Thinking this into a new formation of practice. Praxis. Discursively and actively--against forgetting.
The project I am working on performs operationally in 'information war' 'post-event'. It includes resources such as a school and library. http://occupyeverything.com/category/features/ It is a site of militant research and radical cultural formation. On Mar 12, 2011, at 4:30 PM, simon <s...@clear.net.nz> wrote: > Dear <<empyreans>>, > > Two moments: > > [to talk to Aristide Antonas's post] > > escaping work or the work of escaping the representation according to which > the telos of every field is visibility correlates with the work of resisting. > How to encourage escape but by an escapist's strategy that doesn't end up in > escapism? What David Foster Wallace calls the liberal education has this good > and admirable goal in its sights, by giving the student to gain insight into > the chains binding them to ways of thinking and ways of behaving, leading the > student to ask questions, which in themselves are nodal points of escape - > points all too soon coopted into an optic of resistance, like the field of a > mass action. Recuperation of resistance as information. > > A new barbarism is intriguing. It smacks of a desire for an effort of > thought, of critical thought, or archeology - shouldn't that be a geology? as > in a crossing of the threshold of slowmo? - with the quick violence of the > earth as the upsetter? The point is taken, however, that this cooption of > liberatory knowledge to information, that is, representation, and this > appropriation of action to the field of visibility, likewise, representation, > tank up civilization - but as we know it, uncommonly well. > > The desperation of facing urgent situations without recourse to action, is it > more or less a black hole for the civilian, more or less a barbarism, for the > city, than "spontaneous unorganised violence due to the urgency of desperate > situations"? > > The political space need not immediately become a place enclosed by the three > theatrical walls of a living archive accessible by screen imagery, its fourth > porous wall, its magic. If it is not an open space any more, we should look > for the exits? > > I must admit, I am attracted rather than repelled by the concatenation of > political space, live archive and interweb or net. And I would like to add > the note that it might be precisely the violence and the urgency of desperate > situations that make the thought think. Less a tank, than a gnawing at the > earth, a disturbance in the field, a sudden inrush, a tremour, "more than > surface, less than depth." An illiberal, illegal, unauthorised, unorganised > and nonhuman violence to the fields of thought and action. > > Secondly, I have been thrown by recent posts seeking to establish fields of > names and negotiate those fields in terms of singular actions, singular > movements. To identify them with the singularity of an event or a monad. > Whether talking of an historically unfolding field of political action, > liberatory or encapturing. Or, in fact, enchanting and magical. If we are > with Badiou, then the event itself, in its singularity, has given rise to > this open set of subjectivities we know by their names. If however we are > with Deleuze, then the individual as a diffuse, clear confused, distinct > obscure field is the event and the mass captured by its monadic singularity > has escaped representation and cannot in turn comprise representatives of > whatever revolution in thought and action has occurred. Except as a branding > exercise? > > Best, > > Simon Taylor > > www.squarewhiteworld.com > www.brazilcoffee.co.nz > _______________________________________________ > empyre forum > empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au > http://www.subtle.net/empyre
_______________________________________________ empyre forum empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au http://www.subtle.net/empyre
