Sarah Palin, mediocrity and noise film

One of the things that we've inherited from science is its culture of specialization. To function in a technical culture, you need to possess a great deal of specialized knowledge; without it, you are easily dismissed. The same premise has become a part of the arts as well. I clearly remember one of my undergrad profs criticizing an artwork saying, "it was the same idea I had just seen someplace else. That's why it's important to keep current." Art has become a discourse like science and requires a similar understanding of how one's work fits into a broader contemporary context.

The problem with this idea is the extent to which it makes it easy to be dismissive of others. Placing such a great emphasis on discerning the quality of practice framed through the criteria of a specific discourse often causes us to diminish the voices of other people. We potentially lose shadings and meaningful takes on ideas that we have already deemed naive or irrelevant. It's not like I want to see more artwork about the nature of passion or the ineffability of existence or the alienation of the artist. But we should not automatically dismiss the sum of an artist's thought simply because it begins with ideas that seem to us tired and worn.

Which brings us to Sarah Palin and noise film. The impetus to write this blog entry came when I started trying to understand Palin's popularity. What is her appeal? Why are her advocates so willing to ignore her misleading statements, her poor professional preparation and her vapid interview performances? And it occurred to me that what Palin represents is the voice of people dismissed by technological discourses. Palin's seeming faults (e.g., her misleading statements), then, are simply politics, a way in which she appropriates the grammar of an existing discourse for use against that discourse. Criticisms that she represents a culture of mediocrity only serve to signify the contempt that those in power have for those who are not part of their discursive "elite." Flubs on Palin's part illustrate the fact that she really is an outsider. Palin's reflexive, unthoughtful understanding of leadership shows her refusal to submit to technological authority.

Noise film, then, is Palinesque in many ways. In its barely good-enough craft, it too strains against a culture in which money and the impeccable skills of a trained elite are used to confer a false authority on beliefs. Like Palin, noise film is a homespun product with rough edges. Yet, there is one essential difference. Noise film is an experiment that results in a product existing on a cultural periphery. Palin, on the other hand, is a creature of achievement bent on entering a culture of power.