Stripping Spectacle

By: Jonathan Seidel

The art of stripping: professionalism absent intimacy (Barthes, 84-85)

Strip clubs are hangouts for desperate men seeking validation. A night on the town for an enjoyable evening to splurge. A way of entertaining the spectacle of undressing. Near naked women dancing for the audience’s delight. Yet it is the middle of undressing without intimacy. A professionalism that solely observes without touching. The ideal is desiring the nakedness without seeing it. A moment of gradual build up that never pops. Keeping the mystery at arms length, keeping the excitement rolling. 

Historically stripping can be found on cave paintings. Ancient Sumerian myth tells of Inanna the goddess of love who in her descent into the underworld removed an article one gate at a time. Stripping was originally designated for fertility. A striptease was a measure of elevating the libido of a potential mate. Arousing the interest of the male. A theatrical movement that encourages excitement from the male counterpart. The male’s gaze fixated on the female’s body. Her once clothed self is erasing. Her covered cleavage is showing. Her modest demeanour shaken with sexual fire. Slowly she undresses, unveiling the secret of her sexuality. Her nude body protected by clothing. A modesty of enshrined purity. Her adorned body is pure flesh bare vulnerability of her selfhood. The personal exploitation of the self. Opening up to another at the core of self consciousness. Hesitating removal in fear of takeover. Calmly undressing in gradual faith in the other.  

She is exposed but in doing so influences the desire of the male mate. Each article of clothing represents a layer of defence. A layer of mystery and reproach. She divulges her body one rose pedal at a time. A process of engaging the body. Intoxicated by the desire for her sexuality. The more revealed the deeper the sensation. The male libido rises with each revelation. The slow subtle removal hypnotises the desired connection. The libido is confounded by emotional overload. Her actions permeate his mind. Filling his brain with sexualised doses of obscurity. Her vulnerability invites him in. She undresses to gage his readiness. To indicate to him of her desire for him as well. A mutual effort induced by flirtatious apprehension. He is seduced into her bodily revelation. Marked by her beauty and her desire to procreate. Her striptease is a call to invite him to partake in the experience.     

Her body is idolised. Her beauty is pinpointed and gazed upon. Clothed she is solely another female but as she undresses she imparts a divergence from other females. She is deviating in routine. Her beauty is becoming more apparent as the tattered clothes binding her are removed. Her smooth skin is clear to the ogling observer. He can’t but stare hypnotised by her beauty. With each article discarded his gaze becomes more fixated. He is marvelled by her beauty seduced to her increasing angelic form. Bare is to be purified from the toxic coverings hiding the truth. Exposed she is free and graciously elegant. Objectified in the seductive refraction. She has positioned herself as an object of concentration. The gaze only strengthens, popping out of their sockets. Beholden by her beauty subjected to her theatre. Her wish is for his encroachment to swarm her. Endorphins secrete as the sensation thrusts him toward her urging him to grab her. Yet he holds himself back wishing for the play to persist.

Theatrical uses in Ancient Greece and Rome play a different role than the fertile aspiration or brothel enjoyment. It is crystallised into a form of art instead of art form. Fertility desired male initiative. A flirtatious expression to wound up the observing male. To gather his attention and cast him under her spell. By alluring him with her impulse. Inviting him into her sacred space. A place of secrecy only for those who are awarded such permission. Disrobing is close contact theatre. Watching a play unfold in real time. The audience is in on the action. He is an actor in the play. Riveting in its proximity. Feeling the emotional pressure overwhelm his mind. He is locked into the performance. His eyes target her movements. It is for the entertainment. For his heart to skip as his endorphins heighten. His emotions bouncing in jolly excitement. Her beauty unfolding in front of his very eyes. Encapsulated by the wonder beholden to the unknown. 

She dances to focus his gaze toward her body. Her movements are styled and choreographed to perfection. The dance coveys a story with emotions sprouting from angelic sidestepping. Communicating messages to the audience. Her seductive messages engulf the audience in the spectacle of sexual desire. The dance is nonverbal, swaying her hips as his eyes further fixate on her elegant figure. Her dance spells professionalism. This dance is a performance. It is restricted access. Gaze and ponder at the beauty. Enjoy the production. So close to the action and yet so far. Hypnotised into the spectacle of her dance. Captivating his mind in the process. Communicating her information over to him. For him to sit back and enjoy the show. The climatic insurance is the absence of touch. Her dance is on the stage. Her exposure is to longed for. The mystery though steps away is worlds away. She is an object of mystery that is lusted and enjoyed. 

Private endeavours allow touch but one way. For the stripper to control the event. For the audience to enjoy the dance and movements. She is touching him but he cannot touch her. He is to relax his body with his eyes concentrated on her every move. Yet at times his emotions overwhelm him and he reaches to grab her body. His desire compels his egregious sin. Her objectification of mystery is perceived as his for the taking. His out of bounds action, his ruthless selfishness is akin to breaking the boundary between professionalism. He has been overtaken by his insidious thoughts. Her mystery is even more desirable. She has stripped but there is more. She controls and he desires to regain the authority. To proactively gather her into his arms. The nefarious action is an incitation taken too far. A drunkard with a control complex. The dancer is allotted protection from overwhelmed audience members unable to hand the striptease. Overcome with desire of the classic taboo. 

Interest in the striptease is in its lacking nudity. Nudity is the climax and the momentarily end to the mystery. The continuous unveiling of clothing is the excitement. The more cleavage the more curiosity. Yet with all clothes off, the beauty is there but the mystery is gone. The wonder fades into awe but normalises in time. Nudity will raise men’s hearts to the bare beauty but there is something missing. It is the almost nude that has the greatest success of endorphin release. Sexuality is at its peak in underwear. What do her boobs look like, is her vagina shaven. Covering up these places only spells mystery to the observer. Removing each covering expands the wonder. The first deduction is false maybe it is this way. The unknown increases the emotional investment. It is with the minimal covering that seeks to inspire more desire. She has nearly exposed herself but relinquishes that possibility. She keeps the mystery hidden. Retaining her purity in her professionalism. Sexualised up till her moment of cessation. There is a moment of persisted inquiry. He must know but once he knows that is it. The emotional investment has reduced. 

It is called a tease for a reason. It attempts to provide a considerable detailed possibility without revealing the answer. All the hints without the solution. Estimate, guess, only heightening the emotional engagement. A moment of lacking clarity. A murky wonder confounds the mind. Regressing to the bare animal is seductive in its aspirational intent. The tease is the absent intimacy. The relation is strictly professional. Even if a lover’s striptease is a performance. Do not intervene just observe. The object of concentration is disrobing and unveiling her truth. She is touched once her body is naked. Once she has revealed it all can she be touched. The foreplay is intentioned to raise the libido. To arouse the excitement. A lover who has seen her naked body is still aroused by her disrobing spectacle. He knows what to expect. The mystery is no more but the gradual unveiling is still impactful. It still fixates his eyes and motions his brain. Hypnotised ever again. 

Intimacy is the moments following the nude. It is the realisation of the sexualised. The climax in her underwear fuels his passion. He wishes for her to become nude to reveal the mystery haunting his memory. Wishing to grab at her clothes and tear them off. Yet he patiently awaits her action. Calming himself to enjoy her control. Prioritising the connection over the function. The connection is fraudulent, a hoax. A way of enthralling the male mind for a tease. To chase her around the park for her to show him what is in her palm. Finally tackling her she opens her hand and there is nothing there. The tease is a stage of indeterminacy. Hope for more but forbidden. The tease is a latent distraction for potentiality. A desire menacing in its compulsion. The lover undresses subtly hinting to nudity but reaching there on her own terms. The lover incites his investment holding out for his passion to reach its climax. Her objectification lasts as long as she has yet to unveil the mystery. Tarnishing her sanctity to the mundane.

Her performance is lauded. A desire for something he can never have. He watches from afar holding himself back. In awe of her beauty his libido rising with each step to nakedness. She is objectified and fixated. He cannot tear himself away. Placing himself in an illusion of aspired emotional interest. A sexualised pursuit cut short by climaxed hope. A mystery to remain hidden. To tease the possibility of sexualisation only to keep the audience guessing. Pondering of her true figure of her bare beauty. A mystery professionalised and produced in a spectacle of excitement.

Interlocking Machinery

 

By: Jonathan Seidel

A system of objects: belonging before being and undignified existence

The other is projected as a substance of objectification. The other is manifested in complete peculiarity. Stunned and confused by the other's rampant differences. Even the simplicity of a parent is an other. One need not utilize a mirror to recognize difference. The fact that you are not me is intuitively a division from oneself. I cannot understand your prerogative nor control your actions. The realization baffles but routinely comforts the soul. Otherness is a starstruck moment but one that is easily overcome in the futility of youth. Before the other can even be comprehended the self desires the other. Instinctively, rejecting the grasp of another until comforted. The other needs but a moment of engagement to be accepted by the infant. Serenity shrouds the emotional distress. Otherness is an embrace of concern. 

Infants are less capable of defining otherness. Selfish in their desire to be cared for. Their attention seeking mania can be upheld by anyone. Comfort is normalized in the routine of the cared other. The awakened infant may intuitively deny a cousin holding her given this irregular feeling. The instinctive rejection is not malicious but a stranger danger reaction. A fight or flight syndrome. Her way of fighting is calling for help. A mini damsel in distress. Yet if the cousin routinely soothes her or a consistent babysitter will slowly become accustomed to this change. Otherness is recognized by a sense shift. Appearance is younger, voice is higher, weight is lighter. It is these changes that alarm the infant. Even if she cannot explain verbally why, there is a cognitive swift response. Bells ring and the infant yelps for help. The cousin of babysitter must explain who she is and her role. Demonstrating via comforting action that she is not a threat but a caregiver. 

As the brain develops so does the child’s understanding of otherness. A child lost in the mall will cry for her mother. Scared and alone, she does not know what to do instead of express her fear in tears. The tears alarm those around her and enable bystanders to come to her aid. Children are gullible. The lost child will resist the stranger’s approach. Yet his calming words will embrace her sorrow. Asking her where her mommy is and assisting her in returning is a steady step in the correct direction. The rational brain has developed overpowering the instinctive skepticism. He is not my mommy but he is promising to return me to her. Understanding his intent and scared pushes her to make a desperate act. The stranger is no longer someone passing by but a helper. He will personify himself to assist her. He is no longer an object but a subject. Someone who has unveiled the otherness stonewalling any prior connection. Once she returns to her mother so caught up in her fear she hugs her mother and forgets to thank the man. The man returns to an object finished with his task.

Children are self-centered. Everything revolves around them. Otherness is a pact against them. The story of life is theirs. A Truman Show type mentality. Whereby the protagonist of this world is the child’s journey with actors aiding in her development. The troubling event traumatizes but aids in the child’s development. The individual is honored to assist the lonely child. Yet her mission ends with the conclusion of the play. The daughter is returned to her mother and they live happily ever after. Life is just a sequence of continuous storylines. The man’s objectification is the child’s lack of interaction. The child knows by routine engagement. She may forget his name upon leaving the mall. Her memory is not engraving this event nor her helper at the forefront of her mind. It is not consciously selfish but subconsciously irrelevant to her plot. 

Even in youth, there is little that resembles otherness beyond action. Children in the park care quite little for appearance. Children are simple. Playing in park with different races or genders is normal. As long as the other accepts your entertainment. Sharing passions for children is the highlight of friendship. It has much to do with getting one another. Living close and playing often emboldens that situation but long term friendships are those that mark significant energy on the child’s part. Friends from the park are park friends. There is little engagement beyond this. This does happen in adulthood as well. People do have their ball or bar friends. Yet in youth there is less categorization. The other is quickly embraced as someone like-minded. Children who do not enjoy your passions will be ignored or cast aside. Sometimes even bullied for their difference. Many of these friends are conditioned by the event encountered. The child enjoys his friend on the playground but if far away or different communities that little engagement leads nowhere as the child grows up. Consistency is necessary beyond the playground especially when fun at the playground is outdated.

Teenagers incorporate complexity into their deduction. The other again does not fit into mold of the teenager’s identity. The more recognition of the self imbued, the more projected. If one is more religious then those who are not may be considered outsiders. At times teenagers are less interested in individualistic passions and more group values. “Classist” models become well apparent and a hierarchy of popularity is acquainted. Where these values emerge from is irrelevant, the niche is the interests placed to fit in. What is cool and not cool becomes a desire to be accepted. From infants to teenagers, each wish to receive attention. Wishing it from people one’s own age. Family has suffocated attention, it is time to spread out. Aware of this notion, this competition and aura. Its the non-athletic teenagers eventually from their own group to share that comforting spirit of belonging. The soloist is not a bully mongering scheme but a friendless weirdo association. A stigma for attention seeking popularity and a personal urge to be liked combines for fitting in. Whatever group that may be. 

Otherness slowly gentrifies in the remoteness of an individual. A transfer student may excel or fail in a new school. The awkward nature of the new kid inquires of his place in the school. Categorization has been destined and completed. Even if this may be freshman year, it is the superficial nature of the other. Teenagers are in between childhood and adulthood. Seeking independence from their parents but yet not independent enough to be alone. The solution is a middle-ground of friend group independence. Higher awareness of otherness whether that be appearance or speech meets its match in befriending others. It is easier to befriend a single person but the group requires not only quantitive acceptance but also qualitative acceptance to vibe with the group. In a group, fitting in means altering projection to comply. It is a shrewd representation of the self. The self is subjected and yet an object to those outside the group who recognize the apparent hypocrisy. 

The new kid fears to make the first move. He is the reflected object. Friendless and alone with little knowledge. His mystique may arouse interest or isolate him. Yet his confidence verbally or actionably tests his worth. To which group will he fall to. What is his fate. An athlete may aid his stock but also may hurt him. If he is good for the team without hurting someone else’s spot will congratulate him but if he is messing with an established vision that may tease his burden. Yet consistency with players on the team will unveil his distance. Hanging out more than just during practice will bring him closer to the group. Friendship will grow the more revealed in time. There are many variables. His success may invite condemnation. If the new kid steals one of his teammate’s girl that may spell disaster. Every move is observed. Hawk eyes judging each step if he is fit for their crew. Walking on thin ice even if he aligns completely with the crowd. 

Staying with the new kid example. If he is a foreign exchange student. An immigrant with little knowledge of the layout. Barely speaks the language misunderstands the culture and thus left alone. Athletic capability will help his stock and finding those passionate. Basketball is its own form of communication. There is a poetic license to masterful play. He is objectified as the weird new kid until that barrier is breached by a niche level of communication. The otherness is cleansed in the compatibility with the subjects. He is no longer some random individual but a part of the basketball group. Finding a crew is necessary for his being to be pronounced. His barrier is his belonging. The foreign kid is a testament to his outsider agenda. He alone unless he can overcome.

A crush follows the same formula but instead of the group dynamic it is a sole individual. Though there are group variables in peer pressure but I digress. The crush is an object of imagination. Emotional feelings pair up minutely against the logical meshing of personality. This is certainly the case, pondering of any friendship with another but even more so when feelings for the other usurp logic. Fantasies may emerge but cannot do justice to the realistic portrayal. Asking a crush out is a personal unveiling with a simultaneous transformation. No longer is she an object of indirect thinking but a threaded message. When she says yes and the relationship begins the awkwardness of infatuation struggles to voice conversation. Frequent conversation reduces the distance to embracing otherness as a reflection of the self.

There is a melting pot theme that is muddled by a priori propaganda. Surface differences whether in appearance voice or smell. These differences may halt advancement. Peculiarity has immediate shock effect not long term distance. Only as the mind advances does clarity of cultural discrepancies divide. The mature mind weighs differences and backs accustomed outlook. Propaganda becomes enmeshed in the circuit of representation. It is the group polarity that constitutes membership. Membership excludes the outsider. Individuals can push past differences but groups entitle themselves away from others. Stronger group identity may turn former subjects into objects. Whether that be a former friend entering a group or outside the group. The dynamic changes perception of the other. 

Though at times, the objectification has little to do with preconceived notions and more with pure ignorance. An old friend may transition to an object. Thinking about their life after moving away is not in the dignified conversation. It is necessarily wrong but a recognition of change. People change and an old buddy may be a stranger to you. He is an object gazing at his shift and alterations. What may be is not what is conceived in the mind. The other is a stranger to the self. Confidence aids in unveiling that masked objectification but it does not cancel it out. The experience following the initial shock encounter subjects them to personalization. Otherness is no more. It is breached with brazen action. Deductions are concocted lacking real data. Internal argumentation with little value beyond the alienated intent. 

Wanderers are small outliers. Most people find a relative camaraderie to belong somewhere. Their essence wound up with their connections. People walk in groups compromising their individuality for the whole. Existence is weary in its fundamental relation to itself. Human variance consults value alignment. There is a desire to connecting with others. Yet the other changes over time. The youthful liberal becomes an aging conservative. Children find their group niches and stick to the plural mindset as they develop. While friends may change the community exclusivity is an inevitable part of progression. Otherness is erased quite quickly in youth but in adulthood is carefully monitored. The mature mind surrounds with like-mindedness. Stubbornness sinks in and little advancement is done to alter the echo chamber. Objects remain on the periphery uninvolved and disengaged. 

Free Puppets

By: Jonathan Seidel

Commodification: the need to control—from humans to objects

Consumerism is not a modern concept for humanity but is for the average individual. The Industrial Revolution and technological advancements placed the citizenry in the valve for enjoying life’s materialism. Yet the materialistic drive is age old for the rich and elite. While these riches came in many forms from lands to jewels the most notorious was humanity. Objectifying people as slaves is best known. Today workers are subjected to inhumane measures. Yet the greatest hierarchical challenge is top-down residue of slavish ownership.

Slavery creates an inferior decadence. Slaves ere treated as cattle. Though not every slave owner was a monster, subjugating other person to property demonises their esteem to exist. Property with little autonomy or liberty. It was a complete objectification of humanity. They were no longer human in their libertarian sense. No rights no automatic groundwork. A debt to an owner with unilateral power. 

The slavish personification was felt by women in their inferior position. Children also were slavish in a sense to their families. Both groups were denied the individual gratification. Instead nested by societal folklore. Responsibility is important but so is freedom. A balance must be struck but depriving individuals of basic choice. A slave to the system at large. Born into societal roles with little transcendence. While there is not necessary an issue with destiny, there is when others take advantage of their roles. Determined roles is gruesome when those placed in other roles place their role as the superior aspect. Using their privilege to discount the other. Whether it be a king, a business man or a parent. Positions of power are inevitable in ownership societies. Someone needs to be in charge and direct. Yet it is the misuse of power for personal gain that dismantles the concern. Children are to be taken care of as a responsibility given their immaturity yet treating them as an object only destroys their childhood. 

Mental fortitude is the measure of ethical relation. Placement is ever necessary but the vertical or horizontal axis is entirely arbitrary. The governmental apparatus is ideally horizontal but is realistically vertical. Its mission of representation is reconciled as authority. Democracy has constructed an order that works for the people and yet that does not occur. Governmental officials have placed themselves on pedestals with their own interests in mind. Even on behalf of the people they do what they believe is correct. The system is corrupt as it objectifies the people as something to control and needy maidens. The down-up revolutionary paradigm is an illusion. Perfected on paper but undermined practically. Their authoritarian presentation in positions of power apparently reconciles as a spectacle. The arrogance of an obvious choice is merely a privilege. A gift by the people. Chosen means accepted not subjugated. 

The same routine is placed. Abolishing a practice does not erase the vice completely. A new target is selected to keep the fire alive. Slavery was ended and yet torturous conditions for workers persisted. With every polemic to overcome a hurdle progression has been made. Worker’s rights have long been increased and are continuously evolving. Yet this is not true of the governments’ power. Their promise to protect and care only gives them more power. They are a devilish spouse. Deceiving the people into conditioning dependence.