Date: Fri, 22 Jun 2001 20:15:05 +0100
From: steve brockbank <steve.devos-AT-krokodile.com>
Subject: Re: the Goths




Mary Murphy&Salstrand wrote:

> What I had in mind was more a sense of religion at the level of desire
> as a kind of Hegelian negation of the negation. Not religion practice,
> but desiring machines subverting the established hegemony in the name of
> what has not yet been born.

Interesting notion - very reminescent it seems to me of Serres use of the
'third' - and the material in the natural contract where he is attempting to
construct a different notion of nature. It is this type of notion that in
its radical forms is capable of drawing out interesting challenges to the
inoperative social.

The central notion is nicely encapsulated in the following:

".... forget the word environment... it assumes we humans are at the center
of a system of nature. This idea recalls a bygone era, when the earth,
placed in the center of the world, reflected our narcissism, the humanism
that makes of us the exact midpoint or excellent culmination of all things.
No. The earth existed without our unimaginable ancestors, could well exist
without us, will exist tomorrow or later still, without any of our possible
descendents, whereas we cannot exist without it. Thus we must place  things
in the center and us at the peripheary, or better still, things all around
and uis within them like partasites..."  p33 the natural contract....

One of the things I most love about good postmodern writing - and Serres
(like Negri, Irigaray, Lyotard and Nancy) is certainly 'good' - is the
ultimate triviality of the human in the postmodern recognition of the
universe.

> All I can say to these godless militants is fare thee well!

They are...

regards

sdv