[D-G] let's understand what's profitable for us with the mind of Capitalists

[Mark Crosby]

--- Gondo -Minnie <gondominnie at yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> dear Mark Crosby and others,
> to better point the animal in danger, ie. negative
> dialectic, lets see today this part I have excerpted
> from TP of Foucault:
> "Everything straight lies," murmured the dwarf
> disdainfully. "All truth is crooked, time itself is
> a circle."
> "Spirit of Gravity," I said angrily, "you do treat
> this too lightly."

Camel is burdened, lost in the desert storm; crouching
behind oils well.. A child drifts by and camel becomes
a lion pouncing, devouring the child. But, bounding
off to slake thirst, lion becomes child with poisoned
thorn in paw ("these glorious days were not
trouble-free" - Deleuze, introduction to PUF's 1965
NIETZSCHE, in _Pure Immanence_, translated by Anne
Boyman, 53-55 ;) 

Private & public are incompatible, and between them
child blooms new passions. But illness is not required
here - Evil is unnecessary - only desire and
challenge, a "secret intersubjectivity" or "shift in
perspective" (58). Illness, then, paints grimacing
masks, leading to "death-like rigidity" (59), the
triumph of tropes. "Among the girls of the desert",
fantasms mock, mirages beckon! At last, all the masks
are blown away. And what is left are desert sands,
whirling into fundamentalist dervishes or collapsed
into apathy! The lesson of this fable, Deleuze tells
us, is that "The secret of philosophy, because it was
lost at the start, remains to be discovered in the
future" (68)?

_PSYCHOMEDIA: The Journal of European Psychoanalysis_
(JEP 1996-1997)
http://www.psychomedia.it/jep/number3-4/contpern.htm
has a 3-page conversation about Mario Perniola's _The
Sex Appeal of the Inorganic_ w/Sergio Contardi. 

Still as confused (after reading Steve Shaviro's
recent review of the English translation  of
Perniola's book - see
http://www.shaviro.com/Blog/?p=440#comments) but very
intrigued by what Perniola says regarding positive
rather than negative 'logic' and how he dismisses
Contardi's insistence on sublimation, where "all human
sexuality is inevitably intellectual" and symbolic. 

Symbols, supposedly what are most free to play, are,
ironically, automatisms (laws, habits, signifiers).
Icons are affective & indexes are perceptive, while
symbols are surface concepts. 

Perniola says: "I have never liked the notion of
'sublimation': it is connected to negative thought,
lack, Catharism, and to the world seen as Evil. If,
when you talk about the intellectual character of
sexuality, you mean its 'spiritual' character, I do
not agree with you at all. Organic sexuality has
always been marked by the Spirit or by Life: does
sublimation show this movement between Life and
Spirit?" 

Mark, about to click (which is what amounts to
movement these days ;)