顯示包含「華利」標籤的文章。顯示所有文章
顯示包含「華利」標籤的文章。顯示所有文章

關於文化管理碩士課程的一些建議(作者:華利)

標籤:

倉海君,因為我的 blogger account 有些問題,麻煩幫我將以下一文連信貼出來(呢句貼埋都得):

以下一封信是我給中大研究院,

關於一個叫文化管理碩士課程的意見。我兩年前報了這個課程,亦已修畢,但覺得這個課程有很多地應該要改進。香港本身所謂「文化管理」即「藝術行政」或類似文化機構甚至 NGO 的管理人材本身就很缺,而且還有「西九」,所以這個課程其中一個沒說明但卻明顯的目標:培養西九文化建設的管理人材。可是經過這兩年的學習,不管西不西九,我有點懷疑這個課程能否讓學生真的掌握管理文化機構的基本知識和技巧。詳細的看法都在信裏,不知研究院或相關學系有否理會,現公開出來給有興趣或想報讀者細閱。還有一點請讀者留意,此信寫於本年 9 月,是根據過去兩年的課程提意見,或許今年 9 月或來年有所改變亦說不定,讀者若想作比較請自行向相關學系查閱最新資料。

華利記於 9/12/2008


關於文化管理碩士課程的一些建議


本人所修的課程為文化管理碩士課程(MA in Cultural Management),以下為本人對該課程的建議:


一、關於必修文化研究的問題

本人認為現時須必修兩次文化研究科目沒有必要。上其他課時有老師說過,面對文化議題(例如政策或策展),文化研究理論只是其中一種解讀手法。因此本人認為 只須修一次文化研究略懂基礎已夠。另外,本人尊重王建元教授的學術造詣,但本人認為王教授對很多未接觸過文化研究的學生講授他一些學術 research 理論,並不適合。本人認為另一位 instructor 朱大成博士講授基本理論才令不少學生明白學懂,因此建議只設一科文化研究並應由朱博士講授。


二、加強關於基本管理知識的講授,尤其關於溝通技巧

既然本科為文化管理科目,本人認為與管理相關的科目太少,尤其關於溝通技巧方面的知識,例如最基本的書信、規劃、報告寫作,而且不少老師曾指出學生的書寫 和分析能力有問題,既然如此,應該加強相關的課程和訓練。本人認為,尤其處於所謂資訊時代,加上文化產業本身的特性,溝通技巧非常重要,如果修畢此科的學 生連溝通也沒學好,就談不上其他更專門的訓練。


三、集中關於管理的訓練而非該藝術類型的介紹

此科開設目的為培養藝術和文化產業的管理專才,授課時間和資源應儘量擺在講授管理知識,而且於碩士課程和作為將來的管理人的層次,學生本身應該已具備相關 的藝術類型知識,因此課程不應花時間和資源去介紹藝術知識。例如曾修一科「電影工業研究」,課程本應講授如何策劃影展及其他相關活動,導師卻因為有學生不 太了解 art house 電影而花不少時間在課堂播放電影。如果學生真的不懂電影,應該自己另花時間去補充,而不應浪費寳貴的課堂時間去學什麼是電影。

本人認為這帶出另一問題:收生應該嚴選對文化藝術有所認識的人,若已有相關學歷(如藝術系畢業生)則可以不需面試,沒有相關學歷則透過面試了解是否具備文化藝術相關知識足以應付課程。


四、設分流專修,讓學生選定一門文化藝術深造其相關的管理技巧

文化管理其實涵蓋甚廣,由表演藝術、博物館、視覺藝術以至電影均有所觸及,而且往往各類型只得一科,例如博物館只有一科入門課程,相信學生學懂的的只不過 是皮毛。而且學生須於 4 個學期內選修不同科目,相信修畢整個碩士課程恐有走馬看花的結果,未必對提昇管理技巧有所得着。本人建議應該開設更多課程,並要求學生分流,修畢一些指定 基本課程後,便要專精於某種類型或產業的相關管理技巧。

因此又帶出另一問題:到底文化碩士課程是否適合由 CRS 獨辦,還是應該交由藝術系甚至跨系協辦?4 個學期是否足夠?正因為文化藝術管理跟其他商業管理有很多本質上不同(例如 non-profit making),配備基本的管理知識外,需要對該門藝術有深入認識,而不同類型亦各自有其獨特的管理技巧,需要以專注的學習方式去提昇。


五、發回 assignment 確認成績及作參考

本人認為學系應主動發回已批改的 assignment 予學生確認成績,亦應該讓學生知道導師的評語作反省。但現時情況並非如此。以本人為例,本人曾詢問學系何時可以取回其中一科已批改的 assignment,卻等到學期完後 3 個月才取回,另有一份寄失,亦不是所有 assignment 可以取回。學生只是知道成績,卻因未能取回 assignment 而不知導師怎樣評分,亦不能回應甚至上訴,對學生甚為不公,亦妨礙學習上的改進。


本人希望有關部門/人士能了解上述建議,許可的話亦希望聴取回應,本人(華利)(2006 年入學)的電郵地址為 xxx。感謝有關部門/人士詳讀以上建議。

爛文獎

標籤:

Wisconsin man's mangled prose takes bad writing prize

不正常

標籤: ,

我發覺我身體裏潛藏着一種「包拗頸」的性格。有朋友跟我聊起那兩篇講述我怎樣不「正常」的文字,我們超有共鳴,互相呼應,別人怎麼都不會了解我們,體會不到我們的苦處 ... 聊着聊着,我記起了我有時頗慶幸自己不「正常」。

那兩篇文字,說起我因為自小經歷跟別人不一樣,很多大夥兒在某個特定年紀會做的事,我都錯過了,於是我跟身邊的人甚至整個社會都脫腳了。於是,從一般人或社會的角度看,我其實並不是一個很正常的人。

但又正正是我不正常,我的想法和看事物的角度,也變得不會亂跟大夥兒,不輕易順從主流。這其實很「不孝」的──爸媽從小都希望兒子讀好書做好份工住洋樓養 ... 唔養,爸媽常說貓狗唔乾淨 ... 當我的同學都愈賺愈多,有些也買了房子買了車,我卻開始附庸風雅,有好工也不做 ...

說起來其實很吊詭。爸媽並不是什麼書香世代,從小一直灌輸港人傳統價值觀。但為什麼兒子仍那麼「不孝」?很大程度上因為老爸,他口說讀書賺錢,卻沒有「身教」。最大的邏輯謬誤,莫過於從小講「愛國」。今天港人面對什麼被迫愛國,早二十多年前我已經歷過。那是 1980 年代,我還是個小學生,香港正值一頭栽進經濟、拋開六七十年代什麼認組歸宗包袱的浮華世代。老爸卻不知世道為何,仍舊把他在大陸信奉的守望相助、講理想講革命的親共愛國主義思想,繼續在家裏散播,歷經 1980 到 1990 年代。雖然他口說一套看似跟港人一般會講的資本主義道理,但他其實無意中為愛國主義、打倒殖民地列強資本主義壓迫香港同胞的思想作了身教。老爸並不是現在那些左派機會主義者,而是從前那種很單純為理想但被騙的愛國主義者,儘管他會罵我未讀好課本就去圖書館,或幫學校幫朋友做些沒有着數的事情很 on 9,但我卻聽過他在大陸參與過學生運動,沙士時自願跟鄰居去清潔屋邨平台。

其實老爸所做所教,幾乎跟這個社會背道而馳。或許當初不準孩子交朋友,不買玩具給孩子,跟孩子講愛國,孩子會因此比較遠離主流世界,比較不易學壞。但他也沒想到,這個孩子很有可能會變成一個不會人/社會云亦云的人(當然另一個危機是書呆子或高分低能),於是我不想就此當消費動物不會只想着賺錢,甚至扮哂嘢認為人要思考要講心靈豐足。

說到底,爸媽都只不過希望孩子別像自己從前生活拮据,但當他們見到我不像其他同輩的人一樣「上進」,總會擔心和講多兩句。但也沒辦法,總之我生活沒大問題,其他的,或者從小就定型,很難改。

開始時提及的那位朋友,說過如果只懂賺錢不問其他,也很好,因為有理想有原則一定很辛苦。我也明白,好像失靈的程序,到某一步會不暢順會質問很多事情。如果程序如常,賺錢消費賺錢消費 ... 爸媽也可能沒那麼擔心,也不會見到不平事而奮怒難過。

不過,如果再揀,我還是會揀做一個失靈的程序。

The infinite replication of 606 and 610

標籤: ,



我都係比較鍾意叫果兩個「新移民」做 606 同 610。

source: Banquete Chair with Pandas

La Mer

標籤: ,



不知為什麼,過西人節日,電視台就會重播 mr bean。其實 mr bean 劇集已經是十多年前的作品,由我開始看英女皇仆親的第一集到現在,也是十年以上的往事。可是,每次重播 mr bean,就算出 title 我馬上可以順序講出每一個情節,我仍樂此不疲由頭看到尾。可是當年第一齣 mr bean 電影,我看過一次,但不怎麼覺得好看。

mr bean 玩的是英式幽默。什麼是英式幽默?其實我也不太知道。只不過,知道情節仍重看又重看,那麼,mr bean 吸引人的,很明顯並不是故事。每次看到 mr bean 像傻仔 fing 手 fing 腳,我就會自然傻笑起來。其實 Rowan Atkinson 本身很有表演天份。看過關於他的紀錄片,他是個工程學生,卻走去參加劇社,看到他那時的舞台錄像,他已經是一個能用形體表達自如的演員。

荷李活電影怎樣都要有點高潮起伏,於是總愛搞一些大場面,或者把觀眾都當成白痴低能兒,把什麼東西都說得很明很白,有時講了不夠還可能寫出來。這也是為什麼第一齣 mr bean 長片(對我來說)不好看。mr bean 吸引人就是他的形體動作、他的靜默。把荷里活的電影公式硬套進去,便把 mr bean 獨特處全給刪掉。

這齣最新近的 mr bean 電影 mr bean’s holiday,開場的英國街景,就讓我感到 mr bean 終於「返璞歸真」。然而,我又不想電影會像劇集,否則只不過是把劇集駁長,那又沒意思。那麼有什麼好看呢?

導演頗成功的便是不用翻炒笑了十多年的 mr bean 笑話,但又發揮了 mr bean 吸引觀眾的特質。其實 mr bean 不太需要一個很複雜的故事,反而是如何把他的形體動作、如小孩的心思融入故事裏。於是安排 mr bean 中獎到法國渡假,途中誤打誤撞遇到趕赴康城的男孩和少女,最後大家都準時到埗。故事就這麼簡單。可能因為這麼簡單,才有時間讓 mr bean 表現他的形體動作。而且也容許電影可以沒人說話沒有配樂,有點像歐洲電影。可是有配樂時,我嫌它太 symphonic 太誇張,其實簡單的音樂甚至少些配樂可能會更好。

mr bean 本身的舉動其實已經很不現實,導演甚至把一些夢幻般的場境加進去,好像 mr bean 撞車起來,發現自己忽然身處 20 世紀初的鄉村,觀眾會疑幻疑真導演在玩什麼,疑惑之際,原來在拍廣告。這幕在要講邏輯怕觀眾看不懂的荷里活片是沒可能出現的,也展示了怎樣把早被定了型的 mr bean 翻新,透過夢幻般的電影技巧,同時又展示了 mr bean 經常傻頭傻腦誤衝誤闖的特點。

結尾讓我懷疑是 mr bean 自己想出來要告訴觀眾的弦外之音。當大家都一窩蜂湧去康城,擠在眾聲沸騰的頒獎台上,他卻獨個兒,一心一意地,終於找到他的海灘,走向早被安排好的 La Mer。

electronics for dogs

標籤: ,


很多很多年前,還是小學生的時候,有次看見同學拿着遊戲機,不知為什麼,我問,「說明書係邊」,同學說,「丟了啦」,我於是說,「沒說明書,那怎麼玩」,同學很不耐煩,「自己試下咪得囉,跟咩說明書,唔通說明書叫你跳樓你跟住跳 ...」

從 懂事讀書直到出來工作,老是不自覺想着所有事情都該有些準則,怎樣才算做得好、什麼不應該做等等等等,可以讓我跟隨。就算應付某些事情根本沒有什麼規則, 我還是會不由自主先從學校裏學到的,或者從別人(最好是某些讓我折服的人)講過的道理之中,找出應對的準則。如果找不到,也會莫名奇妙沒頭沒腦憑一點點直 覺虛構一些準則出來。

我一定要跟隨一些規則。不跟隨的話我會很不自在。

這些規則好像一個倒模,我嘗試去遷就 fit in 進去,而不是憑着我的需要和經歷,去塑造這個倒模。就這樣做了很多傻事。看自己根本不喜歡看的書,與很難相處的人做朋友,堅信一些看上去很美好其實不適合自己的信念。

說 真的,找規則去跟隨,或者做傻事,其實沒什麼大不了。問題是當我認定某些規則後,我會像中了咒般,一定要跟隨到底,過了很久才發現有問題,才懂得停止。讀 書讀壞腦,天生愚鈍,讀 science 太久,只會看 model answer,易受人影響 ... 到底有什麼東西讓我有這種想法,我其實不知道。很多時候會不知不覺為自己劃界,甚至傻到認為世界只會跟住一條法則去行。我不敢過小小界。

*    *    *

老是以為自己想的東西不會盲從主流。曾經看書說, 居住的地方要有露台,因為有這個這個和那個好處。還有,香港人付了半輩子賺的錢買個沒有露台的房子,卻沒發現有問題,仍沒頭沒腦為地產公司和銀行打工。於 是找屋租時,總之不要像一般香港人不注意 quality of life,於是要找有露台的村屋。找到了,但住下去就會發現,露台被一幅牆隔絕,要開大門才可以走到露台,其實跟沒有露台沒分別。連露台是什麼也未看清 楚,就學人找露台。

就算我相信了一些所謂 alternative 的想法,但其實這些想法只不過是我從別人口中聽回來,到底這些想法能否跟我的性格和處境切合?有沒有好好去明白和親身體驗這些想法?假如我看了聽了便盲從 堅持,那麼其實跟那些所謂盲從主流的人沒太大分別。只不過大家相信的不同罷了,而顯現出來的愚昧則不相伯仲。

有些朋友不用聽什麼人講或看什麼書,也可以憑自己的經歷和判斷,領悟出那些不會盲從主流的想法。也因為是自己領悟出來的,於是能夠不斷堅持自己的想法,可以不費力知道怎樣捍衛這些想法。這才叫做獨立思考。在這個時代,能真正獨立思考就是 alternative。

*    *    *

很多時候聽說讀書成績不好的人,出來工作反而表現 很好。在現實世界,只要你可以完成一件該完成的事,沒說要跟從什麼什麼準則或方法不成。讀書不好的人,所謂不好是因為不跟課本和考試規則,不跟從預先被設 定的某一種準則或方法。所謂高材生便是因為懂得跟從這一套方法,而被獎勵。既然被獎勵,當然就不會去想如何可以用不同方法去達到相同目的。甚至連自己也相 信了這個世界可以運行也只靠一種方法。然而,可以在課本學到的方法,往往都跟現實世界脫節。到真的走到現實世界,還用以前課本那一套,據我的經驗,會比較 容易失敗。成績不好的人沒有跟從那套課本教授的方法,卻可以發現另一個世界,又或者他早已跟隨現實世界的腳步。

我既不是高材生,卻又用着高材生的處事方式。真糟糕。

如果靠思考和平常經歷也可以悟出所謂學者或經典所懂的道理,為什麼一定要靠讀什麼經典或依附什麼權力才算獲得什麼道理?讀什麼書誰說過什麼又有什麼相干?只不過要想通一些事情吧。

註:圖為 Grand Day Out 劇照

集體回憶

標籤: ,

集體回憶好像針藥,近來不斷注射進我的眼、耳、口、皮膚。每當這 4 個字由新聞報道員的口裏飄進我的耳裏,或在紙上電腦螢幕上靜默地讀着,皮膚的毛管便不由自主豎得直直的。我不知道為什麼,只不過覺得,這個詞聽來有點別 扭,真的,本身這 4 個字讓我聯想到,這個城市那種懶得思考,「人講你又講」所產生的跟風做作。若果真的要說這 4 個字使我想到什麼,立即就想起大陸改革開放前的「集體什麼」...「集體生產」、「集體早操」、「集體上廁」... 這些鼓吹人民大團結的概念和宣傳口號。不過抵着豎毛管的難受再去想清楚,集體回憶便是有一班人有共同的過去,於是好像中小學班裏同學開茶會去旅行,留下美 好回憶。可是又因為「集體」這個 prefix,我又想到,中小學這些活動,如果你不參加,不合群,就會被人說你「摺」,甚至不是一個好學生,因為好學生除了要「學習為了求分數」,也要積 極參與集體課外活動。

這 4 個字會加入評估古跡文物的準則裏。如果成事,我想我會申請保留沙田某間哈迪斯為受保護文物。十多年前,家教深嚴得簡直妨礙我學會基本的社交技能。一個十 五、六歲的中學生仍不可以跟朋友出外玩。於是我挾着什麼要集體做功課等不可不出外的藉口,成功溜出去跟同學到沙田踩單車。踩了半天便到那時剛開的哈迪斯歇 腳。因為難得出外,印象特別深刻,成了我的美好回憶,還有同行的人的美好回憶,店裏不相識的顧客也該感受到的我的美好回憶,集體回憶 ...

Somewhere in the 20th Century - 'Brazil', a 1980s View on the Technological and Information Age

標籤: ,

In early 1980s, computers were still regarded as large machines processing electronic data. The ‘electronic data processing’ was a popular term, which reflected how people perceived computers at that time. In 1984, Macintosh computer was introduced, and marked the breakthrough of personal computer technology. It promoted the idea of ‘user-friendly’, by virtue of graphical user interface, eradicating entering complicated text commands to make computer do things. The model, concept and the habit of using a personal computer today, such as operating through GUI with a mouse in addition to a keyboard, was originated from the standard of this first Macintosh computer introduced. The easiness of operating a computer helped to speed up the development of the technological and information age in the coming 20 years. Today the term ‘electronic data processing’ is rarely used, and is replaced by ‘information technology’, to reflect the change in the concept of how computers are used - they are small, or even portable, and become vital tools for our work, study and even daily life. Not only we can process data, but also search and present information, and refine information to our knowledge with computers. The data or information do not confine to text, and also multi-media. We can get entertainment from computers, which poses a threat to traditional media business, such as TV, radio, and music and film industry. The early 1980s, therefore, marked a historial moment of the technological and information age we now experience.

People at that time could foresee that the coming of technological and information age, which was pushed by the technological revolution of personal computer. At the same time they seemed having much doubts and fears about how the society would change. Such doubts and fears were represented by some science fiction films, such as Bladerunner , which illustrated a ‘high tech’ but ‘low life’ city. Even entering the early 1990s, the making of the animation series Wallace and Gromit still shared similar concerns, such as the reliability and the misuse of technologies, which could in turn become crisis for human beings.

In this article, I’d like to study how people in the early 1980s perceived the technological and information age coming, in a sense of fear and crisis, from the analysis of a science fiction film, Brazil , released in 1985. After 20 years, when seeing the film today , people may find Brazil some how predicted some changes which really happen now. It would be interesting to see why people at that time could think of the changes happened today, and also the changes they guessed wrong or missed.

Background and synopsis of Brazil

Brazil was filmed by Terry Gilliam, and its screenplay was written by him, Tom Stoppard and Charles McKeown. There were 3 versions during the theatrical release of the film. The version to which I refer in this article is the 142-minute director’s cut. It is the version which followed the author’s original idea of making this film.

A s what the caption said ‘somewhere in the 20th century’ in the opening of the film , Brazil was set in sometime of 20th century, and the location seemed to be a high-tech or ‘cyberpunk’ city, with information easily accessible, and fully electronic automation of home and office. The main character Sam Lowry, worked in the Ministry of Information (MOI), met his dream girl Jill Layton when she reported a mistaken arrest of her neighbour as a terrorist by MOI. Jill was pursued and in danger since the authority wanted to hide the mistake made. Sam tried to rescue her but failed, and was finally underwent ‘frontal lobotomy’ by the authority.

Information and power

Gilliam revealed that the film was inspired by George Owell’s 1984 , and the working title of the film was 1984 1 / 2 . Owell’s 1984 was a novel, published in 1949, of 3-part story: ‘The first part deals with the world of Nineteen Eighty-Four as seen through the eyes of Winston; the second part deals with Winston's forbidden sexual relationship with Julia and his eagerness to rebel against the Party; and the third part deals with Winston's capture and torture by the Party’ (Wikipedia: Nineteen Eighty-Four). The structure and the story of Brazil are much alike those of 1984 , as what Gilliam said, ‘written from today’s perspective’ (Wikipedia: Brazil).

Gilliam replaced the ‘Party’ of 1984 with ‘Ministry of Information’ in Brazil . We can see that people often relate ‘power’ with ‘who control the information’ in the information age or cyberspace. Barker cites Touraine that ‘the dominant class is that group able to access and control information’, and we will have ‘technocrats and bureaucrats counterpoised to workers, students and consumers’ (Barker 2003: 162). In the film, the head of MOI was the Deputy Minister named Helpmann. MOI was a large bureaucratic itself, had its security team and weapons, and c ould interrogate any suspects without any formal reason and explanation.

The relation among several characters in the film showed such ‘power-information’ connection. Sam’s first boss Kurtzmann trusted and depended on Sam very much, since Sam knew how to use computer to solve various problems for him. Sam was the son of a late senior information official, who was the Deputy Minister Helpmann’s good friend. Sam’s mother, despite she did not work in MOI, could request getting Sam promoted as she liked. Sam’s relatives and friends often told Sam going to see a doctor since he rejected the promotion. Sam’s mother got respected everywhere while Sam, since he was not promoted and not well known, was often rudely inspected in restaurant and party, until her mother told them he was her son.

We can see from the film that, after entering the technological information age, the authority and corporation were ‘centralized’, e.g. Central Services, Central Computer, Central Banking. As Mosco suggests, ‘power sets the pattern for the principal direction of production, distribution, and use [of technology]’ (Mosco 1988). Why the author of the film suggested a ‘centralized’ structure for the authority and the corporation in the information age, is that it facilitated the collection of capital and the surveillance.

But from today’s development of information technology, we can see a very different picture of social structure: a community-based relationship exists in the cyberspace without central control . People can do anything they like once they connect to the Internet, without much worries of the interference from the authority. Even some governments exercise content filtering, people can still find ways to pass through the roadblock. Gilliam and others in 1980s might overlook the technology of network, or later, the Internet, which was not known by ordinary people at that time.

Bell cites Porter that ‘the aim of current systems of power is to make people accessible to computers (rather than vice versa), since computers are “perfect” disciplinary (and disciplined) machines’ (Bell 2001: 84). Therefore ‘computers do the work of supervision (or surveillance) ... also produce three other effects of discipline ...’ (Bell 2001: 85).

A surveillance society

The city presented in the film showed us how people thought a surveillance society would look like in the coming technological and information age, or, in the urban space built up from cyberspace. Apart from the robots with cameras, connected to a CCTV system, monitoring peo ple, the author imagined that the ducts (or, wires and cables) were everywhere, penetrated deeply through the physical infrastructure, home and the office. At the beginning of the film, commercials were showed to emphasize the importance of the ducts in daily life. The information, in the form of papers and documents, were transferred through the ducts, without the need of human interference. Another use of ducts was for air-conditioning, and also other automatic devices installed at home and in the office. It was illegal for people to reapir those ducts or the devices without the permission of Central Services, a market-dominated corporation, which might be related to the authority. Another character Harry Buttle was regarded as terrorist, since he provided service repairing those devices himself. Audience could see ducts everywhere in the film, being an outstanding symbol for the devices and tools facilitating authoritarian surveillance.

People often thought that technological and information age assumed a highly surveillance society coming , even in the ‘Western’ capitalist world in 1980s. Robins and Webster believe that, by citing Focault’s concept of panopticon - ‘a machine that ensures the infinitesimal distribution of power, one that turns the monitored individual into a visible, knowable, and vulnerable object ’ - ‘on the basis of “information revolution”, ... the social totality ... comes to function as the hierarchical and disciplinary [p]anoptic machine’, and so ‘we can see that a technological system is being constituted to ensure the centralized, and furtive, inspection, observation, surveillance, and documentation of activities on the circumference of society as a whole’ ( Robins and Webster 1988). Apart from the ducts mentioned before, there was a dialogue repeated several times, ‘you can’t move without a form’. People in the city presented by the film had to fill in different types of paper forms in order to do almost anything, for t he authority could control people’s daily life as far as possible . Volumes of paper forms were then processed by computers, with the help of large number of people working in different departments of MOI. At the beginning of the film, a moving shot showed the MOI department for which Sam worked, which was a gigantic office, messed around by countless staff. The complicated form-filling surveillance, also contributed to the formation of the bureaucratic, the MOI, in the story. Such form-filling surveillance also had the panopticon effect, expressed by an exaggerated humorous scene, in which after Sam asked the 2 Central Services technicians whether they filled the forms required or not, the technicians were in panic reflexively since they did not. In fact, almost any character was highly alert when he or she did not want others know what they did. For instance, Sam’s first boss Kurztmann had to make sure nobody tapping in his own office, even there seemed no tapping he still dared not talk very loud with Sam about his troubles.

Brazil: a gigantic office, messed around by countless staff

In mid-1980s, the development of Structured Query Language (SQL), the syntax widely used to manipulate database today, became standardized and improved. Today’s use of SQL in almost any database application was based on the version released in 1992. 1980s was the period when the effectiveness of database quickly improved. People at that time could already conclude that we would live together with database in the coming years. Poster claims database as a ‘super-panopticon’, which ‘[i]n its electronic and digital form, the database is perfectly transferable in space, indefinitely preservable in time; it may last forever everywhere’, and ‘is no one’s and everyone’s yet it “belongs” to someone, to the social institution that “owns” it as property ...’. So ‘[t]he database is a discourse of pure writing that directly amplifies the power of its owner/user’ (Poster 1995: 85). It ‘transform[s] our acts into an extensive discourse of surveillance, our private behaviours into public announcements, our individual deeds into collective language’ (Poster 1995: 87). Database was not explicitly specified in the film, and was an invisible but the most valuable facility. The department processing database information had more power than the one entering data. With the information retrieved in the database, people could be interrogated without knowing being pursued and their actions recorded. For instance, Jill was quickly known for its witness of mistaken arrest by various characters after accessing the central database record.

A consumer society

In a scene there was a boy answering Santa Claus that he wanted a credit card as his Christmas gift. Gilliam predicted our capitalist way of life would perpetuate in the technological and information age. Robins and Webster claim, with Garnham’s perspective of political economy, that ‘[t]he function of new technologies “to develop the market for so-called information goods and services as a new growth sector” that expresses both “the needs of the corporate sector for enhanced communications facilities and the increasingly desperate national search for a share of the international market in high technology products.”’ (Robins and Webster 1988). P eople in 1980s, in fact, already kn e w the economic value of information, such as financial data. W hen the society enters information age, in which having information means having more profit or even power, a ‘pay-per society’ stated by Mosco (1988) will emerge. Mosco suggests that ‘new technology makes it possible to measure and monitor more and more of our electronic communication and information activities ... business and government see this potential as a major instrument to increase profit and control’, which results in ‘pay-per society’ (Mosco 1988) . Such observation could be reflected by the beginning of the film, in which, as the authority dominated the information collection and retrieval, Helpmann was interviewed and talked about ‘information retrieval charge’. Every time if MOI was involved in handling application or operation, the people had to be charged. When Sam was interrogated after he tried to rescue Jill but failed, not only the officials asked him many questions, also the legal and insurance counterparts promote their services which could suit Sam’s need. It was possible since those counterparts could get relavent information from MOI easily and quickly .

The surveillance stated before not only helped monitoring public activities, as showed in the film, also acted as a way to promote physical goods and products. TV still appeared everywhere in the film, not only the programmes but also the commercials, for example, the ‘ducts’ commercial at the beginning of the film. Office staff could peep TV programmes at work like us today. Robins and Webster seek the example of cable television networks, which ‘can continuously monitor consumer preferences for programming material, along with the details of any financial or communicative transactions’ (Robins and Webster 1988). It was interesting to note that, the staff peeping TV programmes at work in the film, was similar to what we do today, such as surfing the WWW during work. But we cannot say Gilliam predicted it, as it was believed that he only wanted to show the effect of TV in the information age, since he, as I said before, like other people at that time, did not know that the network and the Internet technology will soon became mundane.

Such ‘consumer-information’ connection was not only reflected by the authority controlling information, also reflected by the domination of service provider, or the ‘centralized’ concept. People could only rely on the services and products, such as ducts, provided from Central Services. The wife of the mistaken terrorist could not get refund since she did not have an account in Central Banking. People had to rely on the Central Computer from MOI to buy things and do transactions. A character had said that everyone could not live without the Central Computer.

Technology determined subjectivity and identity

Sam got promoted and went to work on the first day. He asked the reception whether he was required to present his ID or be inspected. The reception answered him that ‘you can’t be anybody’, and so there was no need for him to prove who he was by himself. In the information age, as presented in the film, everybody has his or her identity determined by the information recorded in the database. You are in fact a number to the authority, not anyone or not even you. From the view of Foucault, a subject is ‘the product of power which individualizes those subject to it’ (Barker 2003: 229). With new technology, the authority wanted to control everybody, who could be anyone as the authority requested. The story of the film was developed from the mistaken arrest of Buttle, as a terrorist, who should be Tuttle. After Sam got promoted, he was assigned another number. The security team of MOI only recognized him with his number and his MOI badge. The team had to follow strictly the instructions of the MOI officials, no matter who the official was. Mosko states, according to Foucault, that ‘[t]he individual becomes the ob ject of surveillance, no longer the subject of communication’ (Mosko 1988). Sam could ‘kill’ Jill by deleting her record in MOI computer. This reflected what Foucault notes, ‘a system of individualizing and permanent documentation: the observed and scrutinized individual, subjected to continuous registration, becomes object of knowledge (of files and records)’ (Mosko 1988). Ultimately, the film presented the worries, through the ‘centralized’ concept, about ‘increasing centralized state and police surveillance/intelligence activities’ (Mosko 1988).

Foucault suggests that ‘discourse (as regulated ways of speaking/practice) enables speaking persons to come into existence’, which is done by ‘offering us subject positions from which to make sense of the world while “subjecting” speakers to discourse’ (Barker 2003: 229). The discourse here could be ‘database’ in the film. In fact, various views on subjectivity and identity of the film stated could be again accounted to the ‘super-panopticon’ suggested by Poster :

If we looked at databases as an example of Foucault’s notion of discourse we see them as “exteriorities” not as constituted by agents, and we look for their “rules of formation” as the key to the way they constitute individuals. Databases in this sense are carefully arranged lists, digitalized to take advantage of the electronic speed of computers.

(Poster 1995: 87)

Then he points out how different such super-panopticon forms subject from what Foucault suggests:

Foucault argued that the subjects constituted by the panopticon were the modern, “interiorized” individual, the one who was conscious of his or her own self-determination. The process of subject constitution was one of “subjectification”, of producing individuals with a (false) sense of their own interiority. With the super-panopticon, on the contrary, subject constitution takes an opposing course of “objectification”, of producing individuals with dispersed identities, identities of which the individuals might not even be aware.

(Poster 1995: 93)

Buttle would not know he became a terrorist, until somebody was arrested by mistake. In the end, since Sam objected the MOI, and tried to deviate from the thought of the authority, he was regarded as guilty and mad, and had to undergo ‘ frontal lobotomy’ - even his dreams were controlled and invaded by the authority with technology to make him not to be oppressive - he was really controlled and ‘identified’ by the authority with technology.

Technophobe and urban space

Gilliam was pessimistic about the changes in the technological and information age, or a ‘technophobic’. We could see from the film that many problems and troubles happend because technology was not reliable. Butte was mistaken as terrorist because the machine which printed the report was malfunctioned. Sam woke up late because his clock did not run, so the automated devices at home were not operated to wake him up. Later his air-conditioner was out of order, and he could not sleep like normal (will we now cannot sleep if the air-conditioner broke up). Gilliam wanted to present that those ‘technophobic’ problems were , in fact, caused by humans. People should make those technological products more reliable, or at least would not cease people’s everyday life even the products broke up. The repair service provided by Central Services was very poor. Sam called them about the malfunctioning of his air-conditioner, but he only got the answer which said that it was not service hour and could not help him. The technicians could not give help due to the bureaucracy and the complicated form-filling procedures. No matter how the technology evolves, Gilliam wanted to tell the audience that technology might not make our life better, as the key factor is still humans. How they design the technology, how they use the technology. Though Gilliam was ‘technophobic’, he did not interpret ‘technophobic’ simply by ‘technological determinism’. In 1980s, corporations continued to grow by merge and acquisition, and people could see the domination of market, especially the technology products and services, from those large corporations. So Gilliam would imagine a dominated service provider Central Services, and had some relationship with the authority. It was the domination or ‘centralized concept’ eventually contributed to people’s ‘technophobic’ thought.

In the film there were many scenes about Sam’s dreams. One of his dreams was that he fought with a Japanese samurai. This could be another sign of Gilliam’s, or the Western world’s technophobe in 1980s. Many film critics claimed that the metaphor of this scene was the Western world’s fear of the import of Japanese electronic goods and technological products. In 1980s, Japan became one of the main designers, researchers and manufacturers of those electronic and technological products in the world. Their products were cheaper but high quality, and could compete with those made by the US and Europe. Why Gilliam represented technophobe by a samurai was because of the worries about the fear of the domination of Japanese technological products in the Western world.

The urban space illustrated in this film was not alike what the William Gibson’s work or Bladerunner presented, which was called a ‘cyberpunk’, a ‘high tech’ and ‘low life’ city. Some places in the city in the film were neat and clean. Especially the high and grand buildings, because Gilliam thought of information age from the 1980s situation, represented the authority, and made the audience think of Fritz Lang’s Metropolis , a 1920s film illustrating a future urban space. There were still places that were old and dirty, with poor people living, but unlike the ‘film noir’ tone presented in Bladerunner or other ‘cyberpunk’ works.

The film was set in 1920s to 1930s props, fashion and buildings , and had many propaganda posters. Baudrillard has some comments related to propaganda:

All through the 19th and 20th centuries political and economic practice merge increasingly into the same type of discourse. Propaganda and advertising fuse in the same marketing and merchandising of objects and ideologies. The convergence of language between the economic and the political is furthermore what marks a society such as ours, where ‘political economy’ is fully realized. It is also by the same token its end, since the two spheres are abolished in an entirely separate reality, or hyperreality, which is that of the media. There, too, there is an elevation of each term to a greater power, that of the third-order simulacra.

(Baudrillard 1983: 125)


Brazil: the propaganda appeared everywhere

Today we can easily encounter huge outdoor advertising. In fact, the propaganda appeared everywhere in the film was a metaphor of today’s huge outdoor advertising. Though the propaganda in the film was often a political statement, it some how foresaw the continued use of image in urban space when entering the technological and information age, to promote any political or consumer message to the public , or even create hyperreality .

Conclusion

Barker notes that ‘the development of electronic technologies that are intrinsic to contemporary cities is bound up with issues of social power and conflict’ (Barker 2003: 370). Brazil showed how people perceived technological and information age in 1980s, in a way different from William Gibson’s works or Bladerunner . Gilliam perceived the technological and information age from the real world at that time, such as the import of Japanese goods, the strong economy of the US and the UK at that time. The challenge of terrorist bombings in the film could summarize what Barker said ‘social power and conflict’ due to the development of technologies. The bombings were as ordinary as having lunch in the film, in which the characters did not have much feeling about them. This was what we face today. The development of technologies not only creates a surveillance society (like the US today), but also labels some people not agreeing with the authority’s or power’s thought oppressive (like the conflict between the US and Islamic world and the problem of terrorism). The film could give us a brief review of why some problems happen in the information age we now encounter.

References

Barker, Chris (2003) Cultural Studies: Theory and Practice , SAGE Publications

Baudrillard, Jean (1983) Simulations , Semiotext(e)

Bell, David (2001) An Introduction to Cybercultures , Routledge

Mosco, Vincent (1988) ‘Introduction: Information in the Pay-per Society’, The Political Economy of Information , edited by Mosco, Vincent and Wasko, Janet, The University of Wisconsin Press

Poster, Mark (1995) The Second Media Age , Polity Press

Robins, Kelvins and Webster, Frank (1988) ‘Cybernetic Capitalism: Information, Technology, Everyday Life’, The Political Economy of Information , edited by Mosco, Vincent and W asko, Jan et, The University of Wisconsin Press

Wikipedia (Brazil) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brazil_(film)

Wikipedia (Nineteen Eighty-Four) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nineteen_Eighty-Four