Hi Patrick -
Just wanted to say there's been a lot of work in this direction - even the Dispersive Anatomies issue of Leonardo that mez, Sandy, and I did talks about this. In my own work, in the early 90s I wrote about dusts and radi- ations in terms of urban phenomenology (looking specifically at Ciudad Juarez). I'm also not arguing about the social matrix of language, but about ontologies, codings, and so forth, and there's a difference between materiality and information here. Finally, recent results or tendencies, whatever, in cosmology point to matter itself as highly problematic; even information, which is retained, becomes fundamentally dispersed. So if you want to argue for information in relation to meaning, then, yes, you've got the social/implementation as basic. But meaning, at least for me (and in terms of physics), is something else, habitus/culture, and that's not what I was writing about. Finally, finally, the very act of reaching out to touch Derrida - which is as material as one can get with the livedead, is what the essay centers on. However, since you addressed your comments to Curt, these comments are most likely out of order. I just want to say I feel we're all talking past each other; I'll reference Susskind, Curt D/G, etc., and they're really mesh uneasily if at all. Alan _______________________________________________ NetBehaviour mailing list [email protected] http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
