Legman and McLuhan With Zizek Along the Way

It feels like I started something with last week's reference to Gershon Legman. Comments from friends and readers imply as much, anyway, and I'll try to write more about him, and about Neurotica, as soon as possible.

Meanwhile, check out Jahsonic's engagement with Legman's Rationale of the Dirty Joke.

Incidentally, I read something online to the effect that Neurotica was a big influence on Marshall McLuhan. That is exactly backwards. McLuhan was a contributor, and if you read his writings from the late 1940s, it's obvious that he'd come up with his own take on "folklore of industrial man," to use the subtitle of his early book The Mechanical Bride (1951).

By coincidence, I see that Jonathan Goodwin has noticed an interesting parallel that certainly squares with my own impression:

Žižek reminds me much of McLuhan. Facts don't matter for either. In the space of a few pages, Zizek has claimed that Martin Luther King made a radical anti-capitalist turn in the last few weeks before his death and that the Japanese Army relied on a Zen mantra similar to "the sword that kills is the sword that saves" to justify their actions in Korea and Manchuria. These are not even the kinds of claims that can be checked. As with McLuhan, Žižek just wants to make as many connective gestures as possible. That's what make both, generally speaking, fun to read but dangerous to the untutored.

This is exactly right. McLuhan liked to refer to some of his writing as "probes" -- a very space race-era locution (let's not even get into the Legmanian implications) meaning, in effect, "I am totally making this up as I go along."

About a dozen years or so back, you heard a lot about a supposed McLuhan "revival" -- he had had been a genius and a prophet, some of his books were reissued, etc. I never believed in this revival for a minute. I had read an enormous amount of McLuhan as a teenager and knew just how much of his work is -- to use the technical, philosophical term -- bullshit.

Not all of it, by any means, but an awful lot of it; and as Goodwin implies, you really have to be judicious about using him to jump start your thinking. During the "revival," so called, there was very little sign that anybody was actually reading McLuhan, let alone thinking about him -- because otherwise there would have been frequent, loud expressions of disgust at the sheer quantity of junk. (By contrast, the fact that Žižek does have readers is evidenced by the fact that even dedicated Žižekians are put out by the logorrhea, tics, and cut-and-paste of some books.)

What happened, I suspect, is that people felt like there ought to be a McLuhan revival. That he ought to have been a deep and insightful thinker about media. And so he was, for about ten minutes each Thursday perhaps, which sure didn't mean he kept quiet the rest of the time.

Anyway, I mention all this because the thought of rereading him is on my agenda of late: His statement that the content of one medium is always an earlier medium, for example, comes to mind a lot, nowadays. The problem is that the wheat and the chaff are pretty much impossible to sift out, and both are mixed up with big chunks of substances even less appetizing.

February 22, 2007 8:38 AM | | Comments (6)



My favorite questionable assertion from Zizek is his claim at the beginning of The Parallax View that Benjamin didn't commit suicide -- Stalin had him offed.

What are some of the main errors in McLuhan's thought? I'm curious. Perhaps they are worth a blog entry.

I should write more about this at some point. One example that comes to mind is his claim that television is not a visual medium but "audio-tactile" (and also more intensely involving of the brain than the printed page).

Given that we had entered the age of the "audio-tactile," McLuhan predicted that consumers would expect to be able to handle all commodities before buying them. Hence, there would soon be no more packaging, or at least a lot less of it. You'd go to the store and pluck things out of bins mostly. I am not making this up. This was one of McLuhan's "probes" at work.

Forty years later (and one day after spending the usual ten minutes trying to get my razor blades out of the seamless plastic monstrosity they come ensconced within) I feel reasonably confident in saying he was wrong about this. Nor, come to think of it, do I close my eyes and touch the TV all that much.

I taught an intro to media studies course at Georgia Tech last summer in which I assigned Understanding Media. A couple of students questioned why I assigned such an obviously flawed book (as I couldn't stop myself from pointing various errors, questionable assertions, etc., all the while trying to emphasize that they were consequences of his method). Following that up with Baudrillard was probably not the best idea.

I did not expect to see another Gershon Legman reference for a long time. I was wrong. No, really. Scroll down.


Leave a comment

Recent Work

Fidel Castro: My Life 
A review from Newsday
40 Years of "The Crisis of the Negro Intellectual" 
Marking the anniversary of Harold Cruse's great book
Style and Grace 
A review of a book by the late, great Grace Paley from ... sheesh, almost ten years ago.
Oh, Canada 
National identity -- going south?
The LaRouche Tabernacle Choir 
An interview with me about the LaRouche movement, on Pacifica radio in Los Angeles
Open Library 
An interview with Aaron Swartz, one of the developers....
Sailing From Ithaka 
The new report calling for a digital platform for scholarly publishing deserves a wide audience


Battle of the Titans 
Dinesh D'Souza and Alan Wolfe debating? Imagine a slime mold in conflict with a patch of mildew. It's just that inspiring.
To the Tehran Station 
Not about Edmund Wilson
more picks


About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by Quick Study published on February 22, 2007 8:38 AM.

Cosmopolitan Shout Out, No. 1 was the previous entry in this blog.

How True is the next entry in this blog.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.

AJ Ads

AJ Blogs

AJBlogCentral | rss

About Last Night
Terry Teachout on the arts in New York City
Artful Manager
Andrew Taylor on the business of arts & culture
blog riley
rock culture approximately
critical difference
Laura Collins-Hughes on arts, culture and coverage
Richard Kessler on arts education
Douglas McLennan's blog
Dog Days
Dalouge Smith advocates for the Arts
Art from the American Outback
Life's a Pitch
For immediate release: the arts are marketable
Mind the Gap
No genre is the new genre
Performance Monkey
David Jays on theatre and dance
Plain English
Paul Levy measures the Angles
Real Clear Arts
Judith H. Dobrzynski on Culture
Rockwell Matters
John Rockwell on the arts
Straight Up |
Jan Herman - arts, media & culture with 'tude

Foot in Mouth
Apollinaire Scherr talks about dance
Seeing Things
Tobi Tobias on dance et al...

Jazz Beyond Jazz
Howard Mandel's freelance Urban Improvisation
Focus on New Orleans. Jazz and Other Sounds
Doug Ramsey on Jazz and other matters...

Out There
Jeff Weinstein's Cultural Mixology
Serious Popcorn
Martha Bayles on Film...

classical music
Creative Destruction
Fresh ideas on building arts communities
The Future of Classical Music?
Greg Sandow performs a book-in-progress
On the Record
Exploring Orchestras w/ Henry Fogel
Harvey Sachs on music, and various digressions
Bruce Brubaker on all things Piano
Kyle Gann on music after the fact
Greg Sandow on the future of Classical Music
Slipped Disc
Norman Lebrecht on Shifting Sound Worlds

Jerome Weeks on Books
Quick Study
Scott McLemee on books, ideas & trash-culture ephemera

Drama Queen
Wendy Rosenfield: covering drama, onstage and off
lies like truth
Chloe Veltman on how culture will save the world

Aesthetic Grounds
Public Art, Public Space
Another Bouncing Ball
Regina Hackett takes her Art To Go
John Perreault's art diary
Lee Rosenbaum's Cultural Commentary
Modern Art Notes
Tyler Green's modern & contemporary art blog
Creative Commons License
This weblog is licensed under a Creative Commons License.