Date: Wed, 25 Dec 1996 09:42:35 +0200
From: Vadim Linetski <picador-AT-luckynet.co.il>
Subject: Re: theory/practice


Guillaume Ollendorff wrote:
> 
> dear liano.
> 
> it seems we are swimming under the same line.
> and may i say hello to your nice parents ? ("I'm definetly with you here.
> By the way, as a useless bit of >trivia, it happens that I'm named "Liano"
> after Emilliano Zapata.")
> 
> :))
> 
> more seriously, i would like to come back on aparticular point.
> 
> >> > deleuze theorise ? yes, but theorise the way of action, not the purpose you
> >> > should look for.
> >
> >       I totally agree with you, but would add that this theorizing (it
> >seems to me) must be an aspect of the way of action itself and not
> >something carried out separately.  In short, we need to rethink what we
> >mean by theory.
> 
> could you tell me more about your thought about that (i did not follow the
> entire restoth threads, as it was sometimes too long...)
> 
> because, reading it fast it seems really true to my brainycells, but my
> synapses asks themselves ? what does he mean ?
> that you act when you theorise or that you can not act without theorizing (i
> contest that) ? or something else ?
> could you give exemple ? deleuzian or not ?
> or dooyou think the answer is in the question you ask to vadim's response to
> my post ?
> --> "Why should intellectual labor be separated from any other kind of labor?"
> 
> thanx for eclaircissements....
> 
> guillaume.
17 MAY 97
Dear Guillaume,
hope you'd not mind my inteferring.
granted, the problem of how to negotiate theory and practice is one of
the most urgent, unfortunately D/G do not seem to show us reliable
light. Consider all the ambiguities of their use of Daniel P.Schreber's
book: on the one hand, it fits neatly their schiz.anal.program (theory),
on the other - it might be easily argued that it has informed the Nazi
practice. Are you familiar with E.Santner's _MY OWN PRIVATE GERMANY_
(Princeton UP, 1996) - an attempt to rectify D/G'reading which
unfortunately adds to the troubles, esp. in light of theory/practice
problem, for the price to be paid for an unambiguous critique of a
practical framework (Nazism) is the becoming of one of the theoretical
sources (Schreber's text) innocent.
If you taake the problem seriously perhaps you might wish to consider
what ideas re: theory /practice (esp. in light of Liano's argument in
favor of theory/practice correspondence: one mood/practice - one
reading/theory) could be teased out of a passage from E.Nesbit's _THE
STORY OF THE TREASURE SEEKERS_ in which kids bent upon restoring
family's fortunes (practice) toy with different schemes (theory). one of
those is to earn money by selling a new medicine:
"We only had to invent a medicine. You might think that was easy,
because of the number of them you see every day in a paper, but it is
much harder. First we had to decide what sort of illness we should like
to cure, and a 'heated discussion ensued', like in parliament /.../
Noel wanted to make the medicine first and then find out what it could
cure, but Dicky thought not, because there aree so many more medicines
than there are things with us, so it would be easier to choose the
disease first ...
Then Alice said -
'It ought to be something very common, and only one thing... What's the
commonest thing of all?"
And at once we said, 'Colds.'
So that was settled.
Then we wrote a label to go on the bottle...Of course the next thing was
for one of us to catch a cold and try what cured it."
Take care!
vadim