare occasion. The question is
>> > perhaps more focused if we
>> > ask, why do we watch, drink, do, think, feel, write
>> > certain *things*, when
>> > it has nothing to do with our lives except through
>> > media? Do we live our own
>> > lives anymore, whatever our fate?
>> >
>> > Discussions are efforts, but to change involves a
>> > good deal more. I like the
>> > old theory word praxis.
>> >
>> > Put your life, your money where your heart is.
>> > Philosophers inevitably call
>> > it intuition [and similar ilk], that ineffable
>> > knowing what's not a mask,
>> > what's true to self, life, goodness, evil,
>> > dishonesty, whatever the subject.
>> > I distrust and dislike bad thinking, and doubt this
>> > will go away. So
>> > philosophy has it's way. Lingo is another story.
>> >
>> > Susanna
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > From: Aaron Smuts <[log in to unmask]>
>> >
>> > You can oversimplify everything. This is a complex
>> > issue, but I seriously doubt that I don't like
>> > bananas
>> > becasue they didn't have as good of commercials as
>> > oranges. I wouldn't say that soft drinks to 13 year
>> > olds is the same as banans vs. oranges. There is
>> > obviously more going on here. But that wasn't my
>> > point. I was parodying your thinking that having
>> > preferences was akin to somthing along the lines of
>> > colonialism. It was just too simple and broad of a
>> > statement.
>> >
>> > > Some solutions are more effective than others
>> > > regarding the shape of a problem and so may be
>> > > evaluated as 'better than' within these
>> > thresholds.
>> > > I tend to shy away from such statements because of
>> > > the immediate linguistic slide from more effective
>> > > to morally superior invoked by 'better than'.
>> >
>> > Does it really. I hope your nutrality will save the
>> > world from horrible aggressive monsters like me who
>> > are willing to pass judgment on theories and
>> > positions. (I have a big "Truth" stamp in my
>> > closet.)
>> > > I think some ideas are more useful political
>> > > fictions than others. As a feminist, I find it
>> > > difficult to allow myself to high a libidinal
>> > > investment in what I perceive to be badly stated
>> > > problems.
>> >
>> > What exactly does a "libidinal investment" amount
>> > to.
>> > Just how much do you enjoy theory?
>> >
>> > As a mode of social critique, I work on
>> > > the assumption that feminism could build a desire
>> > > for its own death into performative practices i.e
>> > > will it non-existence post the resolution of the
>> > > problems it seeks to create solution for.
>> >
>> > So, my
>> > > 'best 'idea' has no knowable content and cannot be
>> > > used to make a substantive value judgement.
>> >
>> > I don't see how this follows.
>> >
>> > Is this all a prolix way of saying that once you
>> > solve
>> > a problem you don't have to dwell on the issue
>> > anymore?
>> >
>> >
>> > Following
>> > > Deleuze on the question of false problems, this
>> > does
>> > > seem to imply that there could be a non-false
>> > > problem. However, the 'properly' stated question
>> > > starts of as unconscious in Deleuze's early work (
>> > > Difference and Repetition) whereas space is the
>> > > place of problems, mainly false problems .
>> >
>> > I have no clue what you're getting at with this.
>> >
>> > I have to go.
>> >
>> > Aaron
>> >
>> >
>> > =====
>> > Aaron Smuts
>> > 512.480.0377
>> >
>> > __________________________________________________
>> > Do You Yahoo!?
>> > Yahoo! GeoCities - quick and easy web site hosting,
>> > just $8.95/month.
>> > http://geocities.yahoo.com/ps/info1
>>
>> __________________________________________________
>> Do You Yahoo!?
>> Everything you'll ever need on one web page from News and Sport to Email
>> and Music Charts
>> http://uk.my.yahoo.com
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at
> http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
>
|