Date: Thu, 28 Sep 2000 18:27:52 +0100 From: Ruth Chandler <R.Chandler-AT-ucc.ac.uk> Subject: Re: 16 now 21 and moving up! just to clarify the Bergson bit-i do not mean i have the total virtual-which my dodgy writing implies. >>> Ruth Chandler <R.Chandler-AT-ucc.ac.uk> 09/28 6:18 pm >>> >>> <lambdac-AT-globalserve.net> 09/27 7:38 pm >>> >every idea i have had which >was any good has been formed between the discrepancies of sentence >construction and the act of adding grammar We should like to think so. >it seems absurd to me that a >reader of Nietzsche would make such a special case of one whose grammar does >not perfectly reproduce the ideals of the priest. Get off your moral high horse womin, who's the priest here? We referred to people who parade their diseases as magnifiers for their egos, as fad articles one wears to pass by in the artsy-fartsy world, as if they were credentials, and N's sickness is not the expereintial conditions of his great health? anyhow, finding absurdity within the kind of arguent you are making is not a moral abstarction. but, to clarify, i never use the dyslexia as a selling point in finsihed work, it just takes a long time to 'dress' in correct grammar and i don't have time to do that on email as well. the point of my mail was to respond to your sneers by pointing out that all limits are creative in some way and that there are productive ways of aligning these different kinds of sense. this was in the misplaced expectation that explanation would be enough to stop what has turned into a silly conversation. ah well, as N puts it, we still have god while we still have grammar. in your instance, marks of pretentious deleuzianism. You are no more dyslexic than you are a stutterer - who do you think you can con? a fake dyslexic? actually thats quite an interesting thought. , alterntiavely, Spivak links women's artistry ( as expounded by N) as the ability to fake orgasm, 'her' critical skills are thus always scrupulous fake readings. perhaps if i tried faking dyslexia my thought proceesses would 'come clean'. oh dear, dear, fake 'Deleuzianism' too, get all those phantasms out of my theatre... ah well there was only one proper name Deleuze i suppose. You are a poseur yes, performers do have a repetitive habit of posing-kind of goes with the territory- you might as well criticise a snake for hissing. out to sell herself, i never take the cash. in search of the lost identity of LC, unsure of which list to go to. which way which way said Alice-knowing it was both directions at the same time so that for once she could stay the same illusion (first series of bad intentional misquotes) You just wanna be loved, babe. oh yes! i love excahnginging loves with the ones i love but 'just' love, so so boring, bit like counting the women twixt the priest and the dying man? >i can fight within >the kinds of individuations Lamda.C makes but i don't particularly want to >buy into the rules of recognition which mark out his chess-board. as he has >set the questions for this exam and is evaluating the answers, he does >effectively straite the topology of this space. ...afraid to play because that is tantamount to admit you do not have what it takes. only a playground bully would think this was an argument. i gave up on 'chicken' years ago-something to do go with a high speed train...oh ah blind monorail! This milieu here is precisely striated by neo-situs like yourself. Another abject fake schizo... ah, the abject, actually your writings are really open to semanalysis-tempting to run it but i want to do something better with anal art. rocks for breath? quite right by the way on N as the most anal of the lot.as you surely already know group aggregates are schizophrenic in a way which can't be tolerated by collective individuals without, obviously, becoming schizophrenic. in case you are having trouble making sense out of my thought processes, this is an argument for, not against putting a stutterer into a group aggregate. >i find sadness >where one voice seeks to dominate all other differences under its >individuating principles, where all differences are hieriarchialised in the >name of its differences. Where we find sadness is in the spectacle of diversity where all differences are abrogated in favour of the democratic dictatorship of pro-situs and dimwits like you. Deleuze surely would have deserved better followers than those he has now so profusely gotten. again i make the point about following without following, at the end of the day, the agon runs between life forms which tolerate no other lifeforms except themselves and those which tolerate as many different kinds of life form on condition that the the first kind selects itself out of existence. that's the fascism of radical democracies and the 'better standpoints' of some feminisms- just a lesser degree of cultural murder for more differences in kind. the problem of the one and the multiple is a false problem anyhow.. >the last thing i would argue for is a cult of stutters. all that would do is >attempt to universalise my own singularities. Why not a cult of just your own stuttering then? i don't do romantic individuals, oh ah lambs! And why does Deleuze not stutter, or decompose the text in every syntactic and grammatic whichever way? Why, my!, 'coz why do you imagine that readers of Deleuze should try and be Deleuze-what kind of copies do you expect here? Deleuze writes beautifully and suggests strategies i can use. > stuttering is always to be alien in one's own tongue He couldn't do it. But you can. 'mazin'! as said already-i don't suggest my writing is good and i certainly would not attempt to do the single author bit. try some Serres for a alternative productive account of noise and sense. >the performative utternaces of stuttering are a kind of minor literature, >like a mobile logic scrambler which occasionally turns up with something >interesting in the turn and return beyond the experientially given but, >admittedly, works best with people who write and think well. Mush, this is flan pudding! Scrambling logic (whatever you mean by this) can only be performed by those who do not stutter... i am refering to the two kinds of intelligence worked out by Bergson in Creative Evolution and Matter and Memory. one kind, the kind you exclusively recommend as the measure of all things, refers to the specualitve domination of matter by degree, the other is intuitive and links to the planes of phenomena and ossified habit in the total virtual past. the optimum conditions would be for a thinker to become adept in both kinds. i don't have the first kind that strongly but i do have the second, so the best thing to do with that is to work with thinkers of the first kind. Famous thought you got in there, in the interstices of your sentences and your "adding grammar". Garbage, you write garbage. ALL WRITING IS PIGSHIT ( Artaud) >so, no i am not arguing for a super race of stutters Madonna! >but >arguing for productive transversals between stutterers and non-stutterers This ain't one, is it?, given that the only self-proclaimed stutterer is a fake? oo- ah, i had not thought it myself. > anyhow, i don't want to talk about >myself anymore. Really? yes >i am not a situationist but definitely draw many of my influences from the >plotocal blurring of art and everyday life. Speechless. Forget about stuttering. >i am also a little spoilt with >experiemental research ...into what? A thesaurus for dyslexix? ok i understand that working with others is hard for you to grasp so i'll go slow. dyslexics de-systemise so i do the de-stratifying bits of the work. obviously destratification on its own is a lot of bits which don't consist. >i have got too used to friendly working relations, i >suspect, and just found the encounter with majoritarain prejudice >distressing. What we find distressing is that chlorpromazined psychos of your type pass themselves off for minoritarian speech: yes, well you are an institutional sadist and i am a contractual masochist-if you don't know already, the two belong to different kinds of topology in D's Coldness and Cruelty, they do not even meet in opposition. Ruth.C >as D points out in the Fold, the ( >relative) sum of the socious issues from an elsuive performativity 'between' >practices,arts etc. arguably, entertianment is one kind of practice. Lambda Chandala --- from list nietzsche-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu --- --- from list nietzsche-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu --- --- from list nietzsche-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005