John Hopkins on Sun, 27 Aug 2006 18:38:04 +0200 (CEST) |
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
Re: <nettime> IDF reading Deleuze and Guattari (and Debord) |
>There is a need to build a new "old" language of critique, not simply >rely upon the recycled reactions of a strain of the left from '68. Bravo Daniel for stating that up front and clearly!! >To use Debord might be an oversimplification of his work, just as it >is to use D+G. But we must ask, what is in these works that makes >them so open to this use? I think a more general class of question might be: How is it that a relatively obscure set of texts become so Popular and are now used to explain everything? And: Who is next to be completely discredited; Who is next to be raised from the historical mausoleum of textual re-presentation and re-duction to be exclusively followed? Or who(se writings) will next be warped and twisted to fit the contingencies of those in power. Just wait and see! Not to degrade the ideas arising from that period or any other period -- but they are only one way of looking at the world -- I wonder what the landscape of nettime (or of academia) would look like if historical quotations could not be invoked -- that instead first-hand observation was the primary pathway to a world-view. Personally, I got tired of using other people's models for the world, and prefer constructing my own internally (and externally) consistent view. Of course, perusing an elegant and inspiring model from someone else is a nice thing, but should discourse be so often couched in terms and images that dead white guys thought up? I recall using DeBord back in the mid 80's (as a critique of post-modernist-obsessed academic thinking and as a suggested pathway for an engaged critical praxis), but being completely rebuffed by claims that his writings were irrelevant. So much for PC amurikan academia... >Unfortunately, these theories of the French radical mafia have now >become synonymous with "critical theory" in general, as the IDF has Just as the writings/writers who gave rise to the PoMo view of the world were discussed ad infinitum, ad nauseum between 1980 - 2000, now it's D&G from 1990 - 20xx along with the Situationists from 1995 - 20xx. It's great to adopt more accurate models than the one that one is presently following, or models that more accurately circumscribe the momentary contingencies of presence in a particular socio-political milieu, or to actively adjust existing models to fit the moment, but reliance on any one model as the flux of history passes seems problematic. It's too easy. AND, when the next critical step is taken, the step from reading to acting, to a lived praxis, what happens when the book can't be found, when there's no time to read, when life is in-your-face, or the chapter hasn't been written to aid in coping with TODAY? What then? When one is faced with constructing ones own model, THEN one has to be critical of ANY social input at the same time as rebuilding (and being confident in) atrophied internal sensibilities and comprehensions of the world 'out there.' It's a nice unstable, dynamic, and active position to be in, rather than nodding in agreement with those old texts. It brings one to the front of living, where decisions must be made based on what is happening in the moment, not on what one was told to do in school... okay, cheers, John PS - and one might well ask the question of older bits of wisdom -- how is it that they stick around -- hegemonic academia, rigid theoretical application? or functionality? (Sun Tzu has probably saved more readers' arses than D&G so far...) ;-)) PPS -- and when, historically, was war anything else but the ego play of the leader of the offensive war machine? # distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission # <nettime> is a moderated mailing list for net criticism, # collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets # more info: majordomo@bbs.thing.net and "info nettime-l" in the msg body # archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@bbs.thing.net