File spoon-archives/baudrillard.archive/baudrillard_1998/baudrillard.9809, message 11


From: "Soren Pedersen" <speder-AT-post2.tele.dk>
Date: Sat, 5 Sep 1998 23:21:14 +0200
Subject: Re: Behind Baudrillard 


> i find it more than intriguing that soren (who is as grotesque in his 
> interpretation of the books by JB as a fundementalist is grotesque in 
> interpretating the bible in america) would actually quote Baudrillard 
> writing about Nietzsche.  when soren the machine has actually tore into 
> me on more than one occasion for using Nietzsche to think about Baudrillard.

I find it highly unlikely that I should have battered you for using 
Nietzsche. Comparisons between Nietzsche and Baudrillard are 
suggestive, but sooner or later (later, for most) you reach a point 
where Nietzsche's tripartite logic (true, apparent and actual world) 
must be transcended in order to deal with the possibility of 
simulation (which cannot be subsumed Nietzsche's 
perspectivism,as some Postmodernists seem to think).

> otoh, I am in full agreement with Debord's opening words in his 
> COMMENTS ON THE SOCIETY OF THE SPECTACLE wherein he makes it pretty clear 
> that many of those he influenced with his ideas on the spectacle went way 
> overboard with their ideas.  While Baudrillard has captured the spirit of 
> Debord's paranoia well without committing suicide (as of yet,) 
> Baudrillard has found followers who have lost touch with the idea that 
> his writings are what we call a critique.  They are not necessarily the 
> way things are.  Taking Baudrillard literally, always, is a ridiculous and 
> sad display of hopelessness and ignorance, and quite possibly insanity.

Perhaps Debord himself went overboard. This seems to be the 
conclusion reached by one of your soulmates, Steven Best, who 
refers to 'Comments on the society..." as "Debord's defection" (i.e. 
defection from orthodox marxism). Correct me if I'm wrong, Gary, 
but 'Comments....' seems chemically cleansed for the revolutionary 
rhetoric of the 'Society of the Spectacle'.

> i suppose my intrigue with 
> the positions of those such as soren is that they have taken what was 
> once a critique and a plea for change and turned those writings into a 
> call for giving up and embracing technology and commodity fetishism. 
> the continuous and mathematical, not organic, movement of society away 
> from what Nietzsche felt was the actual world is not a revolution of the 
> everyday as some obviously feel.  it is not liberating for sure.  rather 
> it is a binding movement that relies continuosly more on fetishism with 
> technology which is ultimately commodity.

The thing is, Gary, that Baudrillard's writings are strong on 
descriptive accuracy and weak on revolutionary strategies. What 
do you enjoy most? Symbolic Exchange and Death 
(overwhelmingly descriptive) or Fatal Strategies (where the 
conclusion seems to be that the only effective revolutionary 
strategy is terrorism).

And, hey, remember that it is ultimately in the interest of the 
revolution to embrace all technological advances.

- Soren


   

Driftline Main Page

 

Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005