File spoon-archives/baudrillard.archive/baudrillard_1999/baudrillard.9904, message 50


From: Erik Hoogcarspel <jehms-AT-kabelfoon.nl>
Date: Fri, 30 Apr 1999 20:30:55 +0200
Subject: Re: The code, JB, Best and Kellner


Hi kellner-AT-ccwf.cc.utexas.edu

Op woensdag, 28-apr-99 schreef kellner-AT-ccwf.cc.utexas.edu:

k| Re Erik's commentary below:
k| It seems to me to be uninformed and lazy to not discern the differences
k| between the concept of code in various texts at specific stages of JB's
k| work, as well as the differences, or similarities if they may be, with
k| Eco.
k| So my challenge (defi) to Erik: what are similarities in "code" between JB
k| and Eco?

Why don't you just ask?
To me JB's idea of the code can be defined as the way the signs are organising
themselves. The signifiers play their own game and generate meaning as effect,
not seperately but together. The play makes it's own rules, because of these
rules it can be called a code. 
Eco alows for different kinds of codes. There are 'sets of signals', sets of
facts, sets of interpretations etc. But there are also total codes or s-codes as he 
calls them. These are sets of relations between sets. Now an s-code is an overall
signifying system, just like JB's code. The difference is of course that Eco
doesn't put so much emphasis on the domination of the signifiers as JB does.
-- 
erik


 *~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~*
  Erik Hoogcarspel           <    jehms-AT-kabelfoon.nl   ><       Boerhaaveln 99b     >
                             <    tl+31.(0)104157097    ><       3112 LE Schiedam    >
                             <    fx+31.(0)842113137    ><       Holland             >
 *===================================================================================*


   

Driftline Main Page

 

Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005