To: <deleuze-guattari-AT-lists.driftline.org> Date: Fri, 31 Mar 2006 09:55:50 +0200 Subject: Re: [D-G] deleuze and benjamin on violence Hello, you don't have seem to understood that the ethical question of avoiding violonce - being "non-fascist" - includes the avoiding of misunderstanding. So a reading of Deleuze-Guattari denying plainly their philosophy as not sufficient without worked out argumentaion or example and the denying of philosophy as such without giving concretre examples or a setting is more than misunderstable in a mailing list devoted to thework of Deleuze and Guattari. It is this kind of "to narrow" that I meant. If you like to say that Deleuze and Guattari should not be used as a "bible" this has been already said by themselves. So a broader reading is very unlikely ended up in a apraisal of "pure violence". Especially when it is not schown that there has been a "normal" reading. As i pointed out several times I would also not adhere to a lot what Deleuze and Guattari said. But, to be "non fascist" that is far better to do so in a "clear and distinc" and in detail expressed manner. Deleuze and Guattari also pointed out the missing on the work on the details - in the "Anti-Oedipe". You can simply say that Deleuze and Guattari didn't say very much you like. greetings Harald Wenk -----Original Message----- From: deleuze-guattari-bounces-AT-lists.driftline.org [mailto:deleuze-guattari-bounces-AT-lists.driftline.org]On Behalf Of NZ Sent: Donnerstag, 30. Marz 2006 19:38 To: deleuze-guattari-AT-lists.driftline.org Subject: Re: [D-G] deleuze and benjamin on violence yes sometimes it nice to submit to philosphy as a wisdom that helps a person's hapiness. but then sumtimes it is nice to not to submit to philosophy and see it as a source of angst in a person's life. both are completely fine by me and of course there are other ways to talk a-bout the sub-ject of philo- sophy.... it is multi-dimensional (but singluarly experienced). If foucault wants to say that "anti-oedipus is a guide to non-fascist living" that does not mean that is the only way to see ant-oedipus, infact must of that partiuclar book is very un-fit to use as a guide, a lot of it, most of it, is looking at psychology from an extreme distance and saying "look at these bodies wi/o organs and see them as alien subject for critzism!" If you have the intention of fighting agaist other people who focus/maintain the more broader reading of DyG's pov then perhpas that kind of violenc directed at people ought to be understood better. of course it is so much easier to just submit to the blessed wisdom of DyG... but why, whats the fun in that? That is like heraclitus(fire) against the immobile earth(logos)... why makes everything so still and un-moving. There is life that animates, and laws of animation, things can move too and they do not have to be fixed. to study logos is to study those "fixed" things, the "fix" of philosophy is often such a problem in the "real world"... that is why we have DyG pointing their finger at freud and the violence of his logos agianst the animated reality, and the laws that are made to force reality into a "fixed" state so that capital(surplus value) can be properly amassed within the imagined closed social system. ---- _______________________________________________ List address: deleuze-guattari-AT-driftline.org Info: http://lists.driftline.org/listinfo.cgi/deleuze-guattari-driftline.org Archives: www.driftline.org _______________________________________________ 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