[D-G] b&w, color

Liza Kozner liza_kozner at yahoo.co.uk
Mon Dec 19 12:17:07 PST 2005

In 1907, just by flashing monochromatic lights one might
reterritorialize a space, but just imagine how much better the
reterritorialization process would work with POLY-chomatic lights!
hell, why not invent another dimension to this experimental system and
add fantastic stereo sound fx too, now that would be something fit for
a king.
   the popularization of the technologies used by the cinematographic industry, or the music industry, or the cybernetic industry, need to take some times before being brought to distribution and used massively, in a phylum: there was the need to get spectators accustomed to black and white cinema before being capable to impose something else by introducing color cinema (yet as you mentioned loads of technologies were already possible, ie. computer by ibm, sold to nazis, tested by the war machine as experienced by nazis, before commitment, the need to decrypt codes, usa was actually fascinated by the nazis, they wanted to find out what they had invented, and use it, use of power of "nuclear" energy actually distributed to the masses at the favour of a second world war accelerating in cold war then antiterror war, the machine, tests  a kind of subjectivity to an habitus, a body needs to be accustomed, fashionized, created by these technologies, before a new step can be introduced.
 subjectivity is constructed with caution, i think the mistake of the nazi was to reterritorialize on the bad ideas, whereas the capitalists were more cautious, discovered a fascination for criminals, serial killers, bad reterritorializations, and wanted by caution, to discover the right reterritorialization. i think france statements did not like us invasion because they thoughts it was a bad reterritorialization. i think "good reterritorialization" and bad reterritorialization expresses the need for the war machine to get to the right conjunctions. maybe internet? maybe dolby thx? maybe color cinema, at this moment. it's nice because something happens and the new invention can have an effect of all inhabitants of the whole. but yet people can have different motivations. one can be interested by, an other by. but what is important will be decided in the movement, things are uncertain, so extra care is needed, and the companies are asked thanks to the risk of financing ildly to stay
 inside the whole. what is foremost important, is that this movement is preserved in this whole, this movement which helps us to have this complex structure distribution between the parts in the whole. i think what you say are opportunist reterritorialisations, panachromia replacing monochromatic flashes, are this caution. industries, phylums of inventions, need to be not going raw. it's monochroma then polychroma. that's how culture becomes important, because culture enables to see the reversibility of these distributed forms of expression in the whole. that's where Guattari would actually intervene in this discussion of the distribution, and would say: we need urgently new modes of valorisation of the subjectivities. subjectivity could by culture see how instable we are yet when at the same time we are looking to be cautious. how to have good reterritorializations is not as important for the structure as for its citizens to see on what they are asked to follow reterritorialization,
 beyound good and evil sort of. that is to ask not to follow choices offered by the situation but to decide for a visibility of the situation. so i think cinema could help this visibility of the situation, and that is all profit for the inhabitants of the structure to see the structure. it's all profit for the people thinking for our goods that we can help them, and everybody works for this whole. at the moment they need to reterritorialize on objects about which they are not certain easily if these are the good objects, or the bad objects. i think it's an act of morality to show them by cinema so they can better help us, do you follow me? at the moment they need to propagate the medias of communication. but is it working? yes pretty well. but it's not enough to see clearely the world in which we are led to discover our existence, and so a cinema which would help the hierachical structure, like a Orson Wells adapted to our new curricula of pakistanese earthquakes, but other obscure
 events like this 9/11 tragedy. and cinema brought to bring light. so actually we need to take example on Christo, who can teach us how to be moral and help the authorieites. vive la police. wait, i am seing my image on Time Square, but i was only joking NZ!! HAHA (how vulgar to laugh like this here btw). okay. no, actually i am not wanting to be moral, but let's say it's moral, and the people we can let interested will se our morality as superior even to that of Deleuze, i think the structure is unstable, but we don't know it. i was reterritorializing cinema on the structure, it's actually well the structure which needs to be made visible for all. so it's somehow as the transparent city of glass in the apocalypse. not where "everybody" is seen, but where people become capable to get accustomed to what we do not yet see. and so culture is fine, but also cinema , color cinema, panchromatic, then reterritorialization of the people on thx, creation of a new potentially curious crowd,
 then there i have my house built. and then people learn to get cautious, and see that which is proposed them to reterritorialize, but actually i am not sure why to say reterritorialize, as it's rather the kind of wall, the barrier of opacity. i am wondering where does this come from in this map. do you see?
  ok hope you take care of what i say and tell me what you think of it.

To help you stay safe and secure online, we've developed the all new Yahoo! Security Centre.

More information about the Deleuze-Guattari mailing list