BLAST BLAST!

I hardly think I am the only one to have come away with this impression, but here it is:  I found Blast quite severely, even oppressively masculine, at least in a traditional, Burkian sense.  The intense heaviness of the text, the insistence on frequent capitalization for the sake of emphasis (there's a reason constant italicization is discouraged in most forms of writing), and the sharp, dark style of the artwork featured within all manifested a raw, powerful form that made me think over and over of Edmund Burke's treatise on aesthetics, where he describes the "sublime" as intensely masculine and the "beautiful" as feminine, and where the crags of a mountain are masculine and awe-inspiring, while the curves of a woman or a pastoral landscape are feminine and softly appealing.  This gendering of art is one that I have seen before, which resonates quite strongly and yet also oversteps the boundaries of offense.  The attitudes the magazine seems to take towards women are all rather condescending, yet in almost an affectionate way that is quite redolent of Burke.

Not only is the magazine quite blatantly sexist, albeit in a manner that considers itself protective and affectionate towards the "fair" sex, but it is absolutely pretentious.  It endeavors to tear down both the indolent wealthy and the pathetic poor, raising itself as something removed from both and superior in its removal, a sublime ascension from the muck of humanity.  It attempts to soften this message through, again, an air of affection and even something of the child's appreciation for its mother, but nevertheless speaks like the stereotype of a university student who turns up his nose at his less educated parents while claiming he appreciates them for bearing and supporting him in his studies.  I can hardly criticize those who derided it for discarding not only the bad but the good of the past—the journal sounds very much like a teenager who thinks himself brand-new, revolutionary, and uniquely burdened with glorious purpose.

BLESS all those who catch my references and my purpose for this post.

I know I am speaking in a rather emotional and less logical language about the journal at the moment, but I am quite keen on setting down exactly what I think about it before I settle for the class discussion.  In addition, I mean to make a point of how sensationalist, broad, and equally emotional the language of Blast seems to be. 

(I will, however, confess that the energy and passion of the 'zine does appeal to me, on a certain level, which it is certainly meant to do.)