Skip to main content

Slow vs. Fast

This recent New York Times story illustrates how the Slow movement (i.e. Slow Food, Slow Cities and the rest) is parallelling the Futurist movement to an uncanny degree. Both originated in Italy, for starters, but even beyond that, both movements seem to originate from a sane premise that then spins off into slightly less-sane pursuits. 

100 years ago, the most avant-garde artists -- the Futurists -- were embracing many of the things the Slow movement is now setting itself against. While Futurism is most closely associated with visual art, architecture and -- unfortunately -- Fascism, the Futurists were interested in influencing all aspects of human life, beyond the aesthetic. 

Consider this 1931 Time Magazine article about Futurist food and compare it with this description of Slow Food International: "an international organization whose aim is to protect the pleasures of the table from homogenization of modern fast food and life."

Though one movement began in an effort to reform the art world and another began to support sustainable agriculture, it is easy to see the cultural legacies of both are not limited to those realms. In the present day, the Futurists' love of "speed, virility, technology and war" seem somewhat distasteful, though it is clear these ideas are still glorified in contemporary culture. In contrast, the aims of the Slow lifestyle seem so virtuous as to be almost pious -- and thus intimidating. We live in a Futurist's dream, but somehow long to escape from it, turn back the clock to a time before the labor of skilled artisans was deemed no more than "filthy and worm-ridden and corroded by time" -- as long as we can take our iPhones with us. 

Meanwhile, we have seemingly embraced the Futurists' love of speed so completely that Slow advocates find it necessary to create speed bumps for the home, and baskets that will tip over if you fill them too fast. One can imagine F.T. Marinetti's reaction to such ideas (he would probably have set the basket on fire and run over the speed bump with a motorcycle). 

It's clear that, despite their flaws, the Futurists did manage to have a profound effect on society that reached far beyond the Italian art world. And it's already clear that the Slow movement has extended its reach from the kitchen, as the Times article puts it, to take over the rest of the house. But are hand-stitched garments and temporary chandeliers really enough to stem the tide of the (seeming) acceleration of contemporary life? Or did the Futurists do too good a job of seducing us with their arguments for embracing the noisy, fast, mechanized world we inherited?  

"An unhurried sense of time is in itself a form of wealth."
-- Bonnie Friedman, New York Times

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

"The Efficiency Expert" - a film review

An efficiency expert will almost always play the villain or the fool in any fictional scenario. His rigidity will be mocked, and he will eventually proven to be narrow-minded. The people he sets out to study and correct will teach him some valuable lesson about how there are things that are more important than efficiency. He will throw away his stopwatch at the end, and fall in love. Or something similar. So it’s no surprise that Mark Joffe’s 1991 film “The Efficiency Expert” sets out to follow this well-traveled path in its nostalgic look at labor, management and “modernization” in 1960s Australia. The theme of the movie can be grasped virtually entirely through the first few scenes, which contrast the old-fashioned, companionable folks of Spotswood, a humble Melbourne suburb, with the dour and by-the-book efficiency expert brought in to “modernize” a failing footwear company. Yet, curiously, Joffe hasn’t bothered to make his workers sympathetic, nor his efficiency expert unreasonable

Dipping into the stream of media

From The Daily Star : After writing last week about my secret longing to stumble upon the occasional Christmas program, I started thinking about intentional versus unintentional consumption. I don't mean "unintentional consumption" like realizing you've eaten an entire box of Girl Scout cookies in one sitting. I mean leaving the TV on after your favorite program is over and watching whatever comes next, or putting the radio on just to have a little background noise. This is the cultural experience I still associate with TV and radio: an ongoing stream of content I can dip into at will. My current experiment with on-demand viewing has made me realize, however, that this is an increasingly archaic idea. Thanks to the Internet and devices such as digital video recorders, fewer people are dipping into this ongoing stream of content. Instead, like myself, they are siphoning off their own selective streams that contain only the content that interests them. I can't deny

Read all about it

"An American will never meet, or even know the names of more than a handful of his 240,000-odd fellow-Americans. He has no idea of what they are up to at any one time. But he has complete confidence in their steady, anonymous, simultaneous activity." -- Benedict Anderson, " Imagined Communities ," 1983 When Anderson wrote about the origins of modern nationalism, he selected the newspaper and the novel as cultural touchstones that exemplified man's ability to visualize himself as part of a unified mass of people who share a common understanding and experience of the world they inhabit. This "imagined linkage" of "print-capitalism ... made it possible for rapidly growing numbers of people to think about themselves, and relate themselves to others, in profoundly news ways." Today, of course, we need no literary devices to lend the impression of simultaneous experience; thanks to the Internet, we are instead having simultaneous experiences all ov