So over the weekend, the narrative scientists in Hollywood emerged from the lab with good news of two more reboot’s:

The Rocky Horror Picture Show: But this one’s for TV (you know that now cordless wonder that’s going to reinvigorate narrative and replace movies). Plus…

Spider-Man is coming back. This time as a TEENAGER.

In addition, Film and TV and potentially INTERNET TV have fused forces (to spread NARRATIVE SEED in as many directions as possible) to give us an epic (8-hour plus) mythic/potentially post-apocalyptic Western from Stephen King.

And if Hollywood didn’t satiate your REBOOT FEVER over the weekend, well, Washington (or Hollywood for ugly people as the saying goes) brewed up a little something for you in a vat:

Yup. Hillary Clinton is back for another run at the Presidency. My guess is Hil 2016 will follow the tried and true rhythms of REBOOT FEVER (keep the source I.P. and throw the rest to the wind). But let’s use another Washingtonian spectacle to provide useful contrast to HILLARY’S RUN, and allow us to delineate the difference between a REBOOT and a SEQUEL. Because there’s telling differences between a SEQUEL and a REBOOT and these terms sometimes get used interchangeably, and they shouldn’t: THEY’RE FUNDAMENTALLY DIFFERENT.

A REBOOT generally requires some erasure of the mythology. The SEQUEL builds on pre-existing characters and narrative tropes.

The second IRAQ WAR was a SEQUEL: It retained some aspects of the original narrative from ’91 (Saddam is a tyrant who gassed his own people). It recast the lead role with THE SON instead of THE FATHER (shades of sci-fi epics). And crucially for a SEQUEL, they went BIGGER with the STAKES (we were fighting them there so we don’t fight them here. Saddam become a direct threat to America).

They also upped the BUDGET considerably, and got way too many people involved in spinning the new story, a veritable writer’s room of A-list tenured bureaucrats (Powell at the UN, Condi on the Sunday talk shows, Rummy’s snowflakes (shades of Don Simpson‘s epic coke-fueled memo’s), so the plot became downright unintelligible, a familiar trait of most sequels.

And like most SEQUELS: It was more EXPENSIVE, BLOODIER, and ended with everyone unsatisfied. It permanently dented the FRANCHISE.

Hillary in 2016 will not be a SEQUEL to the original. The foundational narrative was REJECTED by the viewers, unlike Iraq War I which was a big hit, therefore the sequel could DISAPPOINT. No, Hillary 2016 will have to be a REBOOT. They’re going to strip it down to the bucket seats and leave only what people responded to in the first version:


And this is the problem with most reboot’s: We never even asked for the ORIGINAL; it was just served to us. And now we’re supposed to get on board and shell out more money, while they fine-tune the original after the UNVEILING.

I actually find HILLARY 2016 to be more spirit-crushing than Hollywood’s REBOOT FACTORY:

If Hillary Clinton is elected president in 2016, hell if she even assumes the NOMINATION (which seems given), it means not only have the American People become unable to envision THE FUTURE, it means we’ve also lost the ability to fetishize the PAST. It’s not like the Clinton days were some halcyon time of American renewal. They were riddled with foreign policy fiascos (Somalia, Bosnia), dozens of dead bodies (frequently their friends), and the persistent stench of desperation flop-sweat from mania’s of all types (not just the nympho variety). The entire nation had to look like a college student taking the “walk of shame” for eight years. This is the NARRATIVE we’re supposedly desperate to see return.

If Hillary Clinton can provide us with anything, perhaps it’s an END-POINT, an end to an interregnum. The moment the ability to envision a FUTURE (even a HORRIBLE ONE) finally arrived. It’s the end of the FUTURE. At least, THE HUNGER GAMES (also subject to post-facto sequels soon), envisioned a HORRIBLE FUTURE, but something tangible nonetheless.

Nostalgia may be a second-order ersatz desire, but at least there’s some trace of DESIRE there no matter how self-willed. There’s no nostalgic desire for Hillary Clinton, just a desire for TIME. But TIME stripped of future, denied any utopian element, and posited as a LITERAL MATERIAL BLOCK, a cinderblock. THIS HAPPENED. We remember her and this HAPPENED. We can’t see the FUTURE, but maybe we can turn back to a PAST, regardless of the original result.

If Hillary Clinton is elected, this may be the time for accelerationist politics to move from being a primarily aesthetic movement to a full on BATTLE PLAN. The CRISIS you’re looking for may have finally arrived.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s