Affective Theory Graduate Seminar
Department of Communication
The University of Memphis
Monday, September 10, 2012
"I have a voice"
So much of what we read for this week center around the question of "voice", "speech", and "scream. I thought that this video from The King's Speech would be interesting for the discussion of the affect and speech.
I am intrigued by the relationship of speech and having a voice as expressions of power. The underlying narrative of The King’s Speech is a man’s search to find his voice. This implies that without a voice, he does not have the power to be king. There is also a line in this clip that questions the nature of power, “Does a king do what he wants, or does he do what the people expect of him?” I think most people would view the idea of king as the embodiment of power, or at least, one who holds power. God, being the King of kings, has the greatest power. Yet if the king is bound by the needs or expectations of his people, does he really have any power? So who has the power, the king or his subjects? Even the term “subjects” implies a line of thinking that contradicts the notion that they, the subjects, hold power. If, as some argue, power is negotiated, then power requires agents to conduct the negotiation. As such, no agent possesses power in the absence of other agents. Power is a product of relationship and can be said to exist only to the extent that the relationship exists. This makes me think that perhaps there is no such thing as power, rather we have only the sensation of being acted upon or compelled because we do not wish to face our own culpability.
I am intrigued by the relationship of speech and having a voice as expressions of power. The underlying narrative of The King’s Speech is a man’s search to find his voice. This implies that without a voice, he does not have the power to be king.
ReplyDeleteThere is also a line in this clip that questions the nature of power, “Does a king do what he wants, or does he do what the people expect of him?” I think most people would view the idea of king as the embodiment of power, or at least, one who holds power. God, being the King of kings, has the greatest power. Yet if the king is bound by the needs or expectations of his people, does he really have any power? So who has the power, the king or his subjects? Even the term “subjects” implies a line of thinking that contradicts the notion that they, the subjects, hold power. If, as some argue, power is negotiated, then power requires agents to conduct the negotiation. As such, no agent possesses power in the absence of other agents. Power is a product of relationship and can be said to exist only to the extent that the relationship exists. This makes me think that perhaps there is no such thing as power, rather we have only the sensation of being acted upon or compelled because we do not wish to face our own culpability.