Tertulia - a discussion of Jade Goody

sorealism

Member since:
1 year 39 weeks

Last activity:
6 weeks 6 days

Posted Sun, 03/01/2009 - 00:43

Whatever's on your mind, probably including the topic - what the hell is sorealism?

Elitist Art or Soreality TV?

Mon, 03/02/2009 - 00:50 — vixen

But seriously. I think the top award for achieving the pinnacle of Soreal performance art should be given to Jade Goody (pretty quickly). What does the panel think?

There is nothing more real than death and Jade Goody is dying on the telly and in the tabloids addicted to fame like one big juxta position - Sorealism is a juxta position in some sort of way. The picture above is of her attempting the London Marathon without training, needless to say she collapsed and had to be taken to hospital.

Jade Goody is Soreally juxtaposed with her impending death in the media. Her celeb wedding, the centre spread in OK magazine, being given her diagnosis on Indian TV only serves to proove this Sorealismo to me. I don't think it gets much more Soreal than this does it?

Well I suppose it could a little, imagine she was faking her cancer for the money? Her story is crazier than real life and she get's my vote as a Sorealist because she is living as she dies very publicly.

I wish her a peaceful end.

Off-axis Quality

Wed, 03/04/2009 - 18:12 — spbmssen

Being a Sorealist means thinking qualitatively (being elitist?), but not neccessarily on the obvious axis.

If I fancy a carbo-snack I will by a mass-produced, chemically-flavoured bag of maize forms. Low quality foodstuff, high-quality munchies. Soreal because they recognise their own quality as a foodstuff (low) and as a top snack (high).

Monster Munch are Soreal. Walkers Sensations are not.

Jade Goody is Soreal. Jack Tweed is not.

Top Gear is Soreal. Fifth Gear is not.

Tony Adams is Soreal. Martin Keown is not.

Hang on, isn't it just about self-awareness?

OK. Running with that...

Thu, 03/05/2009 - 13:54 — sorealism

...it's not just self awareness per se, but an admission of the way art, artefacts, artificial selection, colonises our inner and outer lives. These are surreal, inchoate, and often completely confusing. But once in a while we move beyond cliche. Maybe the cliches pile up so high they amass some kind of new reality in themselves (e.g. Moulin Rouge). Or real life collapses under the weight of cliche, and one is left with the biggest cliche of all (something we alll go through) death. In Jade's case, her trajectory through the firmament of falling stars has been so fast, and powered by nothing else but the internal combustion of her own hydrogen, I'd say you're probably right. She has become soreal.

Does she know this? Will she own this? I have no clue. But 'celebrity' will never be the same again. It's the Truman Show, except there's no way to escape the Big Brother TV set anymore. Except one.

Wood for the Trees

Fri, 03/06/2009 - 12:41 — Closet Sorealist

Good point, maybe Jade herself is not aware of much more than the fact of her celebrity, in which case it would be difficult to argue that she is a Sorealist. But the atom of celebrity that has Jade and Jack in the nucleus, and Max Clifford undetectably occupying some close orbit, and forcing interactions with the outside world, is undeniably self-aware. In fact, Max Clifford has made a career of pointing out the (often short-term) wonder in everyday lives and stories, showing the marvellous in the improbably mundane. Perhaps he is the uber-Sorealist?

Beyond celebrity

Tue, 03/10/2009 - 13:21 — vixen

But leaving Jade aside for a moment... or put it this way: going from the ridiculous to the sublime...

Let's talk about death.

Did someone say it is the ultimate cliche? Excuuuuuuuse ME!!!! YOUR death may be a cliche, but mine most certainly isn't! My death, when it comes, will be so-ruddy-real it's gonna be off the scale of sorealism.

I beg pardon on death's behalf if it fails to be self-conscious in the act of self-fulfilment. We will be too busy BEING it to be safely removed to an intellectual distance where self-awareness is possible.

So to return to poor Jade... that's what I find so magical about her final roasting on the spit of celebrity. What a place to search for immortality at such a moment in her life!! Celebrity, Max Clifford, the tabloids, the glossies, bad taste... none of them can touch her, or diminish her truth an iota. Death is irreducible. That's what I find so stunning about Jade's current journey: I've never seen anything that so blazingly highlights the fatuousness, tragic powerlessness and mirage of celebrity. Jade has been transformed to an angel for me and risen above it all, would she or no, poor darling.

Go Jade!!!! I'll see you there, on the soreal side of the street. Love, Vixen xxx

It was me who said death is a cliche

Tue, 03/10/2009 - 14:22 — Peter Jukes

And I stand by that. Death is in principle a commonplace. Apart from birth and fornication, probably the biggest commonplace there is.

Now you would rightly argue that your death is more significant than mine - at least to you - and of course I could argue the converse till the end of (my) time. But the tragic narrative of celebrity, previously explored in the arcs of James Dean or Marilyn Munroe or Diana, has changed with Jade. She is famous for being famous, celebrity for celebrity's sake, her mistakes and her lack of knowledge only highlighting this fact. In that sense she is a soreal icon of celebrity.

But do I really have to feel for her? I'm sorry this has happened, but aren't there thousands dying everyday who deserve my sympathy and pity more? Why, just because she's part of the media circus, do I have to elevate her to angel? It's Diana without the princess bit. I feel the strength of other people's emotions on this (something which is intrinsically moving) but I don't buy into the sanctification. I find the feeding frenzy ghoulish and a bit scary

So do I

Tue, 03/10/2009 - 21:23 — vixen

... find it ghoulish and scary, that is. Good God, I wasn't suggesting anyone should feel for the woman. We've all got plenty of stuff of our own to feel. And you're completely misunderstanding me if you think I was suggesting that being part of a media circus means she is anything other than a human in the worst possible taste. No, no, no. From this curious observer's point of view, she has simply stepped beyond the realm of celebrity and become untouchable. In fact, she is more than an angel, in that she knows what no angel knows.

Your placing death "in principle" alongside birth and fornication as the biggest commonplace there is, appals me. What principle is this? And if these three things are commonplace, what do you consider not commonplace? Art? What is art if not a creative expression of the anguish of the insolubility of the profound mysteries of birth, death and fornication (at least where the latter is an expression of desire). So, if not art, what, please, is not commonplace?

"Birth, copulation and death...

Tue, 03/10/2009 - 21:59 — Peter Jukes

That's all, that's all, That's all, that's all"

As Sweeney said.

Sorry if it appals, but since copulation is optional, and birth unmemorised (if not unmemorable) then death is the remaining terrible cliche, and I use both 'terrible' and 'cliche' advisedly.

Cliches are just truths which have lost their meaning by overuse. They're commonplace, mainly because they're true. But cliches can be burnished again to shine, in some cases glint - by clarity of expresssion and passionate artistry. So we're not disagreeing in some sense (unless you're looking for a good dialectic), but I would say art differs from birth, copulation and death, by being completely uncommonplace, exeptional and voluntary. The abillity to communicate and preserve our feelings through culture is probably the only clear cut distinction between us and other primates (always useful to drop in a bit of paleoanthropology at this point to win an argument) whereas every other animal we know experiences birth, copulation and death, without making so much fuss about it.

But it's a double bind. We can preserve ourselves to some extent, but that same consciousness makes us permanently aware of our own mortality and transience. So I agree with you on Jade, now I understand you better. Her story has the perfect ending, in media event terms, because - just as in every whodunnit or thriller - death is the perfect book end. However, if she's really an angel, then we're all in deeper trouble than I thought.

Yes to a good dialectic

Tue, 03/10/2009 - 23:47 — vixen

By whom is death overused? And what meaning has death lost by this overuse? I don't understand. And though birth may be unmemorised (and I use "may" advisedly) by the birthee, it might surely be memorised, memorable and uniquely meaningful for the birther. And is sorealism only accomplished through its conscious recognition by a beholder (even if that's a superego spying on the self?)

But copulation, yes, I agree. Unless it is an expression of desire, or even passion, it's as commonplace as PG Tips.

Are you sure cliches are more likely to be based in truth than lies?

Death the concept, death the

Wed, 03/11/2009 - 17:21 — Peter Jukes

Death the concept, death the word, death the irreducible and ultimately banal fact of all existence - I think that's way too prevalent. And if I had my way, it would be banned entirely. Less death please. More life. But I digress...

The reality of personal extinction is a contradiction in the first place - what's the reality of nothingness? I speak as an atheist of course, and other people might think death is just the beginning of a great adventure. I have a personal grudge against death, and don't want to elevate it in any way. I used to believe in Montaigne's phrase that 'wisdom is learning how to die', but when my mother died five years ago, I changed my mind.

LEARNING TO DIE

Wisdom has been called
Learning how to die

But death is stupid
Forgetting everything

Unlearning all those lessons
How to eat
How to wash yourself
How to defecate
How to breathe

Like an orchestra in reverse
Losing tempo, expression
Measure by measure
Detuning the instruments
Breaking the strings

Until the meaning is lost
Vague, inarticulate
Half formed on your lips
Something... no it's gone

O death is so stupid
Forgetting who you are

You who taught me
Everything

As for cliches. I think some of them are based on truths so universally self-evident, they've lost their meaning and need to be reinvigorated. I'm not sure they're all like that though. I'm not sure of anything. But I'm willing to listen to any cliche you think is based on a complete lie and try to disagree.

Fun jazzing with you this way though, regardless

Bingo

Fri, 03/06/2009 - 14:02 — Peter Jukes

I think that's a brilliant formulation. Max Clifford IS the uber-sorealist, the Svengali of the movement, or even better the Sergei Diaghilev.

Maybe you should write a blog/page about him. It would be a great starter for our - as yet empty book - soreal news.

Out of the closet

Fri, 03/06/2009 - 12:43 — spbmssen

Apologies, posted the above (Wood for the Trees) without logging on.

There's absolutely no doubt...

Wed, 03/04/2009 - 11:34 — Peter Jukes

...that Jade Goody's rise, fall, rise, fall, sainthood and demise is a completely SOREAL story of the way modern media interacts at an almost molecular level with modern life. And it's a tragic story. People who live in the glare of publicity tend to become consumed by it. Their private moments become completely public events (even the most private thing, their deaths). But to me, though this is life imitating art at its most soreal level, I'm not sure that makes Jade a sorealist.

She could be. I don't know her, and probably - despite the illusion of intimacy - the millions who think they know her actually have little clue. But to me, to be a SOREALIST, you have to be self aware of how soreal your life is. Living blindly in the tissue of art, publicity, gossip, celebrity is the opposite of soreality. It's an unreality.

Being aware

Wed, 03/04/2009 - 13:15 — Marcos DCruze

Yes think you are right in order to be a Sorealist you must be aware of the Sorealismo and I agree Jade is not aware. But does that stop her being Soreal?

That would be it

Wed, 03/04/2009 - 13:16 — Peter Jukes

She's soreal, but not a sorealist

Good bloody point

Mon, 03/02/2009 - 01:31 — sorealism

But here's the problem.... This is not life imitating the poetic truths of art, it's a life imitating the qualities of soap and tabloid. Subreal might be a better word. I'm sure she's a fine woman (?) but all the sentiment and publicity is a self consuming machine that tells you nothing about reality, only about self consuming machines. But maybe that is soreal in itself

Exactly

Mon, 03/02/2009 - 09:14 — vixen

That's the point! But at least we've established that Sorealism is elitist after all. How can life immitate a poetic trurh of art? Surely if something is a truth, it is rooted in life?

Is sorealism elitist?

Mon, 03/02/2009 - 11:47 — Peter Jukes

I suppose that if you mean it doesn't just rate everything 'because it's there', and has no benchmark of quality, then I'd be all for that kind of elitism. Not elitism of people, but of the best quality of thought and image.

Sorealism, if I had my way (which I never do) should be a reaction against the excesses of the post modern 'anything goes', Jade Goody is as important as Leornardo Da Vinci, kind of thing. That's just lazy, and fits in with all the PR guff we're saturated in.

But can we find a better word than elitist?

book navigation

Navigation

User login

new soreal posts

recent comments

new forum topics

new sorealists