User:Elleke Hageman/Trimester 3/Reading and Writing/Essay vs 2

[abstract- citations- bibliography needed - I've made comments to the first section - in the first section you need to clarify the issue of how fantasy helps construct reality.You also need to articulate the history of Indonesia a more clearly - for instance, the communists were never in power in Indonisia, as you suggest. They were a strong force and at times shared power with the nationalist Sukarno but there was a violent anti-communist purge (which Anwar was part of. ) following an attempted coup which the IKP. Sukarno, the nationalist leader, was responsible for destroying democracy there (a five minute google search would have told you that) . OK, so I think you are right to suggest the communists are the big other but look a little more into the background and don't take Anwar as a reliable source. . ] How can Zizek’s understanding of ideology, as presented in The Pervert’s Guide to Ideology, be applied to Joshua Oppenheimer’s The Act of Killing and Renzo Martens’ Episode 3: Enjoy Poverty ?

The killers in the act of killing seem to live in a post-ideological world but are still trying to cling onto their ideology. [their ideology seems to be thriving, how can it be ‘post’?] They are justifying and glorifying the killings and gruesome actions they committed in 1965-1966 through a measure of constructing a fantasy for themselves. [good point]

The ideas of the gangsters are based upon their ideology of being free. The word gangster for them is a title they have put upon themselves that encapsulates their entire ideology. Gangster means being free, free men. [beyond the law] A lot of the ideas about being free and about being a gangster are based upon their love for American cinema. They used to sell tickets for their local cinema and because of that were able to see a lot of American cinema and Gangster movies. This accessibility to American Cinema seems to have been a main source of education for the gangsters. [it provides their ‘symbolic order’]. The vision these gangsters have on their world and the actions they committed in them is a product of a fantastical world for their education on realism had been constructed in the narrative fantastical construct of American cinema and therefore is detached from the realistic world. [but there is no distinction between reality and fantasy- the real world is constructed through fantasy, isn’t it?]

In 1965 Indonesia was in a bad state economically and the ruling party at the time the PKI (Indonesion Communist Party) was the cause for this. [The PKI were never in total power. Please look more carefully into this and give citation] Therefore it needed to be exterminated [!! What??!!] (the fact that the communists banned the beloved American cinema of Anwar and co. didn't help with the gangsters like the Communists much better). Anwar and friends helped to kill an enormous amount of “communists” in a very gruesome matter. In these killings that went on in that period also a lot of non- communist civilians were killed. Anwar and co in the Act of Killing are very proud and even seem to glorify the killings they committed and their behaviour of that time.

In my opinion the way Anwar and friends justify their behaviour is through what Zizek calls the fantastical construct in Ideology. [citation] Zizek tells us that this construct fills in the gaps of an ideology [unpack] . Because Anwar and friends don't have much or any knowledge of the people they are killing or who their victims are they can use every lack of information as gaps and instead project their own ideas upon the people they are actually killing. They can use it for example to make up facts about the communist nature of the victim. [and the nature of communists]

This is where the fear of the Evil Other comes into place. [this is developing well, one thing is following from another] Zizek states that we need a fear of an evil other to fixate our own ideology. The ideology of the gangsters is “freedom” that is also why they have named themselves gangsters because the word gangster literally means “free man” as Anwar explains. In order to attain their ultimate goal of freedom they need to exterminate everything which might be a threat for this. The gangsters thus use the Big Evil Communist Other to fixate their ideology and the means that come with keeping this ideology alive. '[it helps them make their reality too]

Also one of them literally says that “You can do whatever you want as long as you find a good reasoning for it”. This again has to do with the creation of the fantastical construct because he admits to creating or making up reasons for them to jusify his behaviour. [they are free, they are above the law, they are above the law because the communist are not free and are a threat to freedom…] And again this is where the education they had from American cinema comes into place. They can supplement the fantastical knowledge they created about their victims with knowledge on new means of killing. A lot of the killing they committed was inspired by American Cinema. Having placed themselves in this fantastical construct gives them a way of looking at things which gives them the power to do everything they want. They can steal and kill people and never have to feel guilty for it. They can decide what happens they have placed themselves out of the real world. [I disagree. They have made their own reality. Zizek’s point is that ideology is reality and fantasy at the same time. Unpack why that is (see also my notes below).]

When, in the act of killing, Joshua makes the gangsters re-live their actions through re-enacting them in a film the actions of the gangsters are actually being placed outside of their fantastical realm and into the realm of the real world. [again I don’t think you can make an essential distinction between fantacy and reality] This gives them even more room to construct this realm in a very over-exagerating way. Joshua succeeds in revealing the true fantastical realm of the gangsters in this manner. Where they create a heavenly-like place in which girls dance for them in adoration and Anwar is standing as a black Godlike Priest amidst them. In another scene we see how a beautiful luxurious buffet with a chopped of head (of Anwar, minor detail), and some monkeys feasting from it, is almost as if the gangsters see these killings as exuberant celebrations. [great point, please unpack this]

It seems that Anwar through this process is getting more insight into the actions and killings he committed. He shows remorse and sometimes even has a deep physiological reaction towards the actions that he has committed. But when we look further in the film we might even wonder if this reaction is actually true and if it is not just again something that Anwar has seen in a film and learned is the appropriate behaviour.

The gangsters claim to want a better economy for Indonesia. While actually they are exploiting the people in the way that the communists exploited as well [again, did the communists exploit Indonesia?] They extort money from the people around them in order to pay for their campaign which they claim will bring a better economy.

[I think in this section you do not get to grips with one of Zizek’s main points: one cannot distinguish fantasy from reality because our fantasies construct reality. These fantasies are informed by the symbolic order that pre-exists us (we are born into language systems; systems of signs which are loaded with fantasy &c: in the case of Anwar the symbolic system is Hollywood movies. Please re-think this and revisit the text with that in mind.] Enjoy Poverty

Enjoy poverty establishes that images of poverty are Congo’s most lucrative export as opposed to diamonds gold etc. Also, it is unveiling the ideology behind good causes such as Unicef etc. One of the statements Zizek makes about capitalism; “capitalism is always in crisis and the true capitalist will sacrifice anything for capitalism” is being revealed in Renzo Martens “Enjoy Poverty”. In addition to that we also see that there is a mechanism of fake sympathy for lower classes and a fantastical ideological construct.

Renzo makes an attempt in trying to make poverty profitable for a small group of Congolese themselves. He attempts to educate this small group of local Congolese photographers in a more capitalist way. As in how can I make my photography business lucrative, this attempt is doomed to fail. Renzo Martens gives them a short introduction in a business construct which is based upon the Western section of photographers that profit from making pictures of poverty, war and famine in Congo.

When Martens takes his group of Congolese photographers to a western journalist company and offers him the pictures. The man tells Renzo that the act of photographing Congolese poverty by the Congolese photographers is exploition of the poor, therefore he does not want to purchase these pictures. The most striking in this scene is that this is actually the practice that is being executed by a lot of western photographers. Here is where we arrive at Zizeks statement about fake sympathy with lower classes and the revitalization of Western society. Western society needs the poor in Africa to be a contrast to make them feel good about themselves, they need this contrast to be remembered of how good their lives actually are. I even want to go so far as to that we keep the poverty in Congo in existence so that we do not lose this surplus that has been created for us. The West gathers depictions of poverty in Congo. These depictions establish the fact that life is hard in Congo and the West can put this knowledge into contrast with that the Western way of living. The West can then feel sorry for the poor but also better about their own position, because the West has been confronted with how bad ones life can actually be. The West is revitalised. Renzo Martens illustrates this fact nicely in the scene where there is an exhibition with pictures of poor Congolese. The fact that Western people stand in this exhibition and be appalled by the poverty of the people that are depicted gives Western people a good feeling about themselves and creates even a goal for them in which they want and can help the poor African inhabitant. But also through the showing of the photographers who document the war and poverty in Congo and get a good salary for this.

Not only can the west be revitalised, but western society can also create a value for itself by helping the poor Congolese through the creation of good causes. When the West donates money to a good cause we feel good about the action of helping the poor in Africa. While actually, as we see in several cases in Martens film, these good causes often do not reach the goals that they are aiming for, as we see on several occasions in Martens film. The West “cares” about the poverty of the Congolese while actually Western civilisation, the capitalists, are keeping the system of this poverty alive and the West even uses this commercialized poverty for rejuvination and for capitalist goals, in other words the West exploits the poverty of, and the poor Congolese. This is where the statement of the true capitalist will sacrifice anything comes in. The Western society actually has the capability of fighting poverty in Congo or open up means for Congolese to create their own profitable system within that of the West but the West chooses not to. Instead makes halfway attempts to do something about the poverty, which often are attempts that are not thought through or improductive. These good causes create happiness for a large number of western people. They can donate money to these large capitalistic organisations which claim to make a change about the situation which makes the West feel good about themselves while they actually do not manage to make a change. You might even claim the West doesn't want this too happen because then we would loose the poverty that rejuvenates us, makes us happy and creates a value for our lives. This is the fantastical construct the West created in order to make them feel good.