Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2006 21:49:00 -0500 From: NZ <pretzelworld-AT-gmail.com> To: deleuze-guattari-AT-lists.driftline.org Subject: Re: [D-G] deleuze and benjamin on violence true, I'm going kind of backwards, and thats confusing.... I am eager to plot thisstory, where to take violence thread, it is probably best to make sure we are talking about the same thing ... w/o aggreement violence will destroy understand (just 2 extra steps through the ethical ennead) okay, but to just peek at a tiny clue.... so, there was a garrulous attractive young woman who talked to breuer & gave freud the idea of developing their logos-centric (creepy talking on a couch) techniques of analyzing hysteria which turned into this general theory of unconscious repression that I can learn at any universe-ity...blab-blab-logos-blab. the "itty-bitty universe". (What is repression?) The next big jump is from schizophrenia to violence, and that's pretty much covered in D-G's anti-oedipus book). "Sovereign Violence" The best way to read wb's "violence" is backwards, (that way your hypocampus can accurately decode it for you to contemplate on your bus ride home from the library.) Was this essay written in 1921?, same year that the inventer of the television, Charles Francis Jenkins incorporates Jenkins Laboratories in Washington, D.C. with the purpose of "developing radio movies to be broadcast for entertainment in the home". (Re: Color in 1921) 1) How does wb's discussion (explicitly based) on darwin and spinoza, turn into a discussion on "Sovereign Violence"? Gee-wiz, was it WWI maybe? Why. "pure divine violence" vs "pure drivel violence" here the jihad can be defined in western terms: w/o warning "divine violence" has been realized. ths terrorizm is violating the laws of "mythic violence" that sovriegn modernity has assumed for itself. The fact that nuclear arms are not involved keeps it at this level. But indeed the entire cold-war/ arms-race, certainly remains as the current "pure divine violence". (I question whether "divine violence" is in fact also unalloyed violence.) At least if the sovereignty has alloyed itself to the spectacle of society. .. 2) ....is it a monocle for one-dimensional man? i like benj.... and he leaves me with lots more questions: 3) "ultimate insolubility of all legal problems" vs "psycho-analytical method", does this indicate benj. attitude towards the logos in general and could this provide the basis for a hypothetical debate between freud? 4) "law-making violence" vs "law-protecting violence" how come there is no "law-breaking violence" 5) is "mutatis mutandis" latin for "mother-fucker"? -------- soon we will have democracy someday soon, but that, like communisim, is a mere ideal, it does not exist, it never has, perhaps it will. (note-to-self: must read spinoza's social contract, what name is it called?) _______________________________________________ List address: deleuze-guattari-AT-driftline.org Info: http://lists.driftline.org/listinfo.cgi/deleuze-guattari-driftline.org Archives: www.driftline.org
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005