Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2001 20:14:59 +0000
From: "steve.devos" <steve.devos-AT-krokodile.com>
Subject: Re: cyborg *





Glen/Eric
The strength of Badiou's approach is it's foundation on a situational, 
event based and deeply polemical ethics and associated socio-political 
positions. I would not accept that a universally valid ethical position 
can even exist, though the shorthand 'informed, self-reflexive etc.' is 
attractive. Where Glen suggests  that a 'a cyborg subjectivity, because 
of its mediation of experience'  cannot occupy an ethical position. I 
was surprised but interested for it suggests that a postmodern cyborg 
position can never be ethical... unless it works from a  situational 
perspective. Do you mean to suggest that an ethical position must return 
to a pre-cultural state? (Perhaps there is hope for my volcanic rock 
after all).

The Lyotard point is well taken. It made me remember the question of the 
limits of the postmodern intellectual. The tomb of the intellectual, 
where Lyotard's definition of the post-modern intellectual and its 
relationship with the political are drawn out, a limit-case, the 
universal intellectual of modernity, ended, ended in the irony that is 
left after commitment failed. The specificity of that periods  
post-modern intellectual is well drawn out there by Lyotard, as it is by 
Foucault in his 'local intellectual' concept. But recently that form of 
commitment has reemerged from the shadows - and we have been writing of 
it consistently during the year - Badiou, Negri and Hardt - The tragedy 
in the present is that the very areas of art that Lyotard loved have 
become completely un-experimental, the art has become not unsayable but 
unspeakable...  The disconnection from lived-experience may have become 
the problem. Where is the relationship to everyday life that was always 
a part of  high-modernism and the avant-garde?  

The post-modern artists attempting to win the Turner prize define 
themselves against exchange-value, previous notions of  art, the 
symbolic have no place in the work.

regards
steve

Mary Murphy&Salstrand wrote:

>Glen,
>
>Your comments are very much what I have in mind in connection with the
>cyborg discussion.  My point was that there is an anthropology as well 
>as an ontology in Lyotard which sees art as a kind of interface, not so
>much between us and the world, but between us and the event.  The nodes
>of our perceptions become extended and intensified through the mere
>occurence which presents itself before being understood.
>
>Here are some remarks from Lyotard:
>
>"The powers of sensing and phrazing are being probed on the limits of
>what is possible, and thus the domain of the perceptible-sensing is
>being extended. Experiments are made.  This is our postmodernity;s
>entire vocation, and commentary has infinite possibilities open to it."
>
>"Today's art consists in exploring things unsayable and things
>invisible."
>
>"This leads to experimentation which is poles apart from experience."
>
>eric 
>
>fuller wrote:
>
>>G'day,
>>
>>Also with the cyborg discussion isn't it also possible to think of a cyborg
>>in terms of a widening of the subject's field of experience (seeing in UV,
>>hearing ultrasonic,etc), and also increasing the mediated nature of that
>>which is already experienced, through many more layers of 'technology' (in
>>which I include ego-based rational thought, as a culturally constructed, or
>>programmed, technology).
>>
>>Something which I have been thinking about is the apparent irreconcilablity
>>of an ethically sound perspective (informed, self-reflexive, etc), and one
>>that is indebted to immediate experience as pleasurable, painful, etc like a
>>young child for example, where the latter seems undenialbly more 'real'.
>>Badiou seemed to close this gap to some extent, however, a cyborg
>>subjectivity, which increased the mediation of experience, would that not
>>continue to reinforce dominant precepts and ethical shortcomings?
>>
>>Glen.
>>
>
>

HTML VERSION:

Glen,

Your comments are very much what I have in mind in connection with the
cyborg discussion.  My point was that there is an anthropology as well 
as an ontology in Lyotard which sees art as a kind of interface, not so
much between us and the world, but between us and the event.  The nodes
of our perceptions become extended and intensified through the mere
occurence which presents itself before being understood.

Here are some remarks from Lyotard:

"The powers of sensing and phrazing are being probed on the limits of
what is possible, and thus the domain of the perceptible-sensing is
being extended. Experiments are made.  This is our postmodernity;s
entire vocation, and commentary has infinite possibilities open to it."

"Today's art consists in exploring things unsayable and things
invisible."

"This leads to experimentation which is poles apart from experience."

eric 

fuller wrote:

G'day,

Also with the cyborg discussion isn't it also possible to think of a cyborg
in terms of a widening of the subject's field of experience (seeing in UV,
hearing ultrasonic,etc), and also increasing the mediated nature of that
which is already experienced, through many more layers of 'technology' (in
which I include ego-based rational thought, as a culturally constructed, or
programmed, technology).

Something which I have been thinking about is the apparent irreconcilablity
of an ethically sound perspective (informed, self-reflexive, etc), and one
that is indebted to immediate experience as pleasurable, painful, etc like a
young child for example, where the latter seems undenialbly more 'real'.
Badiou seemed to close this gap to some extent, however, a cyborg
subjectivity, which increased the mediation of experience, would that not
continue to reinforce dominant precepts and ethical shortcomings?

Glen
.