[D-G] Ranciere's art-politics in lieu of the Deleuzian/Guattarian perspective

[hwenk]

Hello,

The sabine ethics has been historically important as "ground and reason"
and
is a "suffering from the eros" (Antonio cited by Deleuze),
that is, it governs still the souls and feelings, although it is superflous
 by technioolgical and social structure developments.
Maybe as "neoarchaism" - recharging archaic structues in lack of
updating the psychic and social structures.



Things are very easy, if you are hungry and eat, the desire
for eating
vanishes without necessary developping a new "equivalent of  desire", so
"constance of desire"
is empirical destroyed by everday experience.


The idea of not too identify people with the state on the terrotory is good,
but also
to differentiate, there is also identfication of the people - which may easy
to release again.
In Germany, after the loss of the second world war,
the "nationalism", the identfication
with the territory gots real  problems,
it is largely not to do identify with germany.
Now, about  60 years later, it grows a little bit again.


It is a very bad effect of the usual academic art of philosphy,
which radiates to writing and reading of books, to destroy
the habit to test  thoughts and theories
by some experience - at best not always
the most simple ones - on plausibility.

This bad effect has also to do with self esteems
and the expectation of appreciating.

In a book of a psychologist the author states: "We want love without
achievements".
That is very striking, for there is mostly the expectation and the tendency
of the own and social practice to do the contrary - which is nothing else as
the effect of the "superego".
Now, rooting back the superego as not releasd neurotransmitters or synapses
or inhibitory synapses,
releasable by some yoga exercices,
would increase happiness on a personal level very much.
Also only the knowledge, that the superego is
a "neurotransmitter" question is very valuable -
destroying fragilities bound to the statement of the psychologist.

The bad thing about the superego is, that it is taken from very
low level brain structures and works somewaht autonomous on a small scale -
not controlled by the  "I", who suffersfrom the pains -
attribtued from the superego to the "I".
Here, our 300 year dead Spiunoza defined in a "robot" way:
"Bad conciousness is pain(my translation) bound to the idea of oneself".
So, destryoing the "bound to the idea of oneself" makes the
pain much more easy to bear - as if you are hurted by some accident on your
skin.
This "robot definition" is so much helpful.

The outcome from more archaic brain structures  and its relativly smallness,
makes the superego  very rigid and sometimes very painful.
Could be a second strategy to add some neocortex structures to the superego
and enlarge the synapse to the rest of the brain,
 making it more generous
and flexible and differentiated and working more together with the rest of
the brain.
In common words this is also "personal development" - subjectivation, the
central theme of Guattari and Deleuze and Foucault.
Then a lot of other ideas are connected to the idea of the superego with
your"fault" - for exampl compnsation, taste,
sytemic considerations - the wrong milieu, the wrong peole, a bad day, a
misunderstanding,
not so important, next time doing better this, is he really as Ithink, ...
....

This is also done by new synapses and new transmitters.
Also there is the not (always) to avoid tendency to project - as you remark
too.
But knowledge of neurotransmitters is much more complete than a pure
"abstract" projection theory -
as, for exaplmle, stated by Laing in "The self and the other".
In mathematics, we love projections, for you can do so much with it - in
geometry
and in mathematics in general.

So, I strongly avoid to bound love to achievements and success.


greetings Harald Wenk

-----Original Message-----
From: deleuze-guattari-bounces at lists.driftline.org
[mailto:deleuze-guattari-bounces at lists.driftline.org]On Behalf Of NZ
Sent: Montag, 9. Juli 2007 04:00
To: deleuze-guattari at lists.driftline.org
Subject: Re: [D-G]Ranciere's art-politics in lieu of the
Deleuzian/Guattarian perspective


I guess jnach is a robot who projects information w/o any circuitry
for dialog.  I agree with this kind of one-way "projection" of
opinion, even at the sacrifice of dialog, since there is so much
projected media already I thnk its hard for people to keep pace with a
real dialog circuit.  The projections of jnach are very much on
target, shooting down many false leads that attract genuine fraternal
needs of communication. The alienation itself produces this kind of
"voltage" that attracts certain populations to systemic outlets. The
process can be slow, that process of severing an identity with a
virtual computer dialog. I always hate how the computer
territorializes our time from immediate physical bonds, an entropy
that manufactures diversity. I do enjoy our dialog hwenk, its just I
try to consiously ration my personal investment to this virtual
reality.

Toqueville's critique of the republic's experiement with democracy in
america is outstanding, he can percieve the crow's feet around the
eyes of an infant. The manufactured diversity in catagories of govt is
a bonefide strategy for survival. I would never conflate govt/empires
with the people they territorialize and I would disagree with Gibon
who saw the fall of rome to be some kind of vitalist demise due to
metaphorical "plague".  Toqcovilla is good at keeping vitalism out of
his frame, allowing a more mechanistic paradigm to develop. I think
also because he is an outsider he doesn't "take it personally" and so
he doesnt take his critique to the 3rd degree, leaving it at the 2nd
allows for the reader to integrate his perceptions into their own 3rd,
providing much enlightenment in those spaces he leaves empty.

To refer back to that east-west momentum, I think the same goes with
Ballard's pov of porn. Simply coming from beyond the west allows him a
less-personalized account of it.  The need for govt/empires to
territorialize people stems from the very basic fact that women give
birth.  That sabine ethics is required is my own personal
explaination, but at least it makes a lot of sense that "solo acts" of
porn are born from systemic mechanisms and not vitalist ones. To me,
that indicates that there are many unexplained steps between "labors
of love" and "labors of masterbation" that would help Ballard's pov
fit with D-G.  Basically those steps would involve the
territorialization of mental space, and that step becomes possible
only after the "vitalist social identity" has been ruined, leaving an
alienated subject by themselves with a bunch of pixels.  That subject
is the same subject DeTocquevlle encountered during his tour of the
american experiement.
-cb
_______________________________________________
List address: deleuze-guattari at driftline.org
Info: http://lists.driftline.org/listinfo.cgi/deleuze-guattari-driftline.org
Archives: www.driftline.org