Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2005 02:14:41 +0100 (BST)
From: Gondo -Minnie <gondominnie-AT-yahoo.co.uk>
To: deleuze-guattari-driftline.org-AT-lists.driftline.org
Subject: [D-G] =?iso-8859-1?q?ne=C3=B9robr=C3=A4in?=


put fold on lesbian brain and the viewer in the lab
will seek to fold floods of hurricanes absolute
nonsense connected with non fecund flows. change this
sign system by speeds shift in my brain baby!!
---
deleuze-guattari-driftline.org-bounces-AT-lists.driftline.org
<pretzelworld-AT-gmail.com> wrote:
> the grammar is useful in many many ways. It is
useful to maintain a
> credible logos. Like an externalized socialized
hypocampus. Grammar is
> also super important to create for capitalists for
translating the
> "unknown" into logos to be used as rhetoric and the
power of the
> differend. Ideas like "the paperless office" have
found some weird
> credibility nowadays thanks to the grammar it
imposes upon the office
> work space. There is no "third-generation" really,
just cuz Brockman
> doesnt want to print out anything doesn't mean that
it dont get
> printed, it just gets printed elsewhere by someother
non-paperless
> office. To a certain extent Brockman was merely
passing the buck, and
> with the time & materal he was able to leach out of
this arrangement
> he was able to drive his competition out of the game
(power of the
> differend).  The situation is not really so
different but the grammar
> makes it look new. But grammar is not the bad guy,
it is just that
> this case the leverage was behind Brockman's and the
grammar helped
> communicate this into the hypocampus of ignorant
office worker.
> So much of that contemporary electronic art is just
dressed up
> "detentionalism" (without intention, and it looks
like it was created
> by oppressed high school students in detention
class) This electronic
> detentionalism adopts the frail grammar of
conceptual art to basically
> sell consumer technology. Like selling millions of
hi-definition TV
> sets to those poor folks who didn't have the correct
resolution to see
> Janet Jackson's tiny nipple during the super-bowl.
What does that
> Afro-American nipple have to do with Japan's newest
Sony TV set?
> Nothing, but if I can convince myself of the
capitalist grammar that
> will connect these together then I will certainly
have something. But
> what is it without that grammar? It is a pretty sick
relationship.
> But unlike our own hypocampus which deals tens of
thousands of
> connections simultaneously, most grammar is pretty
sparse, as you say
> minimal, that's why grammar usually sucks so bad,
but we make up for
> it with our own minds which are much more robust.
That giant gap of
> Socrate's "unknown" is once again filled by personal
labor. Thinking
> is work, it burns calories. The capitalist does't
need to think he
> makes others do that work.
> In English, grammar is all we have left of thoth's
rebus, we have
> specialized cases I - you - we - he - she - they -
that is all we have
> in terms of perspectives standing on that giant
tree. Looking at the
> words "are" and "is" and I cannot see any
similarity, not even a
> single letter is the same, but knowing the grammar
("we are" vs "he
> is"), I can see they virtually mean the same thing
actually, thanks to
> my calorie burning hypocampus. I know this
internally and I can make
> up for all the inconsistancies that rhetorical
grammar of the English
> provides.
> Also from Thoth, the grammar of time seems to be
some kind of ultimate
> grammar, especially for capitalism, and PVirillio
(that good catholic)
> enjoys embracing this line of reasoning. I enjoyed
his semiotexte
> booklet on warfare and currently finishing his
"landscape of events",
> but he is so skimpy. I would like to compare it to
Rebecca Solnit's
> "Rivers of Shadows" ($5 at www.Strandbooks.com !)
but there is no
> comparison. Besides communicating truely radical
philosophical ideas
> about time, "Rivers of Shadows" is also an excellent
history of the
> standardization of time (annihilation of time) and
shows exactly how
> warfare was emplyed to make such a thing occur and
how the war
> industry used academia to transform itself into
Hollywood so it could
> maintain those rhetorical differends in the present
day.  Lets also
> not forget that it is the war industry that has
given us the internet
> as well.
> _______________________________________________
> List address: deleuze-guattari-AT-driftline.org
> Info:
http://lists.driftline.org/listinfo.cgi/deleuze-guattari-driftline.org
> Archives: www.driftline.org



		
__________________________________ 
Yahoo! Mail - PC Magazine Editors' Choice 2005 
http://mail.yahoo.com
_______________________________________________
List address: deleuze-guattari-AT-driftline.org
Info: http://lists.driftline.org/listinfo.cgi/deleuze-guattari-driftline.org
Archives: www.driftline.org