2015年11月28日 星期六

廣告版的深夜食堂(有點太精緻了)

咦嘖(嘖稱奇)說他很喜歡,所以豬頭偏不。
(等等,咦嘖是說他沒有很喜歡。那怎麼辦?我應該同流合污同意他嗎?)

(各位不會覺得很奇怪嗎?麵店老闆用左手拿筷子,卻是用右手拿菜刀。運鏡構圖的關係嗎?不過他應該不是左撇子。豬頭是。)
cut

2015年11月23日 星期一

玻璃心


台灣第一名




cut
2015.12.12更新

2015年11月19日 星期四

104-1 「文化理論」資格考題公佈

「師爺,你給我他媽的翻譯一下他媽的什麼叫他媽的驚喜

QUESTION 1

         Foucault, in the preface to Madness and Civilization writes (1967:xi):

We have yet to write the history of that other form of madness, by which men, in an act of sovereign reason, confine their neighbors, and communicate and recognize each other through the merciless language of non-madness; to define the moment of this conspiracy before it was permanently established in the realm of truth, before it was revived by the lyricism of protest.

         For Foucault, the notion of “non-madness” defines what it means to be a normal human being, and thus “the realm of truth.” Unlike earlier structuralist approaches, the notion of “power” is central to Foucault’s approach. Not only does the ability to define “non-madness” require power, but the new form of truth itself generates new forms of power. In your answer first compare and contrast this notion of truth with that of earlier structuralist thinkers (like Levi-Strauss) and later action-oriented theorists (like Ortner and Bourdieu). Then, second, talk about the ways in which a “realm of truth” has been created by the study of indigenous peoples (in Taiwan or elsewhere).


QUESTION 2

Vincent Crapanzano“Hermes’ Dilemma”一文中(in Writing Culture, 1986:51-76)以為,Clifford Geertz峇里島鬥雞論文(1973)並沒有提供「在地者觀點的在地理解」,而是一種「被建構出來的在地者的被建構觀點的被建構理解」(p74)。請依循Crapanzano的觀點,闡釋這種「建構的建構的建構」的「詮釋技藝」(interpretive virtuosity, p53,如何使得Geertz(至少在〈深度遊戲〉這篇文章中)建立起他的「民族誌權威」?同時,這種民族誌修辭設計(rhetorical projection)使其讀者(以及民族誌作者自身)確信他們在民族誌權威的位置,你認為是否必要?是否有其他形式

In his “Hermes’ Dilemma” article (in Writing Culture, 1986:51-76), Vincent Crapanzano criticizes Clifford Geertz on his Balinese cock fighting essay (1973) that “Despite his phenomenological-hermeneutical pretentions, there is in fact in ‘Deep Play’ no understanding of the native from the native’s point of view.  There is only the constructed understanding of the constructed native’s constructed point of view” (1986:74).  Following Crapanzano (1986), please illuminate how does Geertz acquire his ethnographic authority (at least in “Deep Play”) through such “construction of construction of construction” (p74) in terms of “interpretive virtuosity” (p53).  Is this rhetorical projection necessary for ethnographers in order to convince their readers (and themselves) on ethnographic authority? Any other way to acquire it?


QUESTION 3

Anna Tsing近來試圖用「規模」(scale)的觀點重新思考全球現代性的形成,發展在地知識與資本主義之間「有生產性的摩擦」(productive friction),並與全球接軌的過程。同時她也對Arjun Appadurai的全球地景觀點進行批評(c.f. “Global Situation,” Tsing 2000)。她提出的替代觀點是「規模製作」(scale-making):

Rather than assume we know exactly what global capitalism is, even before it arrives, we need to find out how it operates in friction. Instead of rushing toward global spatial compression, I examine the links between heterogeneous projects of space and scale making, as these both enable capitalist proliferation and embroil it in moments of chaos. In tracing the connections through which entrepreneurship operates, the cultural work of encounter emerges as formative.” (Friction, 2005:12)

Tsing認為「規模」取向可以展現資本主義計畫中的異質空間(相較於Appadurai的地景論述),得此對比全球與地方差距下資本作用的多樣性。請引用Tsing的「規模」觀點,說明如何不同於Appadurai的地景概念,如何藉由此觀點對全球與地方的二元性加以拆解,並且討論TsingAppadurai論述著重處理後殖民全球化情境(postcolonial globality)的哪些問題?


Anna Tsing uses the concept of “scale” in rethinking the formation of modern globalism.  She considers that the “productive friction” between local practice and global capital is the process of making global connection.  Tsing criticizes Appadurai’s “scape-making” in the imagined globalism (cf. “Global Situation,” Tsing 2000); in turn, she uses “scale-making” to make further explanation,
(See above quotation.)

The notion of “scale” can demonstrate heterogeneous spaces in the project of capitalism, thereby exploring the diversity of globalism and the distance between local and global.  Explain how Tsing’s “scale” concept is different from Appadurai’s “scape” model in understanding the dyad of local and global, and what are the emphases in the explanation of “postcolonial globality” by the two theoretical approaches.
cut

2015年11月18日 星期三

2015年11月12日 星期四

中天 逃之夭夭(rap)


逃之夭夭2015年11月8日中天新聞主播周怡德播報畫面今年是五倍的逃之夭夭!!!!!
一百五貼上了 2015年11月10日

cut
本年度新詩組文學獎得獎作品
駕駛下車查看後,突然呢
直接轉身後,馬路上Yeeeeeeee
突然是逃之夭夭

而警方呢循線調閱監視器
這個監視器
下午順利的也將人順利的帶回套警局
而這個呢這個肇事的車輛
而這個駕駛呢發現呢
這個駕駛呢突然呢發現呢
為什麼當時呢會逃之夭夭
駕駛突然發現呢
這個肇事駕駛呢
突然說是
為什麼會逃之夭夭
駕駛說呢
當時呢逃之夭夭他卻是說呢
當時逃之夭夭他卻是說呢
他完全呢
在撞事夭夭以後
他完全呢
是因為呢
他完全是不知情

2015年11月7日 星期六

2015年11月5日 星期四