Subject: Re: Events Date: Sun, 20 Dec 1998 20:04:20 -0500 (EST) > > > > On Sun, 20 Dec 1998, Ariosto Raggo wrote: > > > Some sleepless thoughts, went to bed reading Derrida's remenbrance of > > Paul de Man, bad idea. I was reminded of what Lyotard says in PMC with > > regards to temporary contracts (pg. 66). They are ambigous because they > > indicate something which the system can't fully incorporate. The > > emergence of language games as a quest for parology would bring into > > play this excess, exteriority of the system. > Does the usage of parology in language games lead us to deleuzian > deterritorizaton? It can, I suupose it would depend on inventive juxtapositions which both deteritorialize a concept like paralogy as well as that of 'deleuzian' deterretorialization itself. I try to do, strong misreadings, to use Harold Bloom's expression. I don't think there is such a thing as deluzian, lyotardian, or derridean concepts because there is always displacements, digressions, differential drifts and such, that bring into play unknown, unforeseen readings. So yes, it can, and no, not necessarily as if it were a question of us, or you, or I, adequating ourselves to set notions of which it just a matter of getting them right. 'Good' interpretations work if they stimulate and spill writing, more talk giving rise to other phrases, other language games, other events that would be singular. Isn't this Deleuze's "and..." ? Lyotard speaks similarly in some places. Why couldn't this lead to Derridean dissemination? or Diderot's digression? or Shlovsky's defamilarization, or the rhetorician's 'turn'? and so on... (this is Wittgenstein's expression. I'm very interested in invention, even allowing putatively non-fictional exchanges to become fictional. I see nothing wrong with somebody responding on this list, for instance, with a poem, or a short story, or an online persona, or a multiplicity of personas. Although, there is something to be said for being as faithful as possible to the sense of what a writer is getting at... Ari(...) > The broad definition of > > legitimation that he uses would then mean, in this case, just this > > opening to excess, knowledge (savoir) which can't be reduced to science > > or learning (connaisance) (pg. 18) would be a sort of ability to do this. > > It's not too much of a stretch to say that this know-how is the > > working-through of anamnesis which Lyotard often thinks as the > > practice of Cezanne's approach to painting, to color. > > > > There does seem to be a localization involve in anamnesis when thought > > of as a temporary alliance with, given active forgetting, what remains > > to be thought... an existing, not in a geographical site but a virtual > > one which would be a way of thinking about the chora, but already I > > break the bond by suggesting a name. Always temporary because of the > > tendency to fall back into the old habits is never once and for all > > suspended, one only more or less is binding oneself to wherever one is > > at which is a sort of naked intention... an attentiveness to je ne sais > > quoi, to borrow Montaigne's expression -- a vigilance, in Levinas' > > sense, that keeps us awake in the night. > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > --
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005