From: "A.M. Dib" <amd10-AT-leicester.ac.uk>
Date: Mon, 29 Jul 1996 11:17:40 +0100 (BST)
Subject: Re: shit, sur-face, god


Well...  I was hesitant to reply cause we need to practice a 
sort of forgetting on this subject.  Things are getting  a 
ranting dance with words and redundancies.  I  admit  
R.J's articulation is capturing my movement.  I am  trying to unchain 
its spell.  If I have succeeded I would not have responded now.  .

 R.J wrote: 

> re: a.m.'s "R.J is still plunging onto the social wall"
> 
> the wall is more than social
> it is the redundancy of "signifiance and interpretation": the Ur-recording
> surface

At least now you have ammended your mode of expressing in regard the
 location of the social and admitted that there is more than the 
social itself: the WALL.  Strategy and tactics have their own tolls 
on, and through  the WALLS, the in between. 
 .   
> white wall/black hole system: abstract machine of faciality producing a
> blank white recording surface and a black hole of subjectification and
> subjection: "Year Zero" being the machine's fictive "moment" of effectuation
>  
 The history of the concept as a banal "over-leaping of spheres of reference"
> (N. on truth and lie in extra-moral sense) 
> pro-sopopoeia: to force a face over (sur-face) the excremental rot of "Life"
> to go from this specific face to the abstract face of the Lord of the Logos:
> A wall which legitimates all sorts of obscene graffiti, a wall on which all
> that falls away from the wall can be preserved as meaning, mark, concept and
> idea: the redeemed stain 

I do not have anything to add. My own doing is not contradictory to 
what you have done through these fortifying expressions. 

> thus your "openess towards the inhuman that would rather UNDERSTAND the
> excess forces that traverse unto the infinite planes of time, whether it is
> pure or not" is still stuck on the wall (or signifiance or subjection it's
> up to you).

????????

Being stuck on the wall, perhaps because of the glueing machinery, does not mean 
in any sense the inability to relay a drilling activation to the 
wall.  The inescapability of the walls should not mean as such the 
exhaustion of paces of movements, an eternal  return.   

 Excess (to quote one of its eminent theorists, G.Bataille)is de
> trop for the wall: "Il se deborde"...it exceeds the bounds of recuperative
> Reason, it stains the wall, splatters it with all sorts of secretions, it
> does not reduce the body to the death's head, to the face, to God
> Course the stain always remains as memory: Chronos-Logos is unavoidable but
> nevertheless..."keep moving" "never signify" "never interpret": this is the
> tenor of D&G's "in-between": impossible but the real is "the immediate
> impossible real"  (ao 97)) 

The way you have Capitalised the 'UNDERSTAND', and subsisted it with 
the issue of Excess, is an act of violence subjectivating me into the philosophy 
of consciousness.  Well... I think this move is a bit rediculous. It 
just  expresses how you are being vulgaralised by the position-practice you are 
occupying. If you consider the milieu. or let me say an aspect of the 
rudundancy furrowing itself throughout my expressions, you would not 
have had the courage of commenting on the word itself. You are just 
presuming the 'Understand' has just one meaning.  

Let me tell you ... you have to slash it 'UNDER / STAND' and even if you 
want whip it 'UN~Der~STAND' to realise how the redundancies are more 
than you expected them to be.  #

> "The history of God is thus the history of the work as excrement. Scato-logy
> itself" J.Derrida, Writing and Difference

I have nothing to do with that..... 

amdib