Date:        Mon, 16 Jan 95 00:27:20 EST
From: Aden <BGRZ-AT-musicb.mcgill.ca>
Subject: Re[2]: making it with death and libidinal materialism


As regards the stiffness of the Nazi's, I thought I would remind
everyone of Foucault's _Discipline and Punish_, where an
overwhelming rigidity is shown to result, at least in some cases,
from an extremely fluid, if systematic, discipline. Were German
troops effective fighters in WWII? A well-disciplined military
may appear very stiff in photographs, but could they strike?

As far as sobrietry and caution go, I was unable to find the
references in A-O urging caution, references whose existence
I had mentioned to Jon. (I am becoming convinced I hallucinated
them.) However, even in A-O, G&D say you can only discover
molecular desiring production through indices in the molar,   h
indices they give far too little description of. As such,
whatever it is one does to participate in desiring production,
(and perhaps one must just get swept up by it, struck as if by
lightning), one still does it with ends in mind, even if those
ends are secondary, derivative on the project of molecular
revolution. Such ends reasoning requires some measure of
caution, or one will end up dead, captured (by an enemy, black
hole, whatever), or otherwise without power. While I like Fadi's
triadic reading, G&D insist in A-O and MP that every line of
flight fails and dies, so it is not clear that caution is about
walking the molecular line between molarity and dissolution. (I am
not sure this is what Fadi was saying, anyway.) Finally, does
anyone understand why we are supposed to preserve just a little
bit of the subject, for surely that is what is at issue in urging
caution. What would happen without this little bit of subject?

     ------------------