Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2004 12:22:46 -0500
From: hbone <hbone-AT-optonline.net>
Subject: Re: Discours Figure



Eric,

Thanks for this explanation.   By and large I agree.

My problem is with giving  human attributes to phrases i view as
abstractions -
for me, phrases are meaningful only in living minds.

God, or deceased authors may speak to the living in visions or dreams,
 but the visionary or dreamer can communicate that message to others only
with
the precise word(s) received, or with a personal interpretation using other
words.

That's the background for comments below

> Hugh,
>
> The reason I'm interested in because Discours/figure is considered an
> extremely important book of Lyotard's - equal to "The Differend" or
> "Libidinal Economy".
>
> I have always been struck by the continuity of Lyotard's thought, in
> spite of the various stylistic changes over the years. This continuity
> reflects a lifelong project that was tragically left unfinished by
> Lyotard's death. I continue to fantasize about a final work, never
> written, that would link the themes of "The Differend" with those of
> "Libidinal Economy" and am curious about the clues, Disours/figure might
> offer.
>
> Briefly, I see Lyotard's project as concerned with a few basic themes:
>
> 1. there is a relationship between philosophy and psychoanalysis insofar
> as the latter reveals the divided subject.

"Philosophy"  and "psychoanalysis" are abstractions.   A librarian can
direct you to
a shelf, bookcase, or physical section of the building containing books by
Kant
or Freud.  Their words in their books reveal thoughts they expressed one or
two centuries ago
now available in translation.  They include thoughts found in books,
conversations
psychoanalytic sessions with patients.

We English readers can discuss the meanings of those words/ideas:
1) to Kant and Freud when they wrote them.
2) to living philosophers and psychoanalysts.
3) to ourselves.

> 2. there is something that resists discourse, representation and
> complexification.

I don't know what "thing" in my mind resists the above. Perhaps tomorrow
that something will be there.

Some thing(s) is in "our" minds,  are conditioned by "our"  respective and
different life-histories.

Do we think what we think because of
1) present desire, whim, fancy, or
2) we cannot think otherwise

> 3. art and politics are attempts to show this thing that cannot be said.

I agree that artists show feelings, emotion, moods, mind-states
that words do not describe.

Historically, great artists of the Renaissance portrayed
great events and great persons of  Christianity and Judaism in scenes
that were more than the sum of their parts.

Some political activists, notably Marx, ideologically, and with the fervor
of artists, have glorified/deified political goals.

But I think politics as we kow it is a struggle for power, in which deceit,
murder, theft, weapons of  mass destruction, and since Hitler, massive
propaganda campaigns, are instruments that use artistic techniques.
to convince religious masses that they hear the voice of God, or
to convince irreligious persons of the sacred truths of Marx.

>
> I don't think he sees the "self-identity of the aesthetic as the last
> preserve of non-ideological thought" because Lyotard doesn't seem to me
> at least to believe in such purity. Look at how ruthless he is towards a
> figure like Malraux.  Rather than being the "preserve of nonideological
> thought and "revolutionary" subjectivity" I think art (and politics)
> testify instead to a remainder that eludes this very subjectivity. It
> bears witness to what has not been preserved because the vessel has been
> broken.

"Self-identity of the aesthetic" is imaginary because aesthetics is not a
"thing",
only artifacts in the library, or elsewhere, or a name for a certain living
thoughts in
living brains.

Artists testify by their "works", politicians testify by their deeds.

For me, a "preserve of nonideological thought and "revolutionary:
subjectivity
may well have been desired by Lyotard.   I think we agree he was in pursuit
of
the "sublime", which is a space where the "is it happening?" can happen.

hugh

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

>
> eric
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-lyotard-AT-lists.village.Virginia.EDU
> [mailto:owner-lyotard-AT-lists.village.Virginia.EDU] On Behalf Of hbone
> Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2004 8:19 AM
> To: lyotard-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu
> Subject: Discours Figure
>
> Eric/All,
>
> The author of the paragraph below is unknown to me, but I wonder if the
> concept of "self-identity of the aesthetic as the last preserve of
> non-ideological thought" motivates your search for a translation.
>
> " Lyotard's magisterial Discours, figure is invaluable for its
> painstaking
> dismantling of the notions of sign, system, and subject inherited from
> Saussure, Hegel, and Lacan, and for demonstrating the central importance
> of
> Freud's notions of dream-work. But like Eisenstein before him, Lyotard
> cannot relinquish a belief in the self-identity of the aesthetic as the
> last
> preserve of nonideological thought and "revolutionary" subjectivity. On
> this
> basis, my reading of the figural must diverge from his. Equally
> important,
> and still less obvious as philosophers of the figural, are Gilles
> Deleuze
> and Michel Foucault"
>
> regards,
> Hugh
>
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>
> > Diane,
> >
> > Thanks for this info.  'Mainmise' is a favorite essay of mine and I'd
> be
> > very interested in Ronell's book as well as her other collection of
> > essays that you are working on.  Keep me posted.
> >
> > I also have these questions, since you are more involved with the
> > academic world, do you know of any way to get an English translation
> of
> > Lyotard's late essay 'the phrase-affect'? Is there any chance that an
> > English version of either 'Discourse/Figure' or the 'Misery of
> > Philosophy' will ever be published.
> >
> > eric
> >
> >
> >
> > ---
> > Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> > Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> > Version: 6.0.524 / Virus Database: 321 - Release Date: 10/6/2003
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> ---
> Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.524 / Virus Database: 321 - Release Date: 10/6/2003
>
>
> ---
> Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.524 / Virus Database: 321 - Release Date: 10/6/2003
>
>