File spoon-archives/deleuze-guattari.archive/deleuze-guattari_1998/deleuze-guattari.9812, message 198


From: "Widder,NE" <N.E.Widder-AT-lse.ac.uk>
Subject: RE: RE: Re:  Homeopathic thread is relevant; think again
Date: Sun, 13 Dec 1998 21:56:20 -0000


Allow me, please, to run down the list of your responses to this whole
ethics question:

(1)  Deny the question has any relevance, painting the questioners as people
thinking in simple binarisms.

(2)  Claim that the question is of no interest to you (perhaps not quite as
strong a dismissal as (1) above, since you are putting it in personal terms,
but a dismissal nonetheless), while suggesting an alternate way of setting
the issue (that is, rather than judging in terms of good and bad, right and
wrong, or whatever, because you feel these are useless binarisms, you
suggest that D&G would appreciate, albeit critically.  This, you claim would
be an ethical as opposed to a moral stance, though you go no further to
outline why.

(3)  Then, when the question is put to you again, this time in terms of the
alternative you suggest, just cite four people, without bothering to explain
either their ideas, your understanding of their ideas, or your own ideas.

At least your explanation of your position in terms of your debt to
situationism offers some possibility of discussion, although it seems
unlikely that you could explain from it why it might be desirable to engage
in the sort of praxis you outline, except to once again say "well, I feel
it's important".  But what you have said here is just another non-answer.

Nathan
n.e.widder-AT-lse.ac.uk

-----Original Message-----
From: Unleesh-AT-aol.com
To: deleuze-guattari-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
Sent: 12/13/98 6:50 PM
Subject: Re:  RE: Re:  Homeopathic thread is relevant; think again

" how you might APPRECIATE, albeit
critically, paedophelia, torture, or generally botched BWO's."

See : Nambla, De Sade, Laing and Cooper.

   

Driftline Main Page

 

Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005