z-logo
open-access-imgOpen Access
Jim Morrison
Author(s) -
Scott Sundvall
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
hyperrhiz
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
ISSN - 1555-9351
DOI - 10.20415/hyp/023.r15
Subject(s) - rhetorical question , rhetoric , meaning (existential) , reputation , doors , icon , shit , art , aesthetics , philosophy , sociology , law , literature , epistemology , art history , political science , linguistics , computer science , programming language , operating system
We have much to learn from the rhetoric of Jim Morrison (and The Doors) and the rhetoric employed by Jim Morrison (and The Doors). Scott Sundvall‘s piece argues that the rhetorical tension of the band partially rests on their still-today reputation as the “band you love to hate,” but also partially on the fact that they (Jim in particular) were also the “band that loved to hate you—the audience and everything about rock and roll.” And there is a positive feedback loop between the two. After all, The Doors in general, Morrison in particular, were about the (rhetorical) meaning in a lack of meaning, insofar as rock and roll itself was dead. Morrison, Sundvall suggests, was the centerpiece of such a rhetorical exchange and comportment. You either love getting your faced shoved into the shit, Sundvall/Morrison argues, or you’re going to get your kicks in before the whole shithouse goes up in flames—in true Nietzschean import. All right!

The content you want is available to Zendy users.

Already have an account? Click here to sign in.
Having issues? You can contact us here