From: "Keyman" <keyman-AT-indifference.demon.co.uk>
Subject: RE: Debt and Control
Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2001 16:51:46 +0100


another line of thought with regard to debt is perhaps around the thought of
artaud as well as nietzsche.  The essay I think might be a lot of use here
is 'to have done with the judgement of god' in Essays Critical and Clinical.
Here Deleuze distinguishes between the system of cruelty (artaud being key
obviously to this) and the doctrine of judgement, where debt is key but in a
particular way, debt as inscribed in the account books, the controlled debt.

"In the doctrine of judgement ... our debts are inscribed in an autonomous
book without our even realising it, so that we are no longer able to pay off
an account that has become infinite."(ECC, 128)

Interestingly the essay weaves in the nietzschean notion of the promise (the
noble right), the oath (see footnote 7) for example being outside the realm
of judgement and these original promises being debts inscribed 'directly on
the body'.

control seems to here be a distortion (bad word but it'll do for now) of an
originary process of exchange (in which debt is primary - nietzsche), such
that criteria can be established (in order to make judgements universal).
the idea is something like the imposition of a realm of 'arbitration',
whereby the directly involved bodies hand over (or have taken from them)
their direct involvement in exchange and instead take part in an always
mediated relation.  this suggests another thought with regard to control
along the lines of mediated/immediate distinctions - the anarchist ideal of
'direct control' of our lives depends, perhaps, on the removal of the state
because it depends on a direct control, an immediate relation with the other
in the community rather than a mediated relation (ie: distinctions between
direct and representative democracy for example).

to be in debt implies to be under control - the control lies in the hands of
the creditor.  this is the model I associate with the doctrine of judgement
and so within the system of cruelty the debt and the control are not the
items of exchange (i do not gain the debt in exchange for control) but
rather control is, if you like. 'out of the picture'.  no-one has 'control'
over the sytem of cruelty it seems.  the system simply moves with its own
forces moving it.

of course, that would imply we had to somehow relinquish 'control'
ourselves, not in order to be 'out of control' but in order to make the
whole concept redundant.

anyway, thoughts at random,

matt

???????????????????????????????????
we are the dreamers of dreams......
http://www.indifference.demon.co.uk
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-deleuze-guattari-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
> [mailto:owner-deleuze-guattari-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu]On Behalf Of
> Dan Smith
> Sent: Sunday, October 07, 2001 1:07 AM
> To: deleuze-guattari-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
> Subject: Debt and Control
>
>
> In _Negotiations_ Deleuze states--regarding the movement from
> discipline to control--that "man is no longer a man confined but
> a man in debt" (181).  I am *very* interested in reading anything
> else by Deleuze that elaborates further this connection between
> debt and control.  Any citations??  If not something by Deleuze,
> then perhaps something by someone who takes up this issue/problem from
> a Deleuzean perspective?  I have come across one essay like this; I'm
> hoping there are more.
>
> Cheers,
> Dan (i'm hoping this list is still useful for something other than filling
> my trash bin) Smith
>