So I thought Adorno was tough last week but this week, we're asked to read Habermas. Now once again he isn't someone new to me. The public sphere is something that has been discussed before in my academic career but it's not something I've fully understood. Below is the definition of the public sphere that I have created after reading both the Habermas and Fraser Articles.

The public sphere allows private citizens to come together to discuss matters of common concern which than become part of the public opinion. Much of this talk has to do with the policies and activities of private governing institutions who process some kind of control over the public. This type of arena facilitates argument and provides a place for social interaction. The public sphere is a place created by discourse. In does not exist in any physical state but instead exists in a metaphorical sense.

It allowed people to discuss their ideas in a free and open way for the first time and became a crucial force in both the American and French Revolutions. This is where print became particularly important as a way to spread political discourses. People seized news papers and used them as political tools. Newspapers changed from being institutions that dilervered news to leaders of public opinion. This state was short lived, as the news papers moved to become more about consumer interests and the selling of ad space.

Personally I think it's be interesting to hear Habermas discuss the internet in terms of the public sphere. Although it does serve as a vehicle in which people are able to discuss political ideas it's be hard to say that it expresses public opinion. These discussions are usually fairly limited as people are keen to look up only information that they are already comfortable with. So if you are into communist politics you are not going to search for something on the opposite end of the scale and if you do it is most likely to end up in a flaming war, not coming to any concrete solution.

Also the public sphere is meant as something that brings people together. But to me the internet is something that is increasingly keeping people apart. Because of the internet I have had the opportunity to keep in touch with I would say about half of my graduating high school class, through blogs , facebook and other social networking software I have been able to keep tabs on these peoples lives with out ever needing to have a conversation with them. But I only am able to see what they want me to see. I can only see them as they exist online in a world of their own creation. How do I know that person really exists and isn't just a projection of who would like to be rather than who they really are.

Adorno is someone who I've never really been able to understand. I've been asked to read his work for a few classes and each time I sit in front of my book confused. His work is so dense and heavy that even after a few readings I still have trouble understanding and explaining what it is he is trying to say . So I'm going to try my best and engage with this reading as well as I can , at least i can say that I tried

The ideas that to me are the most prominant in this articles are mass deception and social control. As a society on the most part we are taught to think rationally and reasonably. This way of thinking plays into the hands of mass media and leads to a society in which there is no individualism. We are meant to play our roles knowing that someday we will receive a reward in return. We are taught to follow social norms and therefore play our part in a social hierarchy. If we are a good citizen we will get a reward. If we work hard we will get a raise. If we follow the rules and don't cause trouble there will be a payoff at the end. This leads to little chances for social change.

We are convinced that we must buy into this system to fit in and than that the system is what we asked for in the first place. Now this is all understandable to me because of the situation that Adorno was in. Living in Nazi Germany it must have seemed like everybody was buying into the Nazi's platform. People turned neighbors and friends that had known for years into the Gestapo because it was what the masses were doing at the time.

I don't know how well these ideas translate into today. Although on the surface it may seem like a lot of people are still following the crowd and doing what society tells them to there is a lot more leeway these days in which to move. The internet has allowed people to explore new ideas and options. If say I don't like the clothing that is offered at the mall because it's all too trendy and I feel everyone will be wearing the same thing I can log on to the internet and find something original that fits with the person I want to be and have it shipped to me. I can also create my own media with youtube, blogger and even facebook which allows me to spread my own ideals and find others who agree with them.

At the same time we are also more free to stand up against popular ideologies. Look at the war on Iraq for example, people feel free to show their disgust with the war in public places. Even if there are still people living in the states who believe that it's the right war because the government says so, I still don't feel that people feel unsafe showing their opposition.

Protesters at Nathan Phillips Square

Knitting Nation

I like to knit. My obsession with knitting started in high school fashion class , after we were done making pajama pants for our main project our teacher Ms . Stone sat us down and taught us how to cast on and off and stitch and pearl. I was hooked right away , the sound of the needles clinking against one another, the gratification of making your own fabric and the knowledge that you could make almost anything you could set your mind on. I started knitting all the time, Stitch and Bitch became my favorite book and all my friends got scarfs for Christmas.

This is why when I saw knitting nation on the list of class links I jumped at the chance to write about it. Now I've heard of Knitta, Please before, a group that goes around doing what is called "Knit Graf , a type of graffiti that involves knitting around or on public objects. I was expecting something similar when I clicked on Knitting Nation, but was surprised when I found out differently.

examples of Knitta, Please works

Knitting with a machine is something I have no experience with. I feel like it takes the fun out of knitting. Instead of letting the yarn run through your fingers and wrapping and pulling it around itself over and over you become more of a guide. You tell the machine what and where to knit well the machine does the work. No longer is the object being created solely yours but it becomes a product of the machine.

One of the reasons I love to knit and sew is because it makes me feel connected to what I wear. Going to the store and buying clothing gives you a connection to the process of buying the object, you don't know where it was made or how. You become disconnected with the process of production. I think this is one of the dialouges that Liz Collins is trying to create. By setting up knitting installations where a group of similarly dressed people sit over knitting machines , knitting . Here the work that has been outsourced away is shoved back into our faces. We become aware of ho much work goes into the clothes we wear. How long someone has to sit hunched over a machine , so that we can wear the latest styles. Liz also uses a lot of iconography in her work like the American flag. She uses it as a way to display her frustrations with a government and war that she doesn't agree with.

Nina Felshin defines activist art as so "This cultural form is the culmination of a democratic urge to give voice and visibility to the disenfranchised, and to connect art to a wider audience"(pg10).

Before the 1960's art was mostly an institutionalized process. But just like pockets of the rest of society artists begin to question the institutions that they felt were being harmful to society. They were set on giving a voice to those who had none. It was also a time of change with in the media, which allowed for artists to explore new avenues in which they could produce and distribute their art. Moving art out of museums and out into the streets.

It's hard for me to imagine a time when art wasn't public and available. Growing up in Toronto art was always around whether it was Val Kilmer's smiling face, a swing in an alley, a pole turned into a bass, the Murmer project or Style in Progress's annual graffiti day.

At the start of her article Nina mentions how activist art is the 90's is reaching critical mass and becoming institutionalized. I don't really agree with this statement from personal experience. In Toronto alone you can see this type of work at all levels, you can see the gurriella girls work at the AGO ( when it was open) , walk down the street to Kensington market and view activist art on the streets, pick up a spacing magazine or attend a Toronto Public Space committee meeting.

It's also interesting to note a move away from the collaborative activist art to more of an individualist view. With solo artists such as Banksy, Rene Gagnon and Owen Phillips working alone it seems like the days of activists collectives being the main stead when it comes to activist art are coming to an end. This may have to due with the nature of the work itself. It's a lot easier to sneak into a museum and set up your own art alone than it is to do so in a group. It also allows for artists to explore a topic more indepth and avoids in group fighting witch normally leads to disbandment.

Not saying that the collectives are disappearing altogether, in high school I attended an arts camp. Here I met a girl named Lori , in the past couple years Lori has been instrumental in setting up a group based in Toronto and New York called New Mind Space. New Mind Space creates interactive public art that ranges from LED installations, subways parties and giant pillow fights intent on taking back public space for the public. Which in Toronto seems to be a common theme amongst a lot of activist art.