From: "Lowe Laclau" <lowelaclau-AT-hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: AUT: Bologna on postfordism
Date: Thu, 05 Aug 2004 13:46:05 -0400







Hello Nate,

No. Have not seen this book yet here. But perhaps I will pick it up my next trip to the states. It'd be interesting to see how he approaches these issues and the differences between the theorists who have taken up specifically this theme of the production of subjectivity. One attribution of Read's that I disagree with (and I've only read that one paper at Borderlands from him) is the notion of the socius that D&G use in AntiOedipus. He says its from Althusser's "society effect", but I disagree. D uses this type of thinking already in Logic of Sense, where he's talking about Structuralism, but not Althusser. His reference is anthropological in origin... its Levi-Strauss. And at a more individual level, his concern about the production of sense (on what is 'sense' inscribed but a subject?) is derived from his readings of Nietzsche, Spinoza and Hume. When Read later mentions their critique of Althusser and how Althusser himself later changed what he said he still kind of leaves the implication that this idea of the socius can still be attributed to him. I say no. It was never his. It may have been taken from an interpretation of the limits of structuralist thought but not Althussers per se. One would also have to look at Guattari's writings, as he seems to have known him a bit better and was extremely critical of a lot of Althusser's Lacanianisms in writings before AO. The essential difference is that Althusser went through a deep phase of structuralist though before changing. That structuralism was never part of their work officially. Logic of Sense was up to the 13th series structuralist in orientation... before Deleuze has some weird epiphany and breaks up that organization. And AO was very much an entirely POSTstructuralist (insofar as they overtly attach its positions) text from beginning to end. But otherwise I like Read's writing. Just not his desire to make more of certain semblances than what is really there. I'd like to hear more about wha
t he says in the book... interesting or provocative quotes, saying etc... if you have the chance. 

ciao

Lowe

 

>From: Nate Holdren <nateholdren-AT-gmail.com> 



>Reply-To: aut-op-sy-AT-lists.village.Virginia.EDU 

>To: aut-op-sy-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu 

>Subject: Re: AUT: Bologna on postfordism 

>Date: Mon, 2 Aug 2004 11:28:15 -0700 

> 

>Hello Angela, Lowe- 

> 

>Have you had a chance to look Jason Read's book the Micropolitics of 

>Capital? It's quite good, makes interesting claims about the 

>production of subjectivity in relation to capitalism in its various 

>instantiations, and is great on readings of operaismo and French 

>post-whatever stuff. 

> 

>As Marx says someplace, one of the principal products of work under 

>capitalism is the capital-labor relationship. The production of 

>subjectivity seems to falls cleanly under that heading (for those of 

>us possessed of the need to fit everything we read into the slots of 

>Marx[ism]). Given that Bologna's work (at least the stuff in English, 

>all I've read) is analysis and history of various formations of a 

>class subject, it makes a lot of sense that Bologna and other 

>operaisti would dovetail so closely with Foucault... 

> 








------------------------------------------
 
------------------------------------------
MSN Toolbar provides one-click access to Hotmail from any Web page – FREE download!
------------------------------------------
 
------------------------------------------


--- StripMime Warning --  MIME attachments removed --- 
This message may have contained attachments which were removed.

Sorry, we do not allow attachments on this list.

--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- 
text/html (html body -- converted)
---


     --- from list aut-op-sy-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---