BB again. wherein i justify spending half an hour writing this post rather than rewriting chapters

While I’m almost ready to drop this particular bundle (dang I’m carrying some thesis-anxiety), the BB discussion continues.
There’s another article by Mark up at Lavartus Prodeo (where I’m quoted a bit, as are a few other interesting items by people like Galaxy (also here) and Ms Fits and others).
One of the heaviest heavy weights, Ms Greer, has chimed in, which must have the BB people “hugging themselves with glee” (to quote this article), PR-wise. This is an article which addresses the sorts of issues I’m most interested in, yet when Greer writes:

When Camilla heard that Ashley and John had been evicted, her response was baffling. “I’m really sorry, guys,” she wept. “I feel so bad.”

I’m surprised. Surely she can understand why this woman felt this way at that moment? I mean, it’s nothing new to see a woman ladened with guilt for the actions of male sexual misbehaviour… If only we could all be as robust as Germaine, strong enough not to carry that guilt*.
Perhaps more interestingly, surely its not so baffling that Camilla’s having a bit of a cry, when it’s been made so clear that she (of the three) was not expelled from the house? I imagine I’d be up there in the crying stakes in such a strange, pressure-cooker situation even without mysterious suprise ‘evictions’, public humiliation and implied guilt-by-exemption.
And as this story continues, part of me wonders why it’s so simple for BB to evict difficult housemates, when it always took us weeks and weeks to get rid of difficult housemates when I was share-housing? If we could simply have whisked them away, perhaps I’d still have my copy of The Mists of Avalon.**
…in an aside, I wonder if it’s worth thinking about the context of this ‘sexual harassment’ (I use quotes because the status of the incident is still in doubt in some minds… not mine, though). These things happened ‘in the home’. Yet this is a very public private space. Am I pushing too far when I wonder if this issue, the entire BB program, offers a fascinating opportunity to think about the perormance of public and private space, the sexual relationships between young people in public/private space?
Of course, we can’t really say that BB offers an ‘authentic’ view of private domestic life, but it does offer us an opportunity to think about the way particular types of men and women live and behave together under trying circumstances. And while the issue of sex seems foremost on everyone’s minds (anyone who objects to mixed-sex showering should avoid Herrang… hell, any dance camp), the gastropod in me is always wondering what exactly they’re cooking for dinner, and who will do the washing up.
Though not to forget Ms Greer’s points:

Every picture tells a story, but no picture tells the whole story. No word is more abused by Big Brother producers than “live”, unless it is “uncut”. Perhaps universities should start running courses on how to watch Big Brother, teaching students to discern how, when and where the mix is being manipulated, and what insultingly tatty television it is, in terms of production values.

Setting aside the whole issue of ‘taste’ (something Galaxy and others could no doubt discuss more cleverly than I), is anyone else kind of digging the fact that all of this online bloggage (rather than ‘news’) on the topic is conducted by people who are engaged in teaching the ‘BB demograph’ (ie young men and women) about media and cultural studies and gender and so on, as made particularly clear on Moment to Moment?
Speaking as someone who’s had to explain why feminism is important in a media studies subject, to a group of young(er than me) people who are training to become media producers, I think that the comments and ideas we’re sharing online are kind of important. After all, these bloggers are the sorts of people who are on the ‘front line’ of these university courses Greer suggests. And many of us will go on to do the sorts of jobs that Lumby is doing.
Really, if anyone’s in a position to ask the sorts of endlessly nitpicky questions, or to spend hours thinking about and talking about this issue, aren’t we postgraduate/early-career academic types the one(s)?
Even if we really should be off editing chapters.
Speaking of guilt…
*This is kind of a joke. If were speaking about this, in person, you’d have been cued in by tone of voice.
**Was that too frivolous a joke? I mean, we are kind of talking about feminist readings of history, ideologically informed narrative and all…

more BB talk

Since my first post there have been some responses to the BB thing on other blogs:
Moment to Moment
Pavlov’s Cat (and here)
A Wild Young Underwhimsy
Reasons you will hate me
Ausculture
I’m not the only one who read this episode as a bit of sexual harassment designed not so much as an ‘authentic’ sexual advance towards Camilla by two men, but rather as an act designed more to engage in a little man-man posturing through humiliating a woman (AWYUW and MtM echo that point).
::update::
And some more online commentary rolls in:
Mark @ Larvatus Prodeo
tubagooba (and here) who, interestingly, writes

I haven’t been exposed to these attitudes much in my day-to-day life, which might say more about my day-to-day life than it does about either BB or Australian society in general

I don’t know tubagooba, but I was surprised to read this: have I overgeneralised my own experiences?.
Blogger on the Cast Iron Balcony
armagnac’d (who makes some unsettling comments about breast-enhancement surgery and feminism which I’m not sure are all that helpful, considering…)
what the cat dragged in
There’s a comment by Lumby on crikey, but I can’t be arsed with that (I think you have to pay..?)
Over at The Road to Surfdom there are panopticon references.
Hoyden about town contributes.
Andrew Bartlett comments on the Bartlett diaries… though I haven’t yet had a chance to read it.
There’s some pretty serious artillery up there, so I’m not going to step up and get involved.
Having waded through all that, though, (esp the scuffling on LP), you may want to rest your eyes over here, or perhaps just start with this little sproinger:
sproinger2.jpg

go O.C. go

Ok, so watching the OC, the brown-haired boy with all the ‘witty one-liners and pop culture quips’ and the dumb ex-barbie girlfriend is hanging out with a blonde girl in the city where Brown Uni is.
They totally have to be a couple – they have matching novelty voices.

abstract frenzy

I’m feeling a bit confused. A couple of months ago I went over the list of upcoming conferences and did a heap of abstracts, including one for this year’s CSAA conference. Here’s the call for papers:

f things are ‘un-Australian’ it must be because they come from UNAUSTRALIA.
Where is it?
Who lives there?
How does it come to be?
What is its past and what is its future?
While raising some very local questions of critique and desire, the theme is open to international perspectives and interpretations.
Do other places have their own unplaces? What goes on there?
UNTHEMED papers are also welcome.

I got all confused before I figured out what conference/what abstract/wuh? was going on.
I’m not too inspired by the conference theme, even though I do do a fair bit of work on global/local stuff, but almost two months ago to the day I pulled out this action:

Swing Talk and Swing Dance: online and embodied networks in the ‘Australian’ swing dance community.
Since its revival in the 1980s, lindy hop and other swing dances have become increasingly popular with middle class youth throughout the developed world.
There are vibrant local swing dance communities in Melbourne, Sydney, Hobart, Perth, Canberra and Brisbane for whom dancing – an embodied cultural practice – is the most important form of social interaction. Swing dancers will travel vast distances and spend large amounts of money solely to attend dance events in other cities. The success and appeal of these events lies in their promotion as unique and showcasing their local dance ‘scene’.
In travel itineraries which criss-cross the country, swing dancers develop networks between local communities that are not only cemented by their embodied interpersonal interaction, but also by their uses of digital media. In this paper, I examine the ways in which the online Swing Talk discussion board is utilised by Australian swing dancers to develop personal relationships with dancers in other cities, which in turn serve to develop relationships between local communities. This insistence of local community identity in swing dance culture in Australia defies a definition of a ‘national’ swing dance community. I describe the ways in which ‘Australian’ swing dance is an ‘unAustralia’ – not a homogenous ‘whole’ but a network of embodied and mediated relationships between diverse local communities and individuals.

It’s interesting to see a few other abstracts – here, here and here.
I’ll only go if I score their grant thingy for pgrads/early career types. I can’t afford to get there (air fares) or to pay to get in ($190). I doubt my paper is clever enough or sexy enough to score me some free money. But them’s the breaks. Nor am I sure it’s an especially great time for me to attend a conference – once again it’s on the weekend after MLX, which will keep me more than a little busy.
Not to mention the whole writing a paper thing. I’m kind of a bit tired of writing…

Cars and Over The Hedge

I’ve recently seen Over the Hedge and Cars (did I mention my nieces are 11 and 7?). So I have things to report. But not right now. I’m a bit tired.
But you might want to go have a look here to read the Over the Hedge comic (from which the film was developed).
Super Size Me convinced me never to eat McDeath or other scary junk food ever again. OTH did a similar job. While it was a refreshingly child-centred film, the Message was decidedly anti-junk food and anti-television/sloth… not to mention anti-suburban development. It’s not a pixar-type multimodal/polyvocal text. OTH is a children’s film. But it was ideologically heavy in a very hippy-friendly way (well, perhaps without the ‘violence’).
Cars, on the other hand, was uncomfortable viewing for me. Very ‘go-cars!’, ‘drive one – now!’, ‘use fossil fuels – today!’. It didn’t sit well with me, and is my least favourite pixar effort to date. It looked great (but they all do, right?), but I just had this odd discomfort with the whole car/petrol/nostalgia thing. I’m not sure I want to revisit the 50s, where people drove just for the pleasure of driving (rather than getting places). Though I do dig neon.
It might have been my cold talking, but I also found it really really loud.