File spoon-archives/lyotard.archive/lyotard_2004/lyotard.0411, message 149


From: gvcarter-AT-purdue.edu
Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2004 10:20:04 -0500
Subject: Re: sideways - incapacity



Steve/Eric,

It's un/just so difficult to discuss Texas, or as the Marx Bros. pun, "Dollars, 
Texas."  Yes, of course, of course, Hummers... How can one discuss Hummers with 
regards to Buzz, Buzz... (I confess that I want only to Hmmmmmmmmmm here and 
offer non-discursive gestures and allow the topic to transmorgify into some 
other "monstrousity" rather than these modified military vehicles.  Let's 
discuss modified "funny" cars, instead! (--Glen! what's your take on Hummers!--
), or else I want to say, Steve!, Texas!  Ten Gallon Hats!  Bush!  Alas! 
TexUS!  ...Fort what is worth, all I can say is Austin!!!

But, seriously, to the question of conflating, interchanging terms like "love" 
and "desire"... If I follow Eric on this there is a something more decisive 
concerning divisions between "desire" and "pleasure".  I would be interested in 
hearing more about your take on the Lacanian dimension of all this, though I am 
given to understand that L's "hydra" is Z'z petite object a...  One may 
continously desire, but there's no pleasure in this because at bottom the 
desire is without substance...

More on Epicurus-cum-Lucretius would be worth taking up.  (Lucretius, of 
course, an important figure for Deleuze, and there is, in this sense, the sense 
of the Stoic. ... A Stoic Wind... )

Perhaps, then, to Steve's question, one might explore further the following 
pairs:  desire/pleasure and love/stoicism.   

Of course, all this suspends the diff between human/animal question that was 
raised by bees... but, if memory severes --somewhere in the l-archives-- this 
is topic that we've somewhat lispectored before... 

If there is anything that is "special" in all this, it this peculair lisp...

geof

  

                     


Quoting "steve.devos-AT-krokodile.co.uk" <steve.devos-AT-krokodile.co.uk>:

> Too nice Geof and Eric -  here i am sitting in Texas looking at a 
> society which consumes at a level simply unheard of outside of the US 
> and which will consume itself and the rest of the planet into the state 
> of being like Britain - nothing wild and alive larger than a small 
> nocturnal dog. It is extremely strange how over the past few years the 
> desire to consume hummers and other monstrous vehicles has become 
> normalised here in the midst of a social order which does nothing but 
> consume. I  sense that you wish to think 'humanistically' - that is to 
> say that a notion of the human as a special being haunts your discourse 
> as if humans have institutions, desires and love -  whilst insects and 
> animals have drives and instincts. Not a convincing difference in the 
> land of  texdas and the usa...
> 
> what seems certain is that you are trying to use the terms  love and 
> desire as if they are interchangable,  are they really ?
> 
> steve
> 
> gvcarter-AT-purdue.edu wrote:
> 
> >Steve,
> >
> >Agency?  Buzz, buzz... You know, for seven years I worked at a summer camp
> for 
> >children w/ so-called "speech disorders."  (--Conductively, of course, it's
> 
> >difficult not to th.ink about such "camps" across Agamben's notion of
> "camp," 
> >or even the "found art" such institutions engender such as the following
> sign 
> >that greeted parents on a particularly windy opening day: "Welcome to peech
> 
> >Camp!"--)
> >
> >Anyway... to "the human" and "agency"...  speaking strictly, strictly 
> >speaking... from a bio.logical pov... (--godsss, i can't believe i'm arguing
> 
> >this point!--), there is this "condition" known as PRADER-WILLI syndrome,
> which 
> >entails an uncontrollable urge to eat... All the time... Even the gum off
> the 
> >bottom of university desks during a so-called "time-out"!  Hahaha!  
> >
> >In other words: Hungry Always, All.ways...  
> >
> >Or:  Buzz, buzz...
> >
> >Now, I know that Zizek sez "Enjoy your symptom," not "enjoy y.our syndrome,"
> 
> >but it's un/just that this insatiable... This Desire!... this in.ability to
> 
> >stop consuming... well, yes, there is incapacity... there is "playing with 
> >one's ability not to play"... there is... il y a... and there is "some
> more"... 
> >(And this, btw, is "my" point.less...)  
> >
> >So then, again, to y.our imp.ortant question:  "Does the human ever know
> they 
> >are full?"
> >
> >geof
> >
> >        
> >
> >
> >Quoting "steve.devos-AT-krokodile.co.uk" <steve.devos-AT-krokodile.co.uk>:
> >
> >  
> >
> >>Like the case of the obese human who is never able to stop consuming 
> >>except when they die...  perhaps the agency is different between the bee 
> >>and the human does the human ever know they are full ?
> >>
> >>steve
> >>
> >>gvcarter-AT-purdue.edu wrote:
> >>
> >>    
> >>
> >>>eric,
> >>>
> >>>wowellyes... situating all this across rilke in a bee.aroque manner.ist...
> 
> >>>yes... these passages are quite important, i think, to working out this
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>notion 
> >>    
> >>
> >>>of 'capacity for incapacity'... (watching the audio-commentary to wim
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>wenders 
> >>    
> >>
> >>>_wings of desire_ last night, and its interesting how important rilke is
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>there 
> >>    
> >>
> >>>too...) 
> >>>
> >>>you know... speaking of 'bees of the invisible'... i was also reading j.
> von
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>>uexkull's _theoretical biology_ (1926) this weekend in search of a passage
> 
> >>>concerning a tick that agamben mentioned. instead, i came across one of,
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>what i 
> >>    
> >>
> >>>believe is, one of heidegger's favorite passages.  (...either heidegger
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>quotes 
> >>    
> >>
> >>>this passage, or someone who i talk to who talks about heidegger notes 
> >>>something like this...)
> >>>
> >>>"Suppose, however, that there is a great quanity of honey.  After a time
> the
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>>bee stops sucking and flies away, leaving the remainder untouched.  In
> this
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>>case the indication was not annihilated objectively.  Why then did the bee
> 
> >>>cease its action?  It has been found that if, while a bee is feeding, its
> 
> >>>abdomen be carefully cut off, the insect will go on drinking with the
> honey
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>>flowing out of it again behind. In this case the action does not cease;
> the
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>bee 
> >>    
> >>
> >>>goes on drinking like Baron Munchhausen's horse.  The check set up by
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>satiety 
> >>    
> >>
> >>>is lacking."  
> >>>
> >>>such bees, in other words, lack the ability to know what they are 
> >>>lacking... 'the snap of release' as the loss of one's stomach... (--one no
> 
> >>>longer can view the homeless and unsheltered as having stomachs that
> simply
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>>need to be full... a thanksgiving trope, to be sure... but rather, a 
> >>>recognition of a stomach.less condition ::  "I can't stomach such talk
> that
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>>always come down to stomachs... y.ours is the stomach ache of the snap of
> 
> >>>release... the release of stomach such that one is abandoned to a sense
> that
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>>homeless that is without abdomen... exposed by a lack of satiety...
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>flowing..."-
> >>    
> >>
> >>>-)  buzz, buzz...     
> >>>
> >>>here's another nice passage from uexkull:
> >>>
> >>>"In principle, the step of a beetle's foot or the stroke of a dragonfly's
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>wing 
> >>    
> >>
> >>>must carry their effect as far as the dog-star."
> >>>
> >>>b.est, geof  
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>Quoting Eric <ericandmary-AT-earthlink.net>:
> >>>
> >>> 
> >>>
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>>>Geof,
> >>>>
> >>>>I really can't do justice to your earlier post tonight. I'm too drunk
> >>>>and tired, but I'll try. You mention Rilke in connection with love. I
> >>>>think his poetry has an interesting connection with the theory of the
> >>>>multitude and the general intellect.
> >>>>
> >>>>Rilke spoke of humanity as becoming 'bees of the invisible'.  At first
> >>>>this seems like quaint and eccentric metaphysics, until you begin to
> >>>>realize how apt a description this really is for immaterial labor in a
> >>>>post-Fordist age. 
> >>>>
> >>>>Despite the pious references to Nietzsche, Rilke seems to be on more of
> >>>>a Hegelian path when he posits an alienated humanity in migration away
> >>>>        
> >>>>
> >>>>from nature (joy of the gnat which, still within, leaps up even in
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>>>marriage, for everything is womb) towards the terrible angels who
> >>>>subsume opposition and negativity with themselves.
> >>>>
> >>>>I agree with you when you say:
> >>>>
> >>>>"Love is thus not, as the dialectic of desire suggests, the affirmation
> >>>>of the self in the negation of the loved object; it is, instead, the
> >>>>passion and exposition of facticity itself and of the irreducible
> >>>>impropriety of beings.  In love, the lover and the beloved come to light
> >>>>in their concealment, in an eternal facticity beyond."
> >>>>
> >>>>However, it is necessary to be more concise about what is meant by this.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>In an essay entitled "The Ambivalence of Disenchantment", Virno speaks
> >>>>of the fact that "alienation, far from eliminating the feeling of
> >>>>belonging, empowers it. The impossibility of securing ourselves within
> >>>>any durable context disproportionately increases our adherence to the
> >>>>most fragile instances of the "here and now". What is dazzlingly clear
> >>>>is finally belonging as such, no longer qualified by a belonging to
> >>>>something."
> >>>>
> >>>>This is also what Rilke observes in connection with the sublime Angel.
> >>>>It is not merely that the lover realizes the negation of the loved
> >>>>object, but rather that in this recognition of the negation of love, the
> >>>>lover realizes something else, "no longer qualified by a belonging to
> >>>>something". 
> >>>>
> >>>>As Rilke writes:
> >>>>
> >>>>"But when you feel longing, sing of women in love;
> >>>>for their famous passion is still not immortal. Sing 
> >>>>of women abandoned and desolate (you envy them, almost)
> >>>>who could love so much more purely than those who were gratified. 
> >>>>Begin again and again the never attainable praising;
> >>>>Remember: the hero lives on; even his downfall was
> >>>>Merely a pretext for achieving his final birth. 
> >>>>But Nature, spent and exhausted, takes lovers back
> >>>>Into herself, as if there were not enough strength 
> >>>>To create them a second time."
> >>>>
> >>>>What I am trying to suggest is that in mythic terms, Rilke has already
> >>>>realized the basic homelessness of the multitude ("Alas who is there we
> >>>>can turn to, not angels, not men") with the recognition that a new form
> >>>>of love is necessary; neither the Christian love of agape or duty nor
> >>>>the romantic love of possession of the desired beloved, but a new kind
> >>>>of love, which like the angel, feeds upon death and the very loss of the
> >>>>beloved.
> >>>>
> >>>>"Have you imagined Gaspara Stampa intensely enough so that any girl
> >>>>deserted by her beloved might be inspired 
> >>>>by that fierce example of soaring, objectless love
> >>>>and might say to herself, "Perhaps I can be like her"? Shouldn't this
> >>>>most ancient of sufferings finally grow 
> >>>>More fruitful for us?  Isn't it time we lovingly 
> >>>>Freed ourselves from the beloved, and quivering, endured:
> >>>>As the arrow endures the bowstring's tension. So that 
> >>>>Gathered in the snap of release it can be more than 
> >>>>Itself. For there is no place were we can remain."
> >>>>
> >>>>Or, as Virno puts it, 
> >>>>
> >>>>"Today defection and exodus express the feeling of pure belonging that
> >>>>is typical, in Bataille's terms, of the community of all of those who
> >>>>have no community."
> >>>>
> >>>>Such is the homeless love of the multitude. 
> >>>>
> >>>>Is this what you meant by a love that is capable of its own incapacity?
> >>>>
> >>>>eric
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>   
> >>>>
> >>>>        
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> 
> >>>
> >>>      
> >>>
> >>--- StripMime Warning --  MIME attachments removed --- 
> >>This message may have contained attachments which were removed.
> >>
> >>Sorry, we do not allow attachments on this list.
> >>
> >>--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- 
> >>multipart/alternative
> >>  text/plain (text body -- kept)
> >>  text/html
> >>---
> >>
> >>    
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >  
> >
> 
> 
> --- StripMime Warning --  MIME attachments removed --- 
> This message may have contained attachments which were removed.
> 
> Sorry, we do not allow attachments on this list.
> 
> --- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts --- 
> multipart/alternative
>   text/plain (text body -- kept)
>   text/html
> ---
> 




   

Driftline Main Page

 

Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005