Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1998 12:43:06 +0000
From: Daniel Haines <daniel-AT-tw2.com>
Subject: Re: to destratify


Tom S,

thanks for this response.  certainly Bataille comes into the picture
somewhere... although the only thing I'm familiar with is' The Accursed
Share' I, II & III and Nick Land's book 'The Thirst for Anihilation -
George Bataille and Virulent Nihilism'.   I don't know if Nick would
really go for my perspective on this stuff though -- though I hear he's
drifted quite far out of the strata now...  one thing that is coming
from kant via bataille via nick via me is to do with dichotomy.  

briefly, I would argue that when you have an opposition set up like
subject/object, the dichotomy is set up 'from' one of the terms-  the
higher term, the term where you are positioned, in this case as the
subject (- who dichotomises)-- and a term that is' the other', that is
inaccessible. or like signifier/signified, where the signified is meant
to be deferred infinitely.  
 kant talks about noumena/phenomena, and the image is of an island in a
vast ocean, but you can't leave the island, can't reach immanence but
can only dichotomise from a transcendent subjectivity.... but there is
an alternative idea in bataille-d&g which is that the limit set up by
"/" not a rigid boundary is an intensive threshold to cross... that we
are not only limited to an A/-A logic of states and being, but can also
go "between" these terms and will find an intensive contnuum, A becoming
-A.... so ultimately there is no "other" no "inaccessibility" no
infintie deferring -- if you short circuit transcendence with
immanance.  

- base or libidinal materialism is a fairly good term.

- re: making things seem deleuzian:  I know what you mean, in that it
can become a great black hole to suck everything into, to bring closure
to all meaning... a great signified to which everything points... but
there is a difference between that use and the fact that these concepts
are quite flexible and work with lots of different assemblages... your
favorite whatever doesn't have to be inspired by d&g for YOU to connect
it up to d&g and see what that produces...

cheers,

dan h.

Thomas G. Schumacher wrote:
> 
>         It seems that Dan H's dispute with Michael is perhaps one of terms, but
> I'm not sure.  Dan's version of "mysticism" as a form of materialism seems
> more akin to Bataille's base materialism and writings on religion than the
> more evasive and "philosophical" Deleuze (though see Brusseau's book on
> Isolated Experience).  In other words, when Dan says, This is what I mean
> by mysticism and materialism, it may very well be that his is a "singular"
> usage, one that transforms his objects into Deleuzo-Guattarian parlance,
> pulling out the non-identical in what is normally seen otherwise.  One
> could make the case that Bataille's inner experience, or Bergson's elan
> vital, or Nietzsche's will to power are repetitions of Deleuze's
> difference, or D&G's desiring production, or the plane of consistency, or .
> . . , given particular readings of those texts or presentations of those
> positions.  But then one is open on both sides to people saying That's not
> what he/they mean!  As Hardt points out in the notes to his book, for
> example, not every Bergson scholar is as impressed as we are with Deleuze's
> Bergsonism.  Here of course religious worship is confused with rigor.
> 
>         But the problem seems to be in the oposite direction where just about
> anything can be made to sound Deleuzian (my favorite band, my favorite
> drugs, my favorite artist, my favorite beer, my favorite architect, my
> favorite television show), and perhaps Deleuze is unique amongst the
> Pantheon of theorists for inspiring such repetitions (Foucault's
> panopticism coming in a close second).  There is certainly something to be
> said for trying to start off from Deleuze himself in these situations
> (though this last sounds frightfully close to hero-worship and faith in the
> author -- not quite what I'm suggesting).
> 
>         I'm not being very clear, I guess.
> 
>         Tom S.

-- 
http://www.fortunecity.com/roswell/chupacabras/48/     
http://www.tw2.com/staff/daniel/

Ware ware Karate-do o shugyo surumonowa,
Tsuneni bushido seishin o wasurezu,
Wa to nin o motte nashi,
Soshite tsutomereba kanarazu tasu.

We who study Karate-do,
Should never forget the spirit of the samurai,
With peace, perseverance and hard work,
We will reach our goal without failure.