Discuss

19 Responses to “Kiki and Bubu: neo-Marxist sock puppets join dating service, get friended by China, get taken down from YouTube”

  1. bumblebeeeeeee says:

    what?

  2. Itsumishi says:

    Is the featuring of Jabba’s Palace Fair Use?

  3. SedanChair says:

    BUT MARXISM IS RESPONSIBLE FOR ALL DEATHS EVER

  4. Punchcard says:

    It certainly is long.

  5. FoolishOwl says:

    eHarmony rejects applications by atheists, so I’m not sure how neoMarxist sock puppets or the People of China would meet. It also rejects applicants seeking same-sex relationships, though I’m not sure of the gender of Kiki, Bubu, or the People of China.

    • Boundegar says:

      Some of the people of China are male.  Some are female.

      • FoolishOwl says:

        There’s something about this video that makes it very difficult for me to make a joke about it.

        EDIT: It’s not exactly fast-paced, but the pacing and child-like styling makes the build-up to jokes all the better.
        “Let’s leave creationism to the liberals, Bubu. They need easy targets to try their lame weapons of criticism on.”

  6. eldritch says:

    Oh, monochrom. I wish so bad you made any sort of sense, or had any sort of point. You’re like artsy trolls who fail to realize they are trolls. You put so much effort into making strange and bizarre things that could in theory be cool – I want to like them, I really do! – but somehow it always just comes across as an exercise in purposeful obtuseness and confusing people for shits and giggles.

    It’s like Dadaism, but without the underlying satirical criticism of a specific school of thought.

    • To paraphrase Foucault: It’s not important what you want to know, but why you want to know it.
      I can assure you there is a lot of straight-forward criticism in “Rated R Us” — but a) maybe not the one you are looking for and b) not in the way you want it served.

      • eldritch says:

        Which would seem to reinforce my point that the material is obtuse and confusing. I can’t speak about “Rated R Us”, having no direct contact with it, but lack of clarity seems to be something of a hallmark of monochrom works. There’s a message there, somewhere, but without fail it is hidden, purposefully concealed. Why? For what reason?

        What benefit is there in being so obtuse? If you have legitimate statements to make, why not make them in a way that they will actually be understood by those who aren’t already so enamored with your views and methods that they’ll patienty sift through the chaff to get to the grain? Everything monochrom does feels like a giant in-joke, or snide insider criticism of others. Even when a monochrom work has something good to say, it feels like it’s saying it mockingly and for the unkind amusement of those who already share monochrom’s point of view.

        There’s a thin line between satire and self indulgence. I suppose my major complaint is that monochrom seems to me to somewhat inelegantly straddle that line, almost purposefully. Just my two cents.

        • I have this discussion all the time. Not even about our work, but about art in general. Art is polyvalent, and asking (even calling!) for clarity — a very subjective criterium — is a common rhetoric gesture, but not very helpful.
          We are (referring to the school of thought you are asking for) first and foremost leftists, with friendly ties to the Situationist agenda and Post-Structuralist philosophy. And we like to tell stories. Your say that we ‘purposefully conceal messages,’ but you could also call it ‘poetry.’

    • bumblebeeeeeee says:

      so it’s just BS?

  7. Meta-question: how do I delete posts?

  8. Interesting side story. We showed the video at the Biennial in Venice, and some strange Italian right-wing blog reported that we got funding from the Communist Party of China. Darn, what a great conspiracy.

Leave a Reply