Baudrillard didn't say the Gulf War "didn't happen." He said it didn't "take place". Subtle difference, but important to think about. Everyone should. He said that the violence happened, the death, destruction, but his point was about the "war" as it was televised - packaged for public consumption. There was no "Gulf War" for Baudrillard. The events were too complex, too vast to put into a single box or a series of clips and sound bites. Also, and probably most important, is the idea that it wasn't a "war" at all but a massacre, a series of atrocities committed by US (the most powerful military force in all of history) on the people of a nation run by a dictator that the US put into power and supported up until a few weeks before the atrocities began.

@id3655

3 жыл бұрын

"The Gulf War did not take place because it refers to a simplistic strawman that can be effectively televised" followed by "The USA did it all for some reason." Whatever the USA does is the result of an equally complex, vast and confusing system. What do you think? That the evil capitalists are pulling the strings?

@pjeffries301

3 жыл бұрын

@@id3655 Nice. It is not the "evil capitalists," true, but Capitalism as the naturally evolving force pulling - as you say - the strings, infecting all with the singularity of its will. Biology simply provides an active/passive means for its expression. Inevitably there can only be one queen in the hive. Damn neurons.

@PackinForSuperbowl

3 жыл бұрын

@@pjeffries301 Even one queen has many, many neurons working in concert. All we have to do is scale that up, right?

@pjeffries301

3 жыл бұрын

@@PackinForSuperbowl We are. Or "nature" is. Today's queen has 18 carrier groups, 50,000 nuclear weapons, all the food, etc. When humans reach one "queen," like our insect comrades, it will be the ultimate Power Puff Girl. The scaling up will be Meta-Biblical.

@orsisrutherford4705

Жыл бұрын

Jus like Zelensky and the Russo/Ukranian War. It is a big siumulacrum.

The first 5 minutes of this has finally revealed the meaning of simulacrum to me. Thanks Barbara and Alan!

I wonder what he thinks of Baudrillard now, in 2017. The collapse of the real with fiction seems to be ever present in our political lives.

@Mike-om4tv

6 жыл бұрын

Vanessa Kelly my thoughts exactly

@patricksputnick5094

5 жыл бұрын

+Vanessa Kelly Good point. However, hasnt this always been an issue or ?

@jsraadt

5 жыл бұрын

... said after watching a KZread video

@diver618

5 жыл бұрын

good point.I think there is an effort to mix everything together until nothing really means anything and also that everyone has to be so careful what they say in public even at work at common jobs that people are losing opinions about any societal issues at all when nothing has meaning and there are no opinions a big change will be force on everyone and no one will do a thing about it.

@Falliblelife

4 жыл бұрын

Vanessa, I very much agree with you. Years ago I researched Baudrillard at University.

Enjoyed this this morning. Keep it as real as you believe it can be for you.

Great interview, thanks. Alan How clarifies much from the book which I have been reading & rereading for a year. Dr. Mitra's questions get right to the significance of Baudrillard's ideas.

Thanks for posting this interview. It has clarified a great deal for me.

Great video. Really shed some light of the subject. Thank you!

As a quarter native, this information is more than a revelation. It’s world changing. When ideas fester in the mind and is grasped as plausible, it’s no longer a theory but a revolution. I’m glad for jeans work, of breaking the illusions. Bringing forth the real by separating us from systematic pragmatic disillusionment

This was really helpful for my media studies coursework, thanks for uploading! :)

the italian restaurant example was perfect :] and if you're explaining it to someone you could tell them about the painting and have them guess the type of restaurant (assuming they're familiar with the godfather) and they could arrive at that understanding themselves through the experience. love it.

THANKS FOR THIS VIDEO BARBARA

I have found this very helpful for my essay. ^_^ Thank you

Thank you for this video :) very clear

So... I was searching for a dubstep song and i came to this...

@GoldenBloodyBeared

9 жыл бұрын

xxXFixedGamerXxx maybe your best mistake

@c.hunter9069

8 жыл бұрын

KZread gold, the both of you.

@adityapermana9651

6 жыл бұрын

its late to me to comment, but mate.. you lost again in the youtube lol

2021 here, you wouldn’t believe how far the blur between real and unreal has gone

@pabolton People like Baudrillard are useful insofar as they can provide a bridge between the possibilities of earlier SF speculations and the atrophied conceptualities that pass for philosophic discourse, forms of 'thought' that will endlessly debate the most obvious topoi in a holding pattern that only serves the hegemony of vested interests.

it would be great if more videos of alan how were put up ! :o)

Its actually a documentary about the hyper reality tensions between the cats' simulacrum and their disgust of their feline destabilisation through the plague of meme simulation but unfortunately we only understand through the subpar human technology of english and simply hear a cat mewing in the background. Just proves true knowledge is knowing that we know...

He writes well, has some grasp of the SF ethos, reflected in his "holistic inferences", as it were, though I would guess he didn't grow up reading SF. If he had, he could have perhaps gone much further. When I mentioned "the production of reality" it was with reference to Dr. Alan How's introductory statements at the beginning of the video. I do remember Baudrillard's point about reality being generated from codes, rather than some 'original'. The video wasn't really going into that, though.

I clicked on a small thumnal thinking it was actually Derrida speaking :D

I can't believe this prof can't see that it the hyperreal that makes the kind of joke he talks about so juicy or even possible. Its all about irony- their joke and the criticism of baudrillard. He is watching the game on the TV for a start, the banner in the crowd is knowingly meant to be picked up by TV cameras. So many different levels of reality involved and everyone's in on it. The joke is also mentioned in parliament. But PMQs (for example) are entirely scripted the players know in advance its not a real debate. I could go on and on peeling away layer upon layer, simulacra and simulacrum. And it all gets funnier and funnier!

@sixteenstringjack

8 жыл бұрын

+greenf0rd actually, your comment has helped me to understand JB's theory better than this vid - thanks!

What is real is what can be simulated.

Baudrillard's ideas are often called "unsound". Perhaps because he didn't always fit into the loud clamour of banal (Arendt) conceptual reiterations that allows those who familiarise themselves with it to imagine they are thinking something new. That being said, what little I know about Baudrillard doesn't strike me as new, either.

Is the restaurant in England with the God-father picture an Italian Restaurant of one the continental styles or is it an Italian-American Restaurant?

So if you have a copy of a copy of a copy on one page, is it simulacra, or simulacrum?

I'm like 90% certain that Baudrillard pulled a fast one on the world, because, i just can't wrap my bloody head around Simulacra and Simulation. Also, it seems like everything I've read or watched about it has a different interpretation, each of which has even more, or equally, confusing analogies and explanations.

@gmensah2008

7 жыл бұрын

The problem with Simulacra and Simulation is like taking an advanced class in Physics without having taken the prerequisites. By the time Baudrillard writes Simulacra, he's already written about The Society of Consumption which is embedded in Roland Barthes notion of mythology and semiotics. He's also moved beyond Marxism, situationism (i.e the The Society of Spectacle by Guy Debords) as well as Foucault's genealogy and notion of biopolitics. He's also reversing the logic of McLuhan, that the medium is indeed the message, but that we have become the screen immersed in networks rather than actors manipulating media. I think the Matrix popularized but also vulgarized some of Baudrillard's concept, and as a result, we often fail to place Baudrillard's work. There's no fast one though, it does make sense provided we've acquired certain necessary knowledge. I haven't read Simulacra in a while but the main gist I got was that the real is no longer because its principle is dead. The real was based on the principle of representation, it's only real if it can be represented, otherwise it's an illusion. I.e knowledge, sciences, photos, measurements, all are form of representations, they are guarantors of the reality they represent. But what happens when those representations, i.e those images that came AFTER reality become our source of reality and come BEFORE the real? In other words what happens when art imitates life imitates art imitates life to the point that we can no longer tell representations (images) away from the real? Then reality and fiction are no longer distinguishable, the real becomes the hyperreal, i.e the product of models, i.e images that may or may not represent anything real. There are many themes and wrinkles in Simulacra, not saying I grasp them all, far from it, but Baudrillard is not pulling some sophistry on us, quite the contrary, his theory are like premonitions, they're coming true before our very eyes.

@xlmusic6419

6 жыл бұрын

I'd say a simulacrum is where a false representation of an idea replaces it's original meaning. Borders on a map are superimposed onto reality in the way we act like they are "real". Concepts like God are more often than not judged on our interpretation of organized religion... When fake "reality" t.v is imitated by kids, the world becomes a kind of simulacrum, because the false reality becomes integrated into actual reality in the form of culture. Definition wise, people will say I'm wrong but as a way to understand it this is how i think of it. Regardless, It's a concept I ponder a lot and never fully wrap my head around either.

@xyoungdipsetx

6 жыл бұрын

I noticed this too. shit is so confusing.

@VM-hl8ms

6 жыл бұрын

just because it's in pop culture, no need to view it as an ultimate statement, or preaching, more that anything it's an observation.

@NotYourDude

6 жыл бұрын

it is so rare for someone for understand baudrillard

You could think of this as collapse of the ego (the ego is an evolutionary development of mind to allow "me" to be separate from an objective world in order to plan and manipulate events - this is a subject for another time). The ego cannot cope with these levels of complexity and is in despair (depression is the common post modern disease). However there is an observer of the mind at a deeper level (which knows that ego and its thoughts are also objects). Being there allows "me" to become"Is."

@jonmakack1905

7 жыл бұрын

Interesting point, John. I'd tend to agree with it, even though I'm not sure if J.B. ever considered or even knew about any of what you talk about. Do you know any good books from authors that really know what they're talking about, just like you do? I don't want any of the basic stuff; I already know all that, just as you do. I'm seeking something that goes beyond what most people already understand and could help me understand the ego and similar concepts deeper.

@Spiritofblake

7 жыл бұрын

Maybe Lacan or someone from his school who try to grasp the post-modernist experience from an advanced psychoanalytic perspective

@Snip3r97

6 жыл бұрын

1 year late but never too late, check out Sam Harris, his thoughts on the illusion of the ego, identity politics etc. Enjoy

I have an essay about this... Kill me now

@robberyexpert

8 жыл бұрын

take some shrooms first

@doctordilanka

7 жыл бұрын

^ This guy has the answers.

@matthew562

6 жыл бұрын

How did the essay go?

@febelinahwithanh5966

6 жыл бұрын

I have an assignment...

@febelinahwithanh5966

6 жыл бұрын

Dakota Coppinger Visual Culture Studies.

@sinprelic Agree.

As to"reality"? It is an interesting mark, noise, regime of "thought", "experience", "things"...

Vito Corleone was of Sicilian descent, also.

is there a cat in the background

In the context of a proper hyper-reality, why couldn't a joke exist? If the reference is gone and all that remains are simulacrum, aren't certain simulacra capable of occupying what is effectively the same place the reference once did? I don't mean to insinuate things are so well organized that could ever actually make that connection...but in theory...

Welcome to the desert of the real

I am thinking of buying and reading 'Simulacra and Simulation' but I am not a very "big" reader. Is it a tough book to get through? I dont read alot of philosophical/theoretical books but I do like his idea from what i've read online? should i read it??

@pietrorossi325

5 жыл бұрын

So did you?

13 years old, what prefiguration for what society is today

About Deidre Barlow... Are you saying that all the people that laughed REALLY knew that she was a fictional character ? I would say that 10% really knew. The rest laughed by inertia.

Did he said Jon Snow? Jon Snow knows nothing..! Another example of what Baudrillard trying to say.

@IanSumallo

7 жыл бұрын

Jon Snow only sees reality through a naive lens of perspective -- thus, all that he sees is tinted by a sense of optimism, causing for him to see a reality that is far more hopeful than what reality really is -- a simulacra. On the other hand, Jon Snow is the only one aware of the dangers lurking outside the wall, and is thus, actually seeing the true state of things, but like the enlightened one in the allegory of the cave, Jon Snow was not believed in by his peers due to them still living under the shadow of the false safety provided by the wall, still living in a simulacra.

My theory is that reality is what we ourselves perceive it to be. For Baudrillard his reality was a life trying to perceive what reality was... mental masturbation.

Matrix or not Matrix.. that's the question!

we will not and cannot understand the reality of what boudrillard said because reality exists no more and what we encounter is competing interpretations of various kind that ultimately creates a hyper reality. hahaha..

3:53 so what he is trying to say is that: "stupid people be stupid". And then that creating a specific dinner environment is bad? Brilliant.

@Michael-xv1gn

10 жыл бұрын

Why do people always think in terms of good or bad. Everything has to be bad if it is worth talking about. Actually he isn't saying this is bad, he's just offering up an analysis at this point, an analogy for a broader trend, and he even suggests in different places that this might be a good thing. But I'm gonna use this comment to add my own thoughts so feel free to ignore. His point is that the real and the fictional kind of mix together in this way. We don't know the world itself, but we recognize it through our interaction with technology, with images, simulations. His point was that we recognize the thing we call Italian through fiction. The restaurant is a simulation, that doesn't refer to anything real. Because if you went to Italy and experienced it, it would probably be very different then your experience at that restaurant. And italian as a biological reality, nobody cares about that. It's the image that matters, which is why they have this big ass picture of Marlon Brando. Nobody cares that Brando is not biologically italian (if there is such a thing) or of Italian decent. He is a symbol of "The Italian." Are all italians gangsters, are most of them gangsters? Of course not. Does't matter. This is what we know about Italians, how we experience Italians. His face is signaling or signifying "Italian." But what he is signifying doesn't actually exist in the real world, that version of Italian is also a symbol, a sign referring to another sign as opposed to an object in the real world. It's not that the real doesn't exist, it's that it doesn't even really matter to people. And this is just becoming more and more true every day.

The Matrix has you.

Ellner wasn't denying the idea that we have indeed made progress...

The matrix movie is a program for your mind, what I mean by that is that most people before they watch the movie have a very basic idea about the nature of reality. Once they watch the movie and install the matrix program in their minds. The mind map that the matrix movie presents, tends to overlap their old basic idea of reality, and they tend to believe that they are now in a matrix reality. As we progress in time, in like fifty years the matrix reality will be the only reality that most people have as a concept of reality. So at the very least we are heading towards a Baudrillard world, and current reality will be nothing more than a desert. This is not to say, that I believe we are in the matrix, but rather that the few who believe we are in a matrix like world, will continue to multiply till their belief spreads across the minds of the many. Already concepts like glitch in the matrix and Mandela effect are spreading across the minds connected to the network.

I would suggest re-thinking the text that re-iterates what is said. It doesn't ass any value, I find it mostly distracts if anything.

@lizzieheath1183

8 жыл бұрын

+Arjun Ramakumar lol. I can't even remember what that point was responding too!

Why is Jerry Springer pretending to be an English academic?

@zhangpe1

6 жыл бұрын

Viewership is low and he needs a new angle/gimmick?

2020 - Baudrillard has never been more right.

@jnrolf How? Is that pun? :))))

not only is this guy nuts, so was Baudrillard!

Did anyone else notice that the health care debate in America didn't become entrenched in the popular consciousness until it became an election debate topic? What caused this? Something "real," or something "fictional?"

Fact - factum, a thing made, facere (to make; act, take action, be active; compose, write; classify; do, make; create; make, build, construct; produce; produce by growth; bring forth) Fiction - fictionem, "fashioning or feigning" With such etymology, not only can one forget Foucault, but one can say "who needs Baudrillard" as well! lol

Or so you assume...

@7th75thCallaghan Generally your right...I would agree, that the 'average joe' can be excused from this type of detail...but in this case the so called expert, better be WELL READ about Baudrillard, that's just a basic starting point for a big mouth expert, before he/she decides to critique or explain the message.

Seems to me what is described as a problem by B is simply the method by which images are transformed and made new all through history. I dont see anything unusual about it. What is this permanent real? The only foundation that has ever been is “stillness” and it cant be distorted, in my experience. The rest of it appears to exist explicitly to be transfigured over and over again.

Something unreal.

Now think about the young generations watching this video and hearing the name "Jon Snow".

The "bringing off reality" is a fairly apt way of expressing the "production of reality". The examples are weak and neglect the crucial nature of the topoi concerned, as if they were mere marginalia- "Let's get on with the administered society (Adorno), shall we? But we can enjoy the ideas."

They said he died, if he was a "simulation", he would be here in 2020. There is something wrong his books. I can't figure out what it is. Maybe that coffee is "simulated" at the restaurant with "simulated" money and paper cup.

I am really confused

@IzziAsha22

3 жыл бұрын

wait no I understand

Isn't philosophy a simulation?

He'd argue that It is not. He'd say It's is a poor representation of that which isn't real. He would argue that if there was no technology present in that room at the time of the interview, it would still be questionably real. For him, the starting point for actual reality would be if you found yourself sitting naked in a cave with no knowledge of language because even language is a false representation - a series of auditory signifiers used to quantify everything in our physical realm.

Instead of using the godfather example he should have used the religion example.

Brando wasn’t even Italian either

Yeah, his use of the Godfather kinda falls apart like the pizza. I personally hated Godfather's Pizza..

Why would a picture of Marlon Brando necessarily signify it was an Italian restaurant if you hadn't told the students it was an Italian restaurant? If they were not primed couldn't they be as likely to think it was a Hollywood or gangster themed restaurant? or gay biker icon? or white solidarity with indigenous peoples themed? If the Godfather really was the most consistent reaction, isn't it reasonable to suggest that the Godfather films make it clear that the Godfather-ness of Brando's character is associated with his Italian heritage. Why is this 20th century example any more postmodern than the 2D, othering or exoticised etc, depiction of stereotypical figures in other literatures, say Jewish or oriental characters in early modern western Europe?

@AquaJtang

5 жыл бұрын

you using the word oriental to describe people of Asia already shows why you didn't understand the Italian Restraurant example

This is why we get the industries of faux radicalism, 42 years after Derrida's publications, more than a century after Nietzsche, almost a millenia after Nagarjuna's dialectic, the Buddhist Apoha theory of meaning, etc., making the same stupid noises about the loss of reference, reality, foundation, etc..

I hope they tell some more.fucjing lies. Thats.my favert kind.

Whose agenda was it to give the agenda setters their agenda?

Smart people need to use smaller words when explaining stuff.

elaborate if you want to make a real critique

He doesn't understand a single thing he's saying. Just like everyone who claims to have understood what Baudrillard is saying beyond what is trite.

@lugus9261

6 жыл бұрын

Jon Chuang well, what is baudrillard about?

@adityapermana9651

6 жыл бұрын

if you undertstand what is Baudrillard about, then explain it.. if not, then why you say that?

@celinec3467

6 жыл бұрын

Precisely the reason why I'm here. I can't understand how Baudrillard writes, so I'm looking for people who can explain it better than he does. If you truly understand what he's saying, at least explain it, so the rest of us can learn?

@LeonardoGonzalez-ul8gk

6 жыл бұрын

I agree Jon, If he knew then he would tell it as clearly as possible, this is not clear at all how he answers his questions. He might be good on paper but lacks the rhetoric

The Symbol is not the thing symbolized. . . The Symbol is/are Narratives. . . Competing Narratives Obviate the Object. . . Husserl Burped.

I know what's real, other people don't

Not a very convincing criticism of Baudrillard. His point that most people live in a mostly constructed reality - created by media and vested interests is extremely valid. The fact that you can find a few counter examples is meaningless. Jokes can be based on the difference between two constructed realities - there is no necessity for one of the realities to be real or true. The ‘real’ issue is, can there ever be an actual reality in the sense of an inherent set of truths to which we all necessarily agree?

@othaner38

4 жыл бұрын

Yes, I totally agree. He didn´t talk, though, about the jokes that we SHOULD have laughed and we haven´t. Because we didn´t recognized them as jokes. Like the Cardassians, for example.

*false, not poor representation.

So it's just Kant with a lot of whiney drama.

Students were absolutely correct, he was THE Godfather. Thing is, the lake district isn't exactly swarming with Italians, so a symbol of Italy needs to be relevant to the locals. They could put up a picture of Giacomo Puccini and the locals would probably just assume he was a godfather.

@happinesstan

11 ай бұрын

In fairness the point was valid. Art reflects life reflects art, as they say. And there are gatekeepers to the art world which means there are gatekeepers to reality.

jesus, this is what cnn is doing

this prof is boring...I'm out.

Too much cannabis

And how would Alan How feel about virtual reality games and the gaslighting lies of President Trump. What is real and what is not?

This guy is cuffing it.... trying to act... the fact that he didn't know what year Baudrillard died? How odd???

rien de neuf depuis le mythe de la caverne de Platon : toute réalité est subjective... que ce soit pour un individu ou pour une société... bref c'est pas la découverte du siècle...

that's not even true science continues to explain the world. doctors have saved most the people you know. capitalism has raised the standard of living of all societies that participate in it, which enhances your ability to participate in things that you value. This includes using KZread (a business) on the internet (a scientific achievement).

Blah blah blah postmodernist waffle.