I was introduced to the moebius strip a long time ago. And it challenges me more now in the context in which Baudrillard chooses to present it. From what I understand it is that meaning has become distorted because it is difficult to distinguish between the abstract or the simulation and the reality. But essentially there is no reality, maybe I'm leaving something out here.
Something that I found very intriguing that caught my attention: "For manipulation is a floating causality where positivity and negativity engender and overlap with one another where there is no longer any active or passive" (30 Baudrillard). This especially is demanding, at least I believe so, of my attention in order to better understand what is happening. Manipulation can lead to overlapping positives and negatives for both parties involved, but by having that grey area where it is difficult to distinguish between simulation and reality, there can no longer be an act of 'active or passive'.
Baudrillard then brings up 'dialectical polarity' (31 Simulations). I had to look this up and further inform myself. And from what I understand it is one's ability of potential awareness or lack of awareness. I'm not sure exactly where this fits into play but if anyone else knows; drop a comment. I think that when he introduces the Watergate as a simulation he is explaining why and how it appears to be so: "In a field unhinged by simulation, then all determination evaporates" (31 Simulations). I want to think that the issue here is that Watergate is the simulation in which that 'dialectical polarity' is involved where the scandal is 'unhinged by simulation' creating a lack of a resolution.
Comments
Post a Comment