File spoon-archives/deleuze-guattari.archive/deleuze-guattari_1998/deleuze-guattari.9812, message 331


From: "michelle phil lewis-king" <king.lewis-AT-easynet.co.uk>
Subject: Ideology vs B.W.O
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 14:53:37 -0000


Ideology vs Body without organs?

 (Taking the b.w.o to be a 'physical'untranscendent body  without an
image..)

 V.N Volosinov (associate (or closer?!) of Baktin) wrote in 1929:


"Everything ideological posseses meaning: it represents, depicts , or stands
for something lying outside itself. In other words it is a sign. Without
signs there is no ideology. A physical body equals itself so to speak; it
does not signify anything but wholly coincides with its particular, given
nature. In this case there is no question of ideology.

However , any physical body may be perceived as an image; for instance , the
image of natural inertia and necessity embodied in that particular thing.
Any such artistic-symbolic image to which that particular physical object
gives rise is already an ideological product. The physical object is
converted into a sign."


But...the body without an image cannot be perceived .. that which it
embodies cannot therefore become ideological in Volosinov's sense of
participating in a world of signs.. it does not participate in... cannot
experience ..this ideological sphere:"the domain of the artistic image, the
religious symbol, the scientific formula, and the judicial ruling, etc."

phil.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
"Listen to the silence let it ring out..(on?)...'

Joy Division 'transmission'
-----------------------------------------------------------------------


   

Driftline Main Page

 

Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005