From: LANDERS123-AT-aol.com
Date: Tue, 15 Jul 2003 18:17:15 EDT
Subject: Re: [postanarchism] Zizek Sells Out to Abercrombie and Fitch


In a message dated 7/15/03 11:11:51 AM, spencerpdx-AT-yahoo.com writes:

<< one cannot "become" within the spectacle. you are
giving aesthetics ontological priviledge, even when
they oppress human activity. this is not morality,
although it may be a form of ethics. go read Debord. >>

Spencerpdx,
I understand ethics as a continuum.  One direction (being increasingly 
interfering with becoming) is toward an absolute case of what Freud calls repetition 
compulsion, or acting out, and this may also be what you are calling 
spectacle or aesthetics.  The other direction is toward being supporting becoming.  
You may be saying that to the degree someone is acting out (compulsively 
repeating) they are not becoming.  I would, of course, agree since that is true by 
definition.
Thanks for "go read Debord."  That's so cute.  I get this image of a little 
kid being pushed away by a big, adult hand. 
Fred