The hanging man: death, indeterminacy and the event

This article discusses approaches to the interpretation and analysis an event that is poised between reality and performance. It focuses upon a real event witnessed by the author while driving out of Los Angeles, USA. A body hanging on a rope from a bridge some 25/30 feet above the freeway held up the traffic. The status of the body was unclear. Was it the corpse of a dead human being or a stuffed dummy, a simulation of a death? Was it is tragic accident or suicide or was it a stunt, a protest or a performance? Whether a real body or not, it was an event: it drew an audience, it took place in a defined public space bound by time and it disrupted everyday normality and the familiar. The article debates how approaches to performance can engage with a shocking event, such as the Hanging Man, and the frameworks of interpretation that can be brought to bear on it. The analysis takes account of the function of memory in reconstructing the event, and the paradigms of cultural knowledge that offered themselves as parallels, comparators or distinctions against which the experience could be measured, such as the incidents of self-immolation related to demonstrations against the Vietnam War, the protest by the Irish Hunger Strikers and the visual impact of Anthony Gormley’s 2007 work, 'Event Horizon'. Theoretical frameworks deriving from analytical approaches to performance, media representation and ethical dilemmas are evaluated as means to assimilate an indeterminate and challenging event, and the notion of what an ‘event’ may be is itself addressed.

‘Anything can happen in the next half-hour’: Gerry Anderson’s transnational science fiction

Gerry Anderson’s 1960s puppet series have hybrid identities in relation to their medial, geographical, and production histories. This chapter ranges over his science fiction series from Supercar (1961) to Joe 90 (1968), arguing that Anderson’s television science fiction in that period crossed many kinds of boundary and border. Anderson’s television series were a compromise between his desire to make films for adults versus an available market for children’s television puppet programs, and aimed to appeal to a cross-generational family audience. They were made on film, using novel effects, for a UK television production culture that still relied largely on live and videotaped production. While commissioned by British ITV companies, the programs had notable success in the USA, achieving national networked screening as well as syndication, and they were designed to be transatlantic products. The transnational hero teams and security organisations featured in the series supported this internationalism, and simultaneously negotiated between the cultural meanings of Britishness and Americanness. By discussing their means of production, the aesthetic and narrative features of the programs, their institutional contexts, and their international distribution, this chapter argues that Anderson’s series suggest ways of rethinking the boundaries of British science fiction television in the 1960s.

Temps, memoire et monstres: le monde arthurien de Culhwch et Olwen

The Arthurian world of Culhwch and Olwen initially appears as a resolutely masculine, warrior-based society with little or no place for women. As a rule, the names of the mothers of the many characters remain unmentioned, and even the young hero clearly had no idea of his family ties on his mother’s side. It comes as news to him that Arthur is his cousin. The Arthurian world is equally afflicted with a form of wilful amnesia of the existence of relatives on the distaff side, allowing the giant Ysbaddaden to victimise Custennin and his family with impunity. The hair-cutting ritual represents an intrusion of female memory and a reminder of the biological imperative of reproduction, which means that in order to survive, Arthur’s clan has to be prepared to face destruction.

The tragedy of non-ideal theory

This paper has three aims. First, it argues that the present use of ‘ideal theory’ is unhelpful, and that an earlier and apparently more natural use focusing on perfection would be preferable. Second, it has tried to show that revision of the use of the term would better expose two distinctive normative issues, and illustrated that claim by showing how some contributors to debates about ideal theory have gone wrong partly through not distinguishing them. Third, in exposing those two distinct normative issues, it has revealed a particular way in which ideal theory even under the more specific, revisionary definition will often be central to working out what to do in non-ideal circumstances. By clarifying the terms on which debates over ideal and non-ideal theory should take place, and highlighting the particular problems each deals with, it tries to clear the ground for turning to the actual problem, which is what to do in our non-ideal and often tragic circumstances.