[D-G] a lot of colors in April 1912

NZ pretzelworld at gmail.com
Sat Jan 7 20:28:22 PST 2006

much to margret meade's dismay, here is a gladwell article about the
universal language of facial expression communication, here it is:

there are a lot of things he doesn't get into and the article has a
rather frilly voice (it's gladwell, what do you expect) but the point
is made whether its "true" or whatever can only be decided by looking
at the words and formulating logos recognition of the "facts"

I personally think it is interesting... how could this stranger look
into the eyes of an amazon shaman and "know for a fact" that that
shaman was a child sodomizer? Sure that is a bizarre hypothesis, such
are memes, and it really doesn't need to proven correct for it to
become alive and start affecting our minds. The "truth" of external
expression can be looked at physiologically, in terms of body

the simple notion that when a subject lies, then certain neurons are
fired which control certain muscles in the face - often resulting in
facial spasms or sweaty forhead, or the need to touch the face.
but when the subject tells un-concealed thoughts there are different
neurons being fired which control different facial muscles.
in the early 30s when it was becoming apparent that the brain's
thoughts were more chemical then electrical, certain neuro-toxins such
as botox began becoming subjects of study and experimentation. botox
was often used in "plastic" surgery preceedures to help conceal the
subconscious spasms in the faces of actors and politicials, like
ronald reagan, he is a good example, especially after huac, in the 50s
when his face was used to sell generalelctric agenda on television.
his face need to have botox injected into it so that the lying muscles
would stop twitching.

language, the fomulation of logos will only deliminate a portion, a
sub-set of the absolute. it is the nature of language to obscure the

More information about the Deleuze-Guattari mailing list