Date: Sat, 23 Sep 2000 16:18:42 +0100
From: Ruth Chandler <R.Chandler-AT-ucc.ac.uk>
Subject: Re: Building a New Secular Religion & ALL of IT
lamdac,
>>> <lambdac-AT-globalserve.net> 09/22 10:10 pm >>>
> in Speculum, Irigaray
> makes it clear that she wants to construct a model of narcissim specific
to
> women's identifications. it seems a poor argument to critque others for
> doing precisely this!
So your D&G wasn't enough to make you see that what Irigaray begs for, has
all
along been the bread and butter of every and any oedipalization?
my D and G was enough for me to work out when i am talking to a paranoic
despot! of course, everyone wants to go straight to the top of the class of
the ubermensch which, to my mind, eternally returns a gaggle of ulitimate
men. when screams for the singular case resound in packs, one starts to
think that the medium is the message here! i can not make any other replies
till next week but some of these comments need clarification.
as you would already know, Deleuze's reading in DR both draws upon
Klossowski in as much as it requires an experiential embodiment of ER as the
incorporeal line the Aion. it also argues against the conspiracy of the
circle and the returning 'I' held together by the causal supports of K's
agent.
Only affirmation returns-in other words the Different, the Dissimilar.
Nothing which denies the eternal return returns, neither the default nor
the equal, only the excessive returns: how much distress before one extracts
joy from such a selective affirmation? Only the third repetition returns. At
the cost of the resembalnce and identity of Zarathustra himself: Zrathustra
must lose these, the resemblance of the Self and the identity of the I must
perish, and Zarathustra must die. Zarathustra-hero became equal, but what he
becane equal to was the uneaqual, at the cost of losing the sham identity of
the hero. For 'one' repeats eternally, but 'one' now refers to the world of
impersonal individualities and pre-individual singularities. The eternal
return is not the effect of the Identical upon a world made similar, it is
not an external order imposed on the chaos of the world; on the contrary,
thee eternal return is the iternal identity of the world and chaos, the
Chaosmosis. (p299 DR)
Irigaray falls into religion as far as i am concerned ( as my daughters i
grow old?) by, effectively, positing Chaosmosis written as a feminine
divine. certainly, the habitual conflation of women with the
non-specifiability of 'cause' aligns Ariadne to the difference without a
concept of D's account. Alternatively, Klossowski may posit the breakdown,
or explosion, of multiple temporalities as N's self fractures but he posits
no means of living beyond this point other than a perpetual re -assembling
of the I.
in Difference and Repetion, Deleuze points to the botched repetitions of
the beautiful soul (different but not opposed) Irigaray is claerly
susceptible to the first charge but that still leaves work re making a
feminist counterpart ton Zarathustra as the 'dark precursor' as principle of
repetition v the position of the fiancee. 'if difference is the fiancee,
Ariadne, then it passes from Theseus to Dionysus, from the grounding
principle to the universal 'ungrounding' DR 275 a lot of feminists have
read this as making women stand for the aleatory point of the Aion, the
lived experience of time out of joint ( ER) or for the total virtual past of
Bergson's account.
i don't think you can disagree that K's peculiarly Freudian theatre
provides the starting place Irigaray's critical mimesis. for my reading
these are problems which need to be placed on a relative axis of
deterritorialisation, that is, they come out of the most timely and
culturally situated aspects of N's ouvre. from the double signatures of
your own posts, you seem to be suggesting that you too have experienced this
condition of temporal fracture aka the event. if this is the case, i would
be very interested in hearing an account of it! The point i am making
though is that just because my project is not your project doesn't mean its
crap. it measn that i read N through a lens of problems sepcific to my
territories. on many areas i agree with you, there is no need for the kind
of abuse you are throwing.
Then comes
the poor digest of Klossowski's revision:
yes, it is a quick shorthand. right for its purposes that is all.
> N appears to argue for increasing (as quickly as
> possible) conditions of mass slavery, slaves that are generally contented
> with their lot, in order to provide the material dynamisms where the
complex
> life of a few might emerge. the problem ( which Deleuze and Guattari's
work
> goes the furthest to address is how to posit a complex culture for the
> multiple)
Aside from the fact that your writing, spelling, syntax & so on is simply
atrocious, and your thought processes entirely discoordinate,
hands up to that!-i'm dyslexic and i ask no pity for this. being dyslexic
places me in a critical relation to the onto-theological pretensions of
grammar and those that insist on it as the measure of whose thought counts.
i see from your other posts that you have your own take on Deleuze and
Bergson. you will thus be aware of the positive role assigned to stutterers
in The Logic of Sense and the parallels D makes between hesitancy and
evolutionary divergence.
for a dyslexic, grammar is a creative obstacle within thinking. sure i have
some problems with the connective synthesis-but then i never liked my
mothers milk either ( i shall not clamor today- i have not translated his
poems see thirteenth series LOS). it is very easy to call people stupid
because of their failures within existing sytems but revolutionaries can be
made that way too. i was expelled from school first time round for failing
to learn in its envirnonment- in fact i only learnt to read when i found
something worth reading-but this did not mean i did not read signs before
and this puts me at a distinct advantage when it comes to the non-discursive
elements of D and G's project. most of may work is performance based- the
question of style does not always amount to one of written elegnace.
my typing is slow enough as it is so i don't ususally spend the extra time
making corrections on email. however, if sentence construction really makes
it diffiuclt to understand what i am saying then you, or anyone else, could
always ask for clarification.
on the other hand, if my thought is so easily devalued then i would prefer
you did not answer future mail than target the mechanics of its expression.
interpretation of N entirely matches the wholesome calamity. We would love
to
see you expound on the D&G project of a 'complex culture for the multiple'.
as i have only just joined this list, you have not heard my interpretion of
Nietzsche. the ceratinty of your derision in advance
means that i shall not waste much time elaborating it. briefly, the
fragilities which allows the first explosion of phallic power also allow a
counter -reading of Z. attempting to recast some of the difficulties in
feminist posing and stating of questions through a new reading of Nietzsche
is where my thesis starts. so i have made a counterpart to Irigaray's
reading out of bits of D's ouvre- a kind of Alice/Artaud synthesis to run
along side Z in the Logic of Sense. nothing grandiose but it will do as a
first experiment.
i said that D and G go the furthest towards outlining a complex culture. i
do have some thoughts on this which i would have liked to test out on this
list. another time perhaps.
The great hegelian lie: that the master needs the slave for its
'evolution'!,
nay, for its own 'self-consciousness'!
i am not saying i agree with this, i am saying that Nietzsche's thought is
untenable without these abstarct master fictions.
You are even more pitiful than Simone Sans Revoir.
and your derision entirely becomes you.
>> I read the Ubermench as
>>a type, a sort of personified utopia, one that should be as widely
available
>> as possible.
In short, she reads it as an advanced gizmo that will come to market. As
another masturbatory device.
>i read s/he through Deleuze and Guattari as always a people yet to come- an
>empty utopia in this sense
You, in short, read it as a crypto-heideggerian, as in: the overhuman is the
empty site of the nontopos, the nonlocus. Then the Ubermensch incarnates
before our very and astonished eyes, into a biped:
empty was not the best expression, i meant not filled with a recogniseable
topology which does not mean that there is not a more complex topology to
come into view. you can write it as miriculation if you want. i prefer D and
G's multiplication of N's writing for a person who has not yet been born
into a people wholly unrecogniseable to contemporary humans. i don't like
Heidegger much and, again, find the legacy of his thinking through Lacan the
explanation for most of the paranoic element in Irigaray's reading of
Nietzsche.
none of the rest are my words..
Ruth.C
> Such persons are presently and still, I think, when you find
>them and they're "nice people", the product of their own acts of will and
>power.
[In other words, 'take courage Simone femme, the saviours and messiahs are
amongst us already! ' It is so because-]
>This is so because the relationships between education, state, and
>culture, and I would add corporate conglomerates, are still organized along
>the lines of a death culture.
Education - quid est?, malformation by the access to the media offered to
the
most mediocre, like yourself, so that they parade their ignorant asses with
all
impunity?, or monopoly of state as academia?, or the ruling white robes in
the
halls of our corporate machinery? State - the very embodiment of death in
culture, you wanna re-organ-ize it? Kulture?
Here is what Elsie over here proposes - that people who write nonsense like
this should not have the right of saying anything else in this here list
promulgated unfortunately in honor of the completly misunderstood work of
one
of the last friends of knowledge. Call it what you want, even impractical,
but
somewhere some hygiene has got to get its foothold on something.
Elsie, La Mangeuse C
--- from list nietzsche-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---
--- from list nietzsche-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005