tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-73485480587924162562024-02-20T12:57:22.814-05:00RoutineThe Coming Internet Theorygluehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06940686366088454214noreply@blogger.comBlogger104125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7348548058792416256.post-596047064099203662015-01-05T20:13:00.000-05:002015-03-24T19:26:25.898-04:00Routine<span style="font-size: 85%;"><b>Dictionary</b><br />
routine |roōˈtēn|<br />
noun<br />
a sequence of actions regularly followed; a fixed program : I settled down into a routine of work and sleep | as a matter of routine a report will be sent to the director.<br />
• a set sequence in a performance such as a dance or comedy act : he was trying to persuade her to have a tap routine in the play.<br />
• Computing a sequence of instructions for performing a task that forms a program or a distinct part of one.<br />
adjective<br />
performed as part of a regular procedure rather than for a special reason : the principal insisted that this was just a routine annual drill.<br />
• monotonous or tedious : we are set in our dull routine existence.<br />
verb [ trans. ] rare<br />
organize according to a routine : all had been routined with smoothness.<br />
DERIVATIVES<br />
routinely adverb<br />
ORIGIN late 17th cent.(denoting a regular course or procedure): from French, from route ‘road’ (see route ).<br />
<br />
<b>Thesaurus</b><br />
routine<br />
noun<br />
1 his morning routine procedure, practice, pattern, drill, regimen; program, schedule, plan; formula, method, system; customs, habits; wont.<br />
2 a stand-up routine act, performance, number, turn, piece; informal spiel, patter, shtick.<br />
adjective<br />
a routine safety inspection standard, regular, customary, normal, usual, ordinary, typical; everyday, common, commonplace, conventional, habitual, wonted. antonym unusual.<br />
<br />
<b>Theory</b><br />
[ Our </span><span style="font-size: 85%; font-style: italic;">concept</span><span style="font-size: 85%;"> here ]</span>gluehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06940686366088454214noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7348548058792416256.post-35230138867005981802014-04-29T12:12:00.003-04:002014-04-29T12:12:58.210-04:00Theory 4 (Email 15)<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
Hi Jake</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
Thanks for this inquiry, which is indeed relevant to our conversation.</div>
Lacan
is slippery as we know, so to some extent my account is heuretic and
not scholarly, meaning that my reading is in the interests of
grammatology and framed by apparatus theory. In that context, by
definition, the digital apparatus emerges from but is not confined to
the accomplishments and limitations of the previous apparatus. Electracy has its own limits but that is not our concern now.
A key to the "optimistic" attitude towards psychoanalysis as ontology
for electracy is the provenance of gaze out of existential
phenomenology, specifically Merleau-Ponty (and Sartre). You and I
talked a bit about "Flesh" and Lacan's references to M-P's <i>Visible and
Invisible</i>, pubished posthumously just at the time of Seminar XI. M-P
argued explicitly that his account was ontological, replacing conceptual
or literate "substance" with "element" in the classical sense of earth
air fire water. He overcame cartesian dualism with Flesh, to name the
human as within the world in our materiality and sensorium: we see from
one position and are looked at from everywhere. What attracted me most
to M-P is the relevance of his ontology for electracy, in that he
insisted that the metaphysics of Flesh exceed the reach of linguistics
and language, of discourse (literate metaphysics), so he turned to
painters, especially Cezanne, and then Paul Klee, whose works
"authored" so to speak versions of Flesh as ontology. As we discussed,
Proust was his (and nearly everyone else's, include Deleuze later)
prototype or touchstone, referring to his involuntary memory. But he
noted that Proust in his novel is composing a hybrid philosophy, and not
working directly with Flesh. <br />
<br />The consistency of M-P's claim is measured relative to Heidegger,
for example, who reminded us that Being appears in and is possible for
thought only in writing (just as Lacan observed that the Unconscious
appears only in Analytic therapy). The related point from an earlier
lecture is that the purpose of therapy is to bring the excluded Real
into representation, in order to relieve the suffering you mentioned:
to transform suffering into symptom, as Freud said (into ordinary
unhappiness). We noted in our readings (and my lecture) that Lacan
describes a register of drive now accessible that is beyond the pleasure
principle. There are two pleasures (as Barthes noted in Pleasure of
the Text also: pleasure and bliss). The apparatus argument is that
the tracking of the two pleasures is a map of the discovery or emergence
of electracy out of literacy. The Symbolic (and Imaginary) orders are
covered by literacy, the operations of language and discourse, the
defile of the signifier, alienation (in short). That is indeed the locus
of the other provoking the emergence of the subject. The desire of the
other.<br />
</div>
</div>
<div>
There is another order, the Real, excluded (until now) from
discourse, from appearance, from consciousness, withdrawn completely.
Here is the workings of @ (objet petite a), partial objects, circulating
around the void, the hole of lack, the Nothing, the gap between need
and demand. The interest of Seminar XI for us is the account of gaze as
one of the partial objects, and how it may be brought into
representation, at least as image, but in principle in any aesthetic
procution.<br />
</div>
What is confusing and important to clarify (to the extent
possible) is that the @ proper is nothing in itself, but is only a
relation for the libido, the lamella of erogenous zones: the part
objects are the objects cause of desire (as you know), and any
particular item or "thing" that is desired, any "object" in the literate
sense, is an ambassador for the object cause. The drive and the @ are
best considered together (in fact we are aware by now of the
interdependence of the 4 fundamental concepts in general and all the
subfeatures articulated in the lectures to explain them). The drive
includes four operations (source, impetus, object, aim... something like
that?). These four correlate fairly well with Aristotle's four
causes: material, efficient, formal, final. What interests Lacan early in the seminar is to explain the
Unconscious as the "unrealized" dimension of Limbo between potential and
actual: what interrupts living? </div>
</div>
So
in class on Wednesday we will discuss how or in what way the camera and the various
practices of photography invented in the arts and popular culture
support and enable an ontology of the Real in Lacan sense. Your
spotlight is an excellent test case, but to direct the poetics and its
test in an experiment, we will want to correlate the CATTt inventories
with some clarity.gluehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06940686366088454214noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7348548058792416256.post-50759612860649812082014-04-29T12:06:00.000-04:002014-04-29T12:06:12.897-04:00Theory 4 (Email 14)<div>
Hi Kendra</div>
<br />
"Fetish" is a good anchor for gathering the
CATTt. It is useful even at the basic level of heuretics proper,
reminding us to pay attention to terminology. Psychoanalysis, like any
inventive methodology, dealt with the challenge of naming its new areas
of inquiry by appropriating some existing vocabulary. This vocabulary
is catachrestic, meaning that it is a figure for something that does not
have a literal sense. If we keep in mind the original source of
"fetish" we recognize that the term is eloquent, even if Freud used it
pejoratively to some extent. I discuss this in <i>Internet
Invention</i> (Marx and Freud both using fetish negatively to name features
of the industrial city, versus artists who somewhat later used it
positively). It concerns promoting some ordinary item of everyday life
to a position of symbolic power. <br />
<br />
"Castration" is similarly evocative: a
source of much misunderstanding of course, but also eloquent in naming a
condition of limit, disempowerment, control, threat--and reminds us of stakes in<i> desidero</i>. The most relevant
thing for us in the discussion is the description of operations and
logics associated with fetish and castration. You picked up on the
practical value of Metz's conversation. He is drawing upon Lacan of
course, applying Lacan and psychoanalysis in general to cinema. He is
using the theory to articulate the match between theory and practice
that concerns us also: that there are features of the camera and
photography that correlate with the theoretical account of human primary
process (the Unconscious). <br />
<br />
We need cameras to write with or through the
Unconscious so to speak. For example, the logic of fetishism in the
psychoanalytic context is that of denial, disavowal (defense)--the
child's denial of sexual difference. This scene must be generalized to
the logic, which persists in adult experience, allowing a person to
maintain two conflicting positions simultaneously: "I know, but all the
same" (or, the translation I prefer, "I know, but still..."). I know
(= science); but still (= belief). These two version of reality are on
different planes. We have to assume in the context of grammatology that
there is a use value for this operation of primary process. The
"still" has choral functionality (it is conductive). gluehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06940686366088454214noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7348548058792416256.post-54805158854065205082014-04-29T12:00:00.001-04:002014-04-29T12:00:20.779-04:00Theory 4 (Email 13)<div>
Hi Aaron</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
A good way to situate your deferred
participation in the email back-channel conversation about process.
One's first impression of a week's email could easily be that there is
no pattern or tendency, in that each post picks up on a
different piece of the elephant, so to speak, and then the response may or
may not get around to reminding all that we are talking about a camel (?).
Your primer is a reminder of this gee and haw dimension of the
exchange. The first point always is just regarding heuretics, the logic
of invention, and the CATTt , its chief heuristic. We are indeed
appropriating Lacan rather than attempting to be scholars of
psychoanalysis (and certainly not wanting to be clinicians of
neuroses). Nor are we repurposing him entirely either, of course, since
the proviso is that he is describing a Real for our metaphysics, whose
ontology we intend to test and explore in our experiments. <br />
<br />
Next step
then is to come to some agreement about what the theory has to offer,
and it would be good to be more or less on the same page about this, the
same screen, even though each experiment can and should be specific and
partial (necessarily), and all the better for it, since an apparatus is
not invented in a day by a solipsist. We left off the week you missed
(for a very good reason) with a clear (hopefully) statement of what we
needed to get from Lacan: <i>an idea central to the theory about the
nature and operation of the Unconscious + an example or collection of
examples helping locate how the Real of the theory is manifested in
experience, such that we might be able to work with it in our own
projects (returning to the Wide Image). </i><br />
<br />
This past week the concluding
lecture, following a productive and creative Band, clarified our
purpose, as extracting or extrapolating a pedagogy for general electracy
from the procedures of psychoanalytic training analysis, considered as a
transitional practice moving from literacy to the new apparatus (from
medicine, even from science, to something else, concerning how to enjoy.gluehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06940686366088454214noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7348548058792416256.post-4838356926428975882014-04-29T11:55:00.003-04:002014-04-29T11:55:42.146-04:00Theory 4 (Email 12)<div>
<div>
Hi Asmaa</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
A wonderful post (worth waiting for!).
You have the feel for Lacanian style (and its Chinese cousin) in working
through a theoretical issue by means of an art (or other materialized)
example. <i>Potentiality</i> is the central issue as we know, with the
Unconscious located in an interval gap of Limbo between Potential and
Actual (central and fundamental theme of metaphysics). Relevant to the
lessons of your case example is Lacan's description of the Unconscious
as an alternating current, or as a fish net that opens and closes, a
"trap" in this respect, whose rhythms one must learn to notice. In his
famous talk given at the Johns Hopkins Symposium that kicked off
poststructuralism in America, Lacan evoked the Unconscious as a figure,
as Baltimore in the early morning, before sunrise, with the neon lights
of the city blinking on and off. I appropriated that image to develop a
version of conduction that I characterized as <b>reasoneon</b>. </div>
<div>
</div>
<div>
We may
recognize the <i>Tai Chi</i> symbol referencing the alternating rhythm of
yin-yang, closed and broken lines stacking up into sets of 6, a hexagram
as two trigrams, moments of time flowing constantly, frame grabs of
process, positions as we know--of Shi. It is the 0/1 F/T off/on switch
constitutive of computing (the invention streams converging). Leibniz
who developed the binomial number system was shocked when he learned
about the <i>I Ching </i>from a Jesuit friend returning from mission work in
China. He saw that the 64 hexagram configured the first 64 numbers in a
binomial system. Finally, Lacan made the connection with Electracy
explicit when he explained this operation of the Unconscious with
reference to electricity itself, and the physics of an electric light
(having to do with the properties of current). <br />
</div>
<br />
But all of that , as in your case also, is to understand this
Real, known as the Unconscious, in order to be able to live with it and
thrive in that rhythm.gluehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06940686366088454214noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7348548058792416256.post-530723406707284732014-04-29T11:50:00.004-04:002014-04-29T11:50:59.962-04:00Theory 4 (Email 11)<div>
Hi Jake</div>
<div>
</div>
This post, too, remains connected with the
spirit as well as the letter (!) of the seminar. To the extent that
familiarity with context promotes understanding, it is useful to orient
the path Lacan has charted for himself by noting its emergence out of
existential phenomenology -- not only Heidegger, but also Merleau-Ponty
and Sartre (as we discussed). As you know from <b>Avatar Emergency</b>, early
Sartre -- <i>Nausea</i> and <i>Being and Nothingness</i>-- is important for my
approach to French theory. Sartre learns (ruefully) that being and
meaning (as Lacan termed it) are irreducibly split and may not be
synthesized syncretized or any other version of completeness. The
absolute is impossible, or, it is the Real. Sartre declares, after
numerous failed attempts, that one must either live, or tell, they
don't happen together. One has the cake, or eats it, perhaps.
Benjamin's terms were <i>Erlebnis </i>(living) and <i>Erfahrung</i> (telling). Now as
I said it seems that Lacan agrees and shows why it is so, and his
situating of what resists the absolute as the male/female division makes
his case all the more convincing. Nonetheless, he also indicates that a
characteristic of the human is striving for completion. Advertisers
have mastered the showing of completion that provokes the evil eye
and whose nature was recognized in Christianity as <i>Mary with Baby Jesus</i>
(except she should be nursing for it to be precise). <br />
<br />This striving is life (being), Aristotle's Entelechy, Leibniz's
Monad, Spinoza's Conatus, Heidegger's Dasein. What prevents well-being
(is it a fatal resistance?) is that this striving is captured, trapped
in the gaze. This aphanisis, this coming and going, place and
temporality of the Unconscious, of the Subject in its split, its
dimensions of meaning or being, that is the issue. The "or" is the <i>vel </i>(Latin or), in Lacan's updating of <i>Tuché</i>, the choice of decision.
So it is evident that numerous motifs are wrapped up in the topic you
pose. What we need to sort out, perhaps in the band, is that there are
two pleasures, two vectors or dynamics, in the circulation of drive.
Everything is interrelated in Lacan's model (the Borromean knot, the R S
I rings), but perhaps we may risk a simplification justified in our
context, by saying that literacy ontologized meaning in the register of
the Symbolic via the (semiotic) signifier. That is the way of <i>
alienation.</i> The other way is opened through the other beginning,
passage through the Real, littered with part objects (letters), whose
writing becomes possible in the digital apparatus, by means of a camera. This way becomes <i>Sinthome</i> (in late Lacan), when Lacan apprenticed himself to the littoral litter of <i>Finnegans Wake</i> (Joy/ce).gluehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06940686366088454214noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7348548058792416256.post-15856207302050738082014-04-29T11:44:00.002-04:002014-04-29T11:44:09.101-04:00Theory 4 (Email 10)<div>
Hi Adam</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
Here is the Adam-theorist as ordered by master
ulmer! There was nothing "wrong" in itself with the jazz reference
last week, except that it was an interpretation treating Lacan as
object of study when heuretics (game that it is) requires us to treat
him as method of study. He tells us what to do, not vice versa
(although like the good courtier or the Chinese sage we also manipulate
our resources to suit our invention). You get a lot of value out of
this example, nicely and explicitly supporting an important aspect of
the theory. We know from the Lacan's (local) Contrast that Freud is the
anti-Descartes. The interesting point for the new dimension of
electracy (supplementing the introspective consciousness of literacy) is
to describe what happens beyond the cogito (I think, therefore, I am),
that is, when you include the body (which Descartes abjected as mere
meat, with dire consequences, according to many). The Unconscious (as
Jacob observed) turns out not to be "ours," or in us -- or rather, the
map of our positioning relative to the unconscious is a moebius strip, a
topological figure showing us that the Unconscious functions as an
"edge." It is the edge of inside/outside, with effects Lacan
characterized as "extimacy."<br />
<br />
Your poem gives a more elegant variation on
Freud's alternative cogito (the desidero), "I think where I am not,
and am not where I think." This aniti-cogito takes into account the
split Subject. That the subject is split within (the split is not
subject-object, or me in here vs the world out there, but I/me/other). The
gaze is a field theory of Subject (bringing psychology into line with
the other sciences shifting from reference to field relationality of
system networks). The point is central to electracy regarding added
value for Google Glass: we need not only GPS, but EPS -- existential
positioning system. The split between meaning and being is involved,
and what we want to learn from Lacan is how to gather all our informing
parts (this gathering we have rightly identified as montage of a
surrealist collage sort for example). Lacan works hard to help us,
suggesting one way to characterize our experiment, as learning how to
locate and triangulate to take into account the position from which we
are regarded, as well as and along with the position from which we
look. Note the "French" term: <i>regard</i>.gluehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06940686366088454214noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7348548058792416256.post-66859367382811848562014-04-29T11:38:00.002-04:002014-04-29T11:38:34.102-04:00Theory 4 (Email 9)<div>
<div>
<div>
Hi Kendra</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
The continuity of your inquiry,
taking up from your previous post and my response, is how this email
is supposed to work ideally, and in this case, practically. It sounds
like you got some good relays from the group regarding my attempt to
clarify the heuretics of theory in preparation for the band review of
possible instructions. Lacan made interesting use of diagrams
throughout his career, and especially in the second half of his
seminars, beginning more or less with XI and continuing to the end. One
of the major shifts of emphasis was away from structuralist tropology
(although that work remains important given the tropological nature of
dream work), to topology (so I guess he dropped the "r"?). That is
another matter, as you noted, but with your ability with science
perhaps worth pursuing at some point. There are several books on Lacan
and geometry.<br />
</div>
</div>
<div>
Our context in apparatus theory and grammatology foregrounds
the Analytic clinical sessions as a kind of pedagogy, whose rhetoric or
poetics we want to identify and extract, to extrapolate from therapy
to a general education skill crucial to the project of well-being at the
core of electracy as metaphysics (well-being is to electracy what
science is to literacy or salvation to orality). In the Analytic
session, by means of transference induced through the methods of the
talking cure, the Unconscious appears. We need to attend closely to
Lacan's descriptions of how it appears--oscillation, pulsation, its
rhythm and timing, its temporality, since <b>time space cause are matters
of metaphysics</b>. That is what our poetics addresses. We know that there
is a dimension of "real" that in principle electracy makes accessible,
part of which depends on the practice we are devising. We know from
Lacan that this "real" (Real), which is not the same as reality, is
sexual and is foreclosed or at least expulsed or abjected outside of
speech and even language, but that it nonetheless is a force determining
what happens or not. </div>
<div>
</div>
<div>
The function of Analytic therapy is to instruct
individuals is the means for encountering this Real, to bring it into
discourse or representation-- and for our extrapolation obviously this "discursive"
practice is not only linguistic, certainly not only narrative. In fact,
part of grammatology is the argument that new media capabilities
are what make possible bringing this Real to metaphysics. For now, as you
have done, we learn from the Jullien/Lacan match, declaring and
demonstrating that art (both broadly and narrowly defined) is the
primary device for actualizing a set up (<i>the subject is a set up, an
apparatus</i>). Any and all the examples mounted in the seminar can help
us understand how the Real has a phenomenal or perceptual/intelligible
aspect, although (like chora) it is not itself perceptual nor
conceptual. <br />
</div>
<br />
We also know that we are headed (necessarily and inevitably)
to cinematics. And Lacan is helpful here as well, with his various
camera reference, as you note.gluehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06940686366088454214noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7348548058792416256.post-69304418148067199782014-04-29T11:34:00.002-04:002014-04-29T11:34:11.438-04:00Theory 4 (Email 8)<div>
<div>
<div>
Hi Samantha</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
I anticipate your presentation
with high expectations! A terrific move and illustrates a feature of
our craft as HEUretics. Lacan is excessively allusive in his remarks.
The Seminar proper is highly organized, as by now your notes probably
have shown you: it builds systematically, and every move is calculated
in the manner of an HBO dramatic series, drawing out the exposition to
sustain the required number of installments. At the same time, you
also may have been frustrated a few times by the disparity in context
provided: Lacan devotes more attention to some examples than to
others. His lecture style is famous as a deliberate attempt to
reproduce at least a simulacrum of <i>chimney sweeping</i> for his university
audience, to force them to some extent to bring to bear the auditory
skill of listening with "the third ear" (and this effect no doubt is
what Adam responded to with the jazz gambit). <br />
</div>
</div>
<div>
It often (if not always) is beneficial to pursue Lacan's
allusions beyond what he provides himself, especially if the example is
associated with explanation of an aspect of the overall theory that
especially interests you, perhaps to isolate in one of your inventory
posts. For example, in discussing linear perspective, and the grid
artists used to achieve the effect (mimesis) -- a Cartesian grid, of
course, and the classic 9 square layout is available as an overlay in
your iPhone today (to help get the "best" composition). As linear
perspective evolved into the baroque, leading to anamorphic and other
"distorting" effects, Albrecht Dürer made an engraving, quite famous,
showing the artist looking through the screen "trellis" grid at the
model. The model is a woman stretched out on the table, viewed from an
"up-skirt" angle -- concerned with effects of foreshortening no doubt.
But Lacan in his mischievous way no doubt intended us to notice this
pruient aspect of the scene. He does not explain, but drops the
reference in for those "who have ears" (as Jesus said regarding his
parables). <br />
</div>
<br />
Same with <i>Viridiana</i>. Your detour into the details of this example are suggestive, provocative, useful. gluehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06940686366088454214noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7348548058792416256.post-81900385943077857252014-04-29T11:30:00.001-04:002014-04-29T11:30:19.565-04:00Theory 4 (Email 7)<div>
<div>
<div>
Hi Jacob</div>
<div>
</div>
An insightful, useful discussion of
one of the four concepts at issue in the seminar. Part of the value of
your remarks is to remind us that this distinction between the
commonplace or preconception or layman's dictionary understanding (or
pop culture) of a disciplinary term applies to any and all of the
active vocabulary in play. Some of the added value is local due to our
CATTt, in which for example "position" becomes freighted with
significance, as a central term for Jullien. Because Jullien does so
much with "position," it produces connections with "position" in Lacan,
which is equally major. It doesn't take long to get a parallel (or
reoccupation) between surveillance in imperial China and gaze in Western
modernity. A concern of behavior (Morality in our MMM metaphysics,
action, act) is motivation, how and if acts hang fire, are put in
abeyance, suspended ("souffrance"), on demand of something foreign in
me: A good variation on Superego would be "the Chinese Emperor in me."
<br />
</div>
</div>
<div>
So we have these popular ideas, and studies have shown that a
more or less "vulgar Freudianism" is a default of modern common sense
regarding human motives. Then as you documented, it turns out that the
disciplinary term is substantially different. This happens in all
fields (the notion of "force" in physics, for example). <br />
</div>
<br />
Your inference about how to proceed is correct. What I like
about heuretics in general, and theory in particular, is that you can't
wing it and expect to accomplish anything, or, winging it produces
embarrassment eventually, usually sooner rather than later. Rather,
you have to suspend common sense, and follow the instructions of the
theory (however wacky or counter-intuitive). You start in the right
direction, noting that while the Unconscious may be structured "like" a
language, it does not include many of the features of formal grammar
that literacy developed into the rules of logic, not to mention the
practices of inference (abduction, deduction, induction). Rather, as we
know from Part One, the Unconscious thinks via conduction (as I put
it), or by dream work. Everything Lacan says about "primary process"
is this alternative inference system. The instruction is: <i>use primary
process operations in your experiment.</i>gluehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06940686366088454214noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7348548058792416256.post-24294070698285718142014-04-29T11:24:00.001-04:002014-04-29T11:24:24.741-04:00Theory 4 (Email 6)<div>
Hi Juan</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
Really productive post! An exemplary aspect
of this post is the interplay among theory (libido), Lacan example
(lamella), and mystory: asking and locating "what is this for me, in
my own case?" A point of sublimation, of course, is that mounting
exhibitions, producing a painting, or any activity of civilization, is
itself a source of jouissance. R. Crumb said he started drawing to meet
girls. It worked of course, but the career that followed left the
copulation way behind. And Lacan also asks of the women: why does this
work? In any case, for our purposes, looking for instructions, the
principle is (as you dramatize), to identify a theory of how the world
works (how reality is constituted, what forces construct the
possibilities of being and meaning); then be sure by means of examples
you have an understanding of how these forces are manifested in
actuality, in individual experience of the lifeworld; then formulate a
poetics, a recipe, that may be tested with your own wide image
project.<br />
<br />
In this regard, we are not limited to what is already in the
wide image, but may revisit the whole situation charted by part one,
to pick up aspects also available in the field but not necessarily
relevant to the first pattern, but now salient because of the Lacan.
<b>Also, this gap is precisely the dimension of the Unconscious, the
Unrealized between potential and actual. That is the place of our
metaphysics. Be sure also to attend to temporality and cause. These
are the big three of metaphysics -- what makes experience possible.</b>gluehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06940686366088454214noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7348548058792416256.post-65425443481912007012014-04-29T11:20:00.002-04:002014-04-29T11:20:38.350-04:00Theory 4 (Email 5)Hi Dhanashree<br />
<br />
these posts are circling (zooming in) on excellent material, prime for
instructions. We need to know from Theory some version of how reality,
the world we experience and observe, what makes it work. There is a
practical dimension to our "pure research," as emblematized in the
consultancy theme in Internet Invention (EmerAgency). And the poetics
and final experiment take up a key point of heuretics and mystory, that,
as Lacan noted (citing Freud also), this dimension we are addressing
(enunciation over/under statement, of desire enframing reflexive
consciousness), may not be treated in effigy. The metaphysics concerns
us (it describes the world we are in today, and proposes a mode of
action and attitude). So these phenomena that we observe and the
"things" and "persons" with which we interact, what moves them,
motivates and causes what we undergo? Drive. Everything circulates
around a lack/void, including in the empty uncanny place [chora] some
materialization that ontologically is objet a (which I write @, for
several reasons we should discuss). <br />
<br />
That is what the text says and we
adopt as the correct account (provisionally). We find its slot also in
Jullien, where we learn that the Chinese observed something similar, a
circulation of force organizing all experience, but they accounted for
it with reference to the season cycles, yin-yang (the <i>tai chi</i>). The
Chinese, that is, like the West (Greeks) were attending to life as
bios. Lacan acknowledges the reality of that dimension (obviously), but
adds another dimension that must be accounted for as well in
metaphysics, libido (beyond need into demand, desire, jouissance).
Drive is the force of libido, and its paradoxical features include the
fact that humans are able to gain some bit of satisfaction (of
jouissance) without achieving the aim. It has to do with the capacities
of our sensory organs, their polyvalence, and with the integration of
nature with culture, hence sublimation. There are many ways to say
being, Aristotle observed. Lacan would add, there are many ways to enjoy. No wonder I get a kick out of writing books!gluehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06940686366088454214noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7348548058792416256.post-90749829114249434602014-04-29T11:14:00.002-04:002014-04-29T11:16:18.348-04:00Theory 4 (Email 4)<div>
<div>
Hi Anastasia</div>
The question of adaptation of Lacan
to electracy is central to our heuretic concerns. I mentioned in
introducing Lacan relative to the CATTt that psychoanalysis is one of
several sites of apprenticeship, transitional forms, suggesting
practices that may be appropriated and repurposed and moved into
"general electracy" (part of an electrate education). Our project frame
in any case prompts us to ask about this adaptability, since we are
doing grammatology. "Tragedy" was a transitional institution for
Classical Greece, partly religious ritual, partly modern theater. A
symptom of the new mode of identity experience and behavior emerging in
literacy was manifested in theater in the figure of Thespis, the first
actor to perform as an individual fictional person (stepping out from
the Chorus to speak as a person). The grammatological analogy (using
apparatus comparison/contrasts to find opportunities for invention) is
that "subject" as theorized in psychoanalysis names and develops a new
mode of identity specific to electracy. The account of subject in
Seminar XI (and throughout all the seminars) is not so much about the
identity we have had all along, but of a sort that we may achieve within
the capacities of the digital apparatus. The experience of being
referenced, of course, is not new (desire, for example), but the account
of how it works, and the behaviors recommended for accomplishing
well-being, are a new possibility for how to address the irreducible
human condition (mortaltiy, finitude associated with the fact that
sexuality or sexual reproduction for survival of the species and the
lure of pleasure that goes with it condemns individuals to death).
Apparatus always includes identity formation and institutional practices
along with technology in the analysis and invention of culture.<br />
</div>
<div>
The related point of adaptation is to assume -- just
as you noted -- that Analysis as clinical therapy, in its treatment of
patients (Analysands) suffering with various degrees of disabling
neurosis, perversion, or even psychosis, models styles of self-knowledge
that may be generalized to everyday thriving. The historical analogy --
one that Lacan himself used frequently-- is with Socrates, who
practiced dialectics without writing. Freud managed the Unconscious
without a therapist (although his correspondence with his friend and
colleague, Fliess, is considered to be a kind of proto-analysis, and
these letters are the scene of the invention of psychoanalysis). The
four fundamental concepts name the elements of one experience that
Analysts-in-training must undergo (an encounter with the Unconscious).
Our poetics proposes to extract from the training features of a practice
that may be generalized for electrate being, relative to the
metaphysics of pleasure-pain (jouissance), productive of well-being.</div>
<br />
As you said, our question then is: what are the details?
what is the nature of this reality now supposedly accessible to
ontology, such that we may access and manage it? gluehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06940686366088454214noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7348548058792416256.post-23809008436923108172014-04-29T11:09:00.004-04:002014-04-29T11:09:59.160-04:00Theory 4 (Email 3)<div>
<div>
Hi Jacob</div>
A nice transition from my response to Juan, to your post referencing structuralism...</div>
As noted, we are looking to Lacan for help in defining the account of
reality opened up to metaphysics in electracy. We can approach this
account initially just by means of our common sense or popular
understanding of psychoanalysis, which, according to some, is now (in
its popular or vulgar version) the default explanation of human behavior
(psychosis, neurosis and the like). A quick statement of the reality
to be ontologized is the Unconscious. A virtue of Seminar XI is that
(for reasons already discussed) Lacan took a break from pushing forward
his more experimental speculations in order to regroup, to review the
fundamentals of his project (the four Freudian concepts). Part of the
fun and challenge of heuretics has to do with our appropriation of a
theory for purposes of invention, rather than as scholars let alone as
experts or masters. <br />
<br />
As with any specialized knowledge, with
psychoanalysis there is a vocabulary, touchstone examples and cases,
methods. We orient ourselves by coordinating our own understanding
relative to the unfamiliarity of the theory. A good point of departure
is to track vocabulary, technical terms, not just the four concepts, but
the terms used to describe and explore them. We may correlate and test
Lacan's usage relative to Jullien's vocabulary, the terms used in the
Cinematics overview (forthcoming), Internet Invention, and of course our
own background as students and in popular culture. Some terms will be
foregrounded in this way: for example "position." We know that a
central debate in China (and between East and West) is the role of
position in a set up, whether it is entirely deterministic, or the
extent to which an agent may manipulate events by means of position. <br />
<br />
The formula you discussed is a central point of reference, as you noted,
scene of many book chapters and mis/understandings. In heuretics we
are responsible not for correctness but for invention. We need to
understand the functionings and manifestations of the unconscious, so we
should be able to do something with the analogy (it is like a
language). Part of an instruction would be to note that our interest in
electracy is not to return to the function of language in literacy, in
alphabetic writing, so there must be more to language, or language
extends beyond what could be managed within the previous apparati, and
this more is to be brought into general practice by means of experiments
such as ours.gluehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06940686366088454214noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7348548058792416256.post-76507607549729379942014-04-29T11:03:00.001-04:002014-04-29T11:03:17.392-04:00Theory 4 (Email 2)<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
Hi Samantha</div>
Lacan is an interesting
case among the primary French theorists of post/structuralism in that
most of his work is in the form of lectures. His collection of papers,
Ecrits, includes pieces reworked into essays from lectures. There are
some 26 or so lectures (as far as I know), now mostly available in some
published form or other (albeit still unofficial versions in some
cases). I tried to avoid reading them all, but by now have read more
than half. They really are engaging, and reward attention, more than
reading works actually composed as books in some cases (Zizek, to name
one egregious case, has published more than 60 books). That Proustian
syntax to which Anastasia alluded is apparently the way Lacan spoke, his
natural style -- multiple subordinate clauses putting off the direct
object. His speaking style confirmed or demonstrated his point about
the role of the quilting point (point de capiton) not just in syntax but
at every level of discourse and action: that we cannot be sure what
the meaning of a statement is until the period is closed, and that
signification thus is retroactive. At the same time, the quilting point
is at work all along and a purpose of style is to play with the
expectations of interlocutors, to manipulate hopes and fears (as in
narrative and drama). <br />
</div>
<br /> Your comments motivated my opening, to get around to say
that the beginning of Seminar XI is not planned in the way a book
introduction would be, but is circumstantial, or historical, at least in
part, addressing the fact that he had just been excommunicated and
hence could not hold the lecture he planned, and had to find a new site
-- place and institution -- in which to work (recalling Adam's post
also). The opening is relevant, certainly, as we learn over the course
of the year, since Lacan has in mind the comparative history of the two
apparati that are our precedents: religion and science -- wondering
where psychoanalysis falls, and what may be learned from his experience
of innovations undertaken in the name of a return to the founder of the
new practice, Freud himself. <br />
<br /> Looking back could connect with the adage, reculer pour mieux
sauter, crouching in order to leap more forcefully. His audience is no
longer primarily professional or vocational, so he shifts discourse
positions, from master to university (as he later articulated the
available positions: master, university, hysteric, analyst). He
returns to the four fundamental concepts, inventions of Freud, in order
to take them up and develop them further, in order to advance the
"Freudian Field." As our theorist, we consider him to be performing
"first philosophy" (metaphysics), opening a new dimension for ontology,
just as the Classical Greeks did when they invented Philosophy and the
new institution of the Academy. <br />
</div>
<br /> As for narcissism, we understand by this term in
psychoanalysis an orientation necessary for everyday functioning.
Kendra noted a keyword for this new ontology -- desire. A reduced
version of the shift from literacy to electracy would be to say that
literacy took care of an ontology of knowledge: the love of wisdom
(sophia, knowledge) at the beginning. They assumed that this "love" or
desire for knowledge was in the nature of the human (even its defining
characteristic). Psychoanalysis, functioning as electrate metaphysics,
takes up the other side of the project: the love, the desire that
motivates and frames knowledge. This love yields at least a few secrets
under scrutiny, and much of the seminar is devoted to understanding the
primary role that desire plays in transference, which is the medium
that must be made to emerge within the analytic treatment if there is to
be healing. "Transference" is not exclusive to psychoanalysis, and has
always played some role in intersubjective institutions, such as
education, religion, politics, but it is foregrounded in
psychoanalysis. <br />
</div>
Your comments are valuable in noting Lacan's references to his
own ontology, and in looking for instructions. In the context of our
project, the poetics, we do not want to be psychoanalysts any more than
we want to be Chinese. Rather, the final poetics emerges from the
intertext of the CATTt resources. For the moment we recognize
"transference" as an experience for this new institution of the
electrate era that may be generalized, with consequences and
opportunities of practice for the general population of egents.gluehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06940686366088454214noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7348548058792416256.post-77769313600168296672014-04-29T10:53:00.001-04:002014-04-29T10:53:40.346-04:00Theory4 (Email 1)<div>
<div>
<div>
Hi Anastasia</div>
Thanks for getting us started
on this conversation. An ambitious post including the transition: The
points of reference you defined are good, useful for our purposes, in
grounding sufficiently general operations. We are defining
"metaphysics" not in the specialized sense of the science of being qua
being (as Aristotle had it), but taking being in its general sense as an
attempt to state the truth about what life is, not just THAT nature is,
but what it is, how it works, its axioms or principles (the arche).
This life refers to us who are living, learning how to act in accord
with reality and what is real, so as not to be mistaken, in error, and
repeat the same stupidities, such that we may be happy and thrive (so to
speak). Aristotle treated all of that in several text, inventing
several different fields of knowledge (not only metaphysics but also
logic, ethics, and poetics). <br />
</div>
I put it that way to pick up on your point about repetition,
one of the 4 fundamental concepts of psychoanalysis. Literacy committed
to rationality, developing logic out of the affordances of written
Greek, in order to get some control over error, the false, the stupid,
the deceptive. Socrates as gadfly felt obligated to point out to his
interlocutors that they didn't know what they were doing or saying.
Was reason the answer? Civilization made a great attempt in that
direction, following up the first beginning as Heidegger put it. And
yet, today, we still do not know what we are doing or saying. Freud
introduced a theoretical concept, the Unconscious, naming this
condition. Our stupidity does not work the way literacy thought, it
seems. Try again, with the other beginning. People who sought or who
seek out psychoanalytic treatment suffer dissatisfaction to the point
that they are no longer able to function. They repeat the same
mistakes, find themselves in the same impasse repeatedly. Why? what is
the cause? What may be done about it?<br />
</div>
Lacan as Theory in the CATTt provides our anagogy: we accept
his account of the Real, reality (provisionally, always), to explain
how things work. That is what we need from our Lacan instructions, so
that our instructions tell us what reality we are looking for and
testing in our experiment. You are right to focus on the examples, just
as we noted with Jullien: there is a general principle but the
examples help orient us to its quality: crossbow vs spear for example.
The game you rightly featured is famous in the literature, observed by
Freud watching his grandson playing with a bobbin on a string. He was
playing "gone" Freud said, and Lacan sites this case. The bobbin is a
signifier, the game is the means by which the child deals with the
absence of his mother. The bobbin is about something else (this is
always the case in art, dreams, language). A relationship is set up, a
semiotics, associating the two sounds the child made with two German
word (Fort! = Gone; Da! = There); the words in turn associated with the
position of the bobbin: thrown away; retrieved. In psychoanalysis, of
course, games, dreams, jokes, stories, art, literature are not "just"
analogies but the very material of the discipline. <div class="yj6qo ajU">
<div class="ajR" data-tooltip="Show trimmed content" id=":17q" role="button" tabindex="0">
<img class="ajT" src="https://mail.google.com/mail/images/cleardot.gif" /></div>
</div>
gluehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06940686366088454214noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7348548058792416256.post-59900005995791329972014-03-22T20:37:00.005-04:002014-03-24T15:59:34.588-04:00Shi (Instruction)<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhnV4ps8FBQf9G06yV8F2CYxCwIc3C1nmqHQu58U4kn80cCKOQMOH5_NabqwmrxqZFPdMEjkaaAUb8vDj3ryDvzhrk8FaSrCnb50uFZ4Qwlorls-4upU5Mm_APHbT3UmB6V7NUDG0g5kwk/s1600/ChineseLandscape.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhnV4ps8FBQf9G06yV8F2CYxCwIc3C1nmqHQu58U4kn80cCKOQMOH5_NabqwmrxqZFPdMEjkaaAUb8vDj3ryDvzhrk8FaSrCnb50uFZ4Qwlorls-4upU5Mm_APHbT3UmB6V7NUDG0g5kwk/s1600/ChineseLandscape.jpg" /></a></div>
<br />
Michel Foucault's <i>The Order of Things</i>, a thorough account of categories or classification in the history of Western literacy (in other words, a grammatological approach to metaphysics), begins with this declaration:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
<i>This book first arose out of a passage in Borges, out of the
laughter that shattered, as I read the passage, all the familiar
landmarks of my thought - our thought, the thought that bears the stamp
of our age and our geography - breaking up all the ordered surfaces and
all the planes with which we are accustomed to tame the wild profusion
of existing things, and continuing long afterwards to disturb and
threaten with collapse our age-old distinction between the Same and the
Other. <br /><br />This passage quotes a `certain Chinese encyclopedia’ in which it is written that `animals are divided into: <br />(a) belonging to the Emperor, <br />(b) embalmed, <br />(c) tame, <br />(d) sucking pigs, <br />(e) sirens, <br />(f) fabulous, <br />(g) stray dogs, <br />(h) included in the present classification, <br />(i) frenzied, <br />(j) innumerable, <br />(k) drawn with a very fine camelhair brush, <br />(1) et cetera, <br />(m) having just broken the water pitcher, <br />(n) that from a long way off look like flies’. <br /><br />In
the wonderment of this taxonomy, the thing we apprehend in one great
leap, the thing that, by means of the fable, is demonstrated as the
exotic charm of another system of thought, is the limitation of our own,
the stark impossibility of thinking that. (</i>xvi<i>)</i></blockquote>
Jullien's <i>Propensity of Things</i> removes the mystery of this effect when he explains that such collections are indeed an alternative system of knowledge, functioning not like Western abstract categories that unify by genus and species according to shared properties, but a series of positions (<i>shi</i>) for performing some skill, anything from playing the flute to the equivalent of the <i>kama sutra</i>. Chinese knowledge does not work with concepts and definitions, but gathers into coherence by means of networks of affinities and contrasts, correlations.<br />
<br />
The relay for a heuretics of electrate metaphysics is the refinement of the very notion of "apparatus" itself, the resonance between the "disposition" or configuration of a situation, producing a potentiality, with <i>dispositif</i> and the Wide Image matrix. Works of art, especially landscape painting, are the prototype for actualizing and exploring a specific "set-up," and set-up as such. The formal coherence of relationships within a set up, the design of tensions, the style (efficacy) of the design, create an effect of vitality. This vitality or dynamism has metaphysical significance, emblematized in the dragon as the icon of a Chinese disposition. The vitality or dynamism experienced in making and contemplating art directly concerns our inquiry into metaphysics, with ontology as the study precisely of being (life). The feeling of vitality in art expresses the force of being.<br />
<br />
A rule for heuretic instructions is to note in Jullien any points of analogy, as well as direct comparison/contrast between East and West. The categorial theme concerns <i>shi</i> as the guiding notion for observing Chinese metaphysics (despite Jullien claiming that Chinese landscape painting evokes the invisible force governing reality without resorting to metaphysics). The instruction is first to locate the relationship, and then to ask: what is that for electracy (to be answered by means of the CATTt)? There are numerous useful analogies, but the one featured here as instruction is the following (commenting on the list of shi or positions for learning a skill such as playing a musical instrument).<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
These positions in movement (and of movement) defy thought cast in the mold of dichotomies. For us too, the only way to describe them is through metaphor, by resorting to a cinematographic technique, for instance, and envisaging these series of <i>shi</i> as so many "freeze frames." Alternatively, using the terms of graphic representation, one might liken them to "sections" made for a drawing of an object imagined as divided across planes; the series of <i>shi</i> could thus be thought of as so many different sections cut through a continuous movement. Each section reveals in itself a fixed plane, but one reads it as a "configuration" matching the dynamic force invested in it (114).</blockquote>
The choice of this particular analogy (<i>shi</i> as cinematographic freeze frame), is motivated by our CATTt Analogy-- a book on "Cinematics," treating artists's explorations of relations between photography and cinema. The instruction is: <b>Art forms capture and realize potential set-ups, even in an experimental way. Specifically, be alert for a pattern (a configuration) emerging across the CATTt referencing freeze frame and related photographic and filmic devices.</b>gluehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06940686366088454214noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7348548058792416256.post-16882114750420054992014-03-08T17:05:00.000-05:002014-03-08T17:06:50.113-05:00Generating Instructions<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj82gRYoEVqQKLPtERZss6NINWLKIQzDKzY9nkKMo143wq1Q0AWLx9MhRnfVyWEfPAghe0XzkdqfKbjUcaXUnhrEOjL2Sz5jd-ZXdkV13hFMk1rsEpn8PKOx0W0rxwPDw5PtV4Qt3n1AcE/s1600/ulmerwide.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj82gRYoEVqQKLPtERZss6NINWLKIQzDKzY9nkKMo143wq1Q0AWLx9MhRnfVyWEfPAghe0XzkdqfKbjUcaXUnhrEOjL2Sz5jd-ZXdkV13hFMk1rsEpn8PKOx0W0rxwPDw5PtV4Qt3n1AcE/s1600/ulmerwide.jpg" height="361" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Image of Wide Scope (<a href="http://www.clas.ufl.edu/users/glue/F06/noonstar/noonstar.html" target="_blank">personal metaphysics: Ulmer</a>).</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
Heuretics requires several levels of process: the first step is to take a set of notes on a resource, in order to generate the inventory of possibilities for the intertext poetics. The notes must be an accurate if reduced and condensed representation of the resource, useful in any project. The instructions generated from the notes (second level) are relative to the specific experiment (in our case, an electrate metaphysics). In the spirit of translating hermeneutics into heuretics, the analytical and interpretive arguments of the original are rewritten as rules for production. The caveat is provided by the history of drama: the prestige of Aristotle's original poetics, describing the features of an ideal tragedy (Oedipus Rex), became prescriptions for Neoclassical tragedy, having a constraining and ultimately negative effect. Caveat duly noted, but still at this initial stage the procedure is to select key descriptions to revise into provisional prescriptions. <br />
<br />
The assignment describes the project and experiment, providing the goal the instructions address. The experiment is to test the conductive image logic used in the Wide Image to perform and communicate the electrate poetics generated in Part Two. The method is to use the assignment to help read the CATTt texts, beginning with Jullien. In this context we recognize a certain homology between Jullien and the Wide Image. The Wide Image was produced from a mystory by means of the Emblem--itself an unpacking of a basic image form: vehicle as material icon with properties and connotations; tenor as answers to three questions, concerning "metaphysics" (the nature of reality), "morality" (how one behaves), "mood" (feeling, attitude). Jullien's <i>Propensity of Things</i>, not by chance, manifests a similar organization. The book includes three parts, each with a conclusion: 1: A Logic of Manipulation. This Part corresponds with Morality (how does one act). 2: The Dragon Motif. Part Two concerns aesthetics, art practices expressing attitude, mood of this world. 3: Conformism and Efficacy; Part Three makes explicit the understanding of reality. These are an alternative three "Ms" of the H'MMM disciplines (counterpart to the STEM disciplines of literate science) -- a relationship that calls for a separate post.<br />
<br />
The immediate point is that in generating instructions for the poetics, one understands that a metaphysics is precisely that cultural environment that directs collectively, as a set-up for a civilization, comprehension of how reality is, how one must behave to thrive in that reality, and the attitude of feeling of this living. The Wide Images designed in Part One are intuitive, folk metaphysics. The experiment in Part Two is to correlate and augment the personal metaphysics with a potentially collective version.gluehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06940686366088454214noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7348548058792416256.post-37707077327607342792014-03-08T16:20:00.001-05:002014-03-08T16:27:42.378-05:00The Propensity of Things<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjGmh1vOUzUojMwjZD-CDLBnc698W77C7BUgY_FD7PboTwsoAiGMAGk7it0Azr6xbZ5ZJ1qLJ1rlMjrFdXRYU9s6mqUy_h8u8gD72uGqVwn-GQN_322V-kc9sgoFfNpu6UK8fGPo2LcnPE/s1600/julliencover.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjGmh1vOUzUojMwjZD-CDLBnc698W77C7BUgY_FD7PboTwsoAiGMAGk7it0Azr6xbZ5ZJ1qLJ1rlMjrFdXRYU9s6mqUy_h8u8gD72uGqVwn-GQN_322V-kc9sgoFfNpu6UK8fGPo2LcnPE/s1600/julliencover.jpg" height="400" width="272" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">(Cover Art) Dragon in Clouds</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Jullien's study functions as Contrast in the CATTt for an electrate metaphysics. Given the rule of heuretics-- that the poetics must be confined to the assigned resources -- it is desirable to have generous resources. The looseness of the heuristics can be frustrating. The first thing to note is that we are not contrasting with Jullien himself, but with the literate metaphysics he describes. Some confusion may arise to begin with since Jullien himself produces our contrast for us. A stricter CATTt might have placed Aristotle's Metaphysics in Contrast, in which case an inversion of that inventory might have resembled an ersatz "China" (just as, in <i>Heuretics</i>, an inversion of Descartes's <i>Discourse on Method</i> resembled a certain "Deleuze"). Derrida recommended in <i>Of Grammatology</i> that a theory and history of writing must include all literacies, not just alphabetic writing but also Chinese, Mayan, Egyptian (et. al.). Electracy in other words learns from and also distinguishes itself from all existing writing.<br />
<br />
Thus Jullien occupies Contrast in a complex manner. His method is to explain Chinese metaphysics for Western readers by a systematic comparison and contrast between Classical Chinese culture and Western (especially Classical Greek) culture. Our inventory extracts several levels of generative material from this arrangement: 1) Every major point of contrast may first be read as identifying a slot of any metaphysics. Our understanding of "metaphysics" as such derives from Jullien's survey of these two civilizations: we need to generate an entry for these slots by extracting from our Analogy and Theory our own version of what the contrast defines. 2) Chinese metaphysics may be construed as "opposite" to Alphabetic (Greek), and certainly it is "different" in principle, beginning with the difference between Chinese and Indo-European languages. This difference accounts for why at times there are parallels rather than oppositions found in our inventories, so that Jullien produces some analogies as well as contrasts. At the same time, the Chinese case is still a literacy, albeit calligraphic and ideogrammic. While it is true that some major inventors of electracy, such as Sergei Eisenstein and Ezra Pound, used Asian writing and arts as relays for their exemplary innovations, nonetheless an electrate metaphysics will not be Chinese anymore than Greek. Its exact relation to extant civilizations is not oppositional, however, but syncretic, operating as apparatus for a global civilization.<br />
<br />
<br />gluehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06940686366088454214noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7348548058792416256.post-3637121118606720392014-03-08T15:20:00.000-05:002014-03-08T17:09:45.058-05:00Designing a Metaphysics for Electracy<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEguCXg8artjtS9l_o56l3euyVbSKJLfEEgXYK_J1KtO2D9rLVz5potcfSywXDpW_w9KP4a7hcffUNdu8vzzzm_q6m1gy-3D1VI3-rgPtyb4S6l5YACWm2Uj9qn_y5BGLh0ao8YsRv_vDzM/s1600/gauguin.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEguCXg8artjtS9l_o56l3euyVbSKJLfEEgXYK_J1KtO2D9rLVz5potcfSywXDpW_w9KP4a7hcffUNdu8vzzzm_q6m1gy-3D1VI3-rgPtyb4S6l5YACWm2Uj9qn_y5BGLh0ao8YsRv_vDzM/s1600/gauguin.jpg" height="232" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><i>Where do we come from? What are we? Where are we going?</i> (Paul Gauguin, 1897).</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Gauguin's masterpiece, whose title alludes to a catechism Gauguin learned during his school days, introduces our heuretics of metaphysics. In the first part of the semester we used Internet Invention as guide for composing an <a href="http://www.clas.ufl.edu/users/glue/theory/blog14.html" target="_blank">Image of Wide Scope</a>. In the second project the goal is to develop a theoretical framework situating the wide image in an electrate metaphysics. In fact, the claim is that a wide image is a mystorical metaphysics. The electrate metaphysics is generated using the CATTt heuristic: Contrast = Jullien, <i>Propensity of Things;</i> Analogy = <i>Cinematics</i>; Theory = Lacan, <i>Four Fundamental Concepts of Psychoanalysis</i>; Target = the Internet; tale = blog. One purpose of the seminar is to gain some experience operating the CATTt, which was derived from a pattern emerging withing the genre of discourse on method (see Ulmer, <i>Heuretics: The Logic of Invention</i>). A rule of thumb is: <i>any hermeneutics may become heuretics</i>: it happens through a certain style of reading: <a href="http://blogs.hbr.org/2010/12/designing-for-propensity/" target="_blank">description becomes guide to prescription</a> -- look for instructions.<br />
<br />
The CATTt slots function like a spread in Tarot reading (or in any template): the slot itself is active and inflects any resource it receives. The syntax of CATTt begins with the articulation of a problem: Contrast repels; Target attracts. Contrast: the extant metaphysics of literacy are fine as far as they go, but are relative to their apparatus. Target: The Internet requires a native metaphysics. The C & T are kenotic, emptying out, opening a site for invention. The procedure is to inventory the respective resources to understand the terms of the problem, both what is being rejected, that for which an alternative is sought, and the affordances of the new condition. Solution is generated from an inventory of Analogy and Theory. Analogy is an extant related practice suggesting possibilities of the new discourse; Theory identifies the principles structuring the invention as a whole (the What of the enterprise). The heuretic produces four inventories, four lists, each list inflected by its slot. A pattern of correspondences emerges in the intertext created by the juxtaposition of lists. This pattern is configured into a poetics, a forumla or recipe of instructions for composing (in our case) an electrate metaphysics. The blog medium supports and organizes this process of collection, inventory, and correlation.<br />
<br />
In our project, this poetics is immediately tried, correlated with the first project, the Wide Image.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />gluehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06940686366088454214noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7348548058792416256.post-56968556212242101692013-04-15T17:45:00.003-04:002013-04-29T15:59:53.052-04:00(Ob)Scene-o-gram<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgYU6oFy9bwYkHhq-jiryL3RyQudEvk9ekIAaSHPK0vsxOdF08ef7BtfEOC4ABNw5U_lfioEDHYpyvLu6_tLC7zBsCV3HGTdsa4STIY-BOsB6iG7wZw3zouKr6YEHjKLyWNErQPaZSkb58/s1600/scene-o-gram1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="411" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgYU6oFy9bwYkHhq-jiryL3RyQudEvk9ekIAaSHPK0vsxOdF08ef7BtfEOC4ABNw5U_lfioEDHYpyvLu6_tLC7zBsCV3HGTdsa4STIY-BOsB6iG7wZw3zouKr6YEHjKLyWNErQPaZSkb58/s640/scene-o-gram1.jpg" width="640" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">From Narrative to Figure via Oracle</td><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><br /></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
In his book How to Adapt Anything into A Screenplay, Richard Krevolin admits that his method actually describes how to adapt anything into the Hollywood template. He includes this "scene-o-gram" in his book, mapping the three-act template of the screenplay, with the crucial turning-points punctuating the structure. As a visualization of structure, the layout evoked a tarot spread, which is not surprising considering the correlation of the three-level matrix of the major arcana with the screenplay form, mediated by the tradition of "the hero with a thousand faces." Since the shape of our tarot spread is open (for the Prezi map), it could be interesting to test the syncretic capacities of our own adaptation to konsult: can a Prezi configuration evoke together a tarot spread and a Hollywood scenario? gluehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06940686366088454214noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7348548058792416256.post-33582720238014105662013-04-04T20:19:00.000-04:002013-04-04T20:23:54.775-04:00Consulting the Accident<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhwqpBQSPCiqnFyQX3hRE8b_Hak3wBC01SCp2MW7WlR0ZfIQiFS2nOrF3a6rgsVIFeN15ajl6OiJ4VDAdqzvoWiLgfkGhY7oBhwgOO1mrq22zpyxetuC0qxvc4aZqRI0-_y5MM9a9LoXH4/s1600/layers1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="291" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhwqpBQSPCiqnFyQX3hRE8b_Hak3wBC01SCp2MW7WlR0ZfIQiFS2nOrF3a6rgsVIFeN15ajl6OiJ4VDAdqzvoWiLgfkGhY7oBhwgOO1mrq22zpyxetuC0qxvc4aZqRI0-_y5MM9a9LoXH4/s320/layers1.jpg" width="320" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">From Oracle to Konsult</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
The challenge of heuretics is to integrate the CATTt sources into a unified poetics. The immediate goal of Part Two is to relate the microcosm Once allegory of Part One with a macrocosm archetype for avatar counsel. The registers of the CATTt treated in Part Two contribute the following instructions (briefly stated):<br />
<i>Analogy</i>: Smithson. Create/design a feature of the local site as a figure/trope expressing a force organizing the scene or situation.<br />
<i>Target/tale</i>: Tarot. An Existential Positioning System (EPS) enabling DYI comparisons between individual and collective experience.<br />
<i>Target/Analogy</i>/<i>tale</i>: History of the Senses. A goal of Konsult is to augment and formalize individual encounter with sensory experience at the level of macrocosm.<br />
<br />
Konsult Design. The experiment proposed for this semester is to create a Prezi konsult, in which the egent (you) serve as querent. The hybrid poetics proposes to use tarot consultation as an interface to generate a bachelor machine figure, evoking a tropical relation between the querent and the Non/Site of the Accident (Koppers Superfund Disaster). <br />
<br />
<i>Layer One</i>: Pollack's <i>Guide to Tarot</i> is our relay. We are creating our own deck, at least in part, in that we will start with a reading, and then update the cards drawn using the materials of our own scene as archive. The reading requires that we first create our own spread. The purpose of this spread is to question the Accident, as a figurative translation of the conditions of our history into an archetypal form, for further thought and action. The spread should consist of ten "cards," having in mind the complexity accomplished by the Celtic Cross. To compose the slots for the spread, draw upon the sorts of questions found in the Celtic Cross, keeping in mind that the goal is to activate an association between our Once allegory and the Accident Site. Some further suggestions for the spread questions are found in ways to get to know the cards (p. 163), in getting to know a deck: What special message do you bring? What do you want to teach me? What do I need to work with you? The section on Interpretation of Tales (p. 172) models further design strategies, tailoring the questions to a specific tale (to the Accident in our case). Soul Questions (p. 174) are adaptable to our purposes as well: What is (Accident)? Where Does it Come From? How Does It Teach Us? A spread suggested in another source is used to question a particular card, to ask what it means: 1 = The card does not mean this. 2 = The card means this. 3 = The card is good for this. 4 = The best course of action. Be sure to include questions that ask about your relationship with Accident. <br />
<br />
<i>Layer Two</i>: There is considerable room for invention in this adaptation of tarot to konsult. The correlations listed here are points of departure. Once Allegory (Part One Einstellung). The movie in your Allegory of Prudence = trump cards of the major arcana. Significant people in your anecdotes = court cards.<br />
<br />
<i>Layer Three</i>: Koppers Superfund Site may be a source for any card in principle, but consider especially the pips of the minor arcana, which trace processes from inception through excess, corresponding to the elemental system of the tradition (Earth Air Fire Water).<br />
<br />
<i>Layer Four</i>: Use History of the Senses to augment the sensory features of your Once Allegory, as basis for any card in principle, with attention to the minor arcana.<br />
<br />
<i>Significator</i>: The Fool's Journey passes through our scene. A good way to select the Significator is to use the dates method (pp. 166-67).<br />
<br />
<i>"Card" Design</i>: There is no need to put the features selected from your archive into emblem form, as in the formally designed decks. However, the kinds of properties promoted to symbolic status in the formal decks are a useful guide to what to include in the features used to represent the updated "card" in your Prezi map. Modernist collage works are a valid relay for our purposes. The arrangement of the spread may take any shape. Translate/update the
cards drawn for each of the places in the spread, using the spread as a
grid of chance to select some feature from the other layers of the
assemblage. The effect of juxtapositions thus produced should in principle generate an evocative tropical figure.gluehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06940686366088454214noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7348548058792416256.post-70626674623328344612013-03-31T17:02:00.003-04:002013-03-31T17:07:07.339-04:00Mapping the Blind Spot<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi31llB0-NJ8vWZWWj2Haezs_yASEZ1y8CBncnvWBN_C8gpz4VFcKq1UzEkbTh_TjVyeavEwpB-SpVzo1JTy5LHOk77d6xNO6S23MSZGeEh3wewZ77OXLsrkOMWrTs0hEt3K0HQhKfUCRc/s1600/smithsonShed.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="310" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi31llB0-NJ8vWZWWj2Haezs_yASEZ1y8CBncnvWBN_C8gpz4VFcKq1UzEkbTh_TjVyeavEwpB-SpVzo1JTy5LHOk77d6xNO6S23MSZGeEh3wewZ77OXLsrkOMWrTs0hEt3K0HQhKfUCRc/s400/smithsonShed.jpg" width="400" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;"><i>Don't Make Me Take You To The Woodshed</i></td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Robert Smithson's oeuvre as described by Ann Reynolds is our Analogy. We approach this analogy holistically, appropriating for konsult Smithson's poetics.<br />
<br />
1) The first insight is his use of abstract art as a grammar of image inquiry. He invokes the entire problematic of representation through his use of enantiomorphic projection to figure <i>Blind Spot</i> as the register to address. This blind spot to be mapped by konsult is not only the various forces at work in reality that are out of sight, neglected, but still within the material realm. Force in this sense obsoletes substance in electrate metaphysics, to the extent that reality exceeds objecthood. Smithson devotes numerous works, activities, installations, and performances to rendering visible the force of entropy. Our analogy at this level is to ask: what is the force operating in the field addressed by konsult? That force is the human body itself, specifically our sensory capacity for pleasure-pain, attraction-repulsion. <br />
<br />
2) The second dimension of <i>Blind Spot</i> is figurative, that which comes into thought, feeling and experience only through sign semiosis expression, and this is Smithson's (and art in general) primary interest. He constructs the woodshed on the site near Kent State University, covers it with loads of dirt until the support beam cracks (twenty tons), in order to demonstrate physical limit. This physical limit is a figure, a trope, as is always the case in Smithson's projects, to intimate the force of entropy across all registers of real: physical, mental, ethical, political, economic, metaphysical. He suggests: where is your woodshed? Why a woodshed, if not to invoke the idiom: to take someone to the woodshed is for punishment. It is the luck of synchronicity that four months after this installation was completed, the notorious events happened at Kent State, when National Guard troops fired on protesting students. This historical juxtaposition just makes explicit the historical forces relevant to the question of limit, counsel, measure, decision.<br />
<br />
<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjvpIJqQiEnfvnAEHw2xnWh0Cz-Doho5jm5SDwe1ye6TrILFwb8X5ga94TdtvjlfHBKXVvG_wOu6LsaRzic2KTI-PS9fjb7NubTqVgsRqOn0DXh4TuM6HCjGTofQsmPpLO-ELbHTyjPK_8/s1600/Kent_State.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjvpIJqQiEnfvnAEHw2xnWh0Cz-Doho5jm5SDwe1ye6TrILFwb8X5ga94TdtvjlfHBKXVvG_wOu6LsaRzic2KTI-PS9fjb7NubTqVgsRqOn0DXh4TuM6HCjGTofQsmPpLO-ELbHTyjPK_8/s1600/Kent_State.jpg" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Limit (Measure)</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
3) Blind Spot, then, identifies the dimension to be mapped by konsult as that of tropology, figurative allusion, and konsult itself as a practice of reading and authoring figures. From Smithson we may learn to appropriate some feature of the consultancy field, to activate it in an image mode, to create a figurative comment. The most obvious material for this comment is the Cabot Koppers site itself -- the contemporary dilemma of pollution, contamination threatening the acquifer and the well-field, the issue of technics, in the manufacture of pine tar, and the history of this invention, including its contribution to the spice trade and colonialism. The direct analogy from Smithson is to ask after the pine tar in me. That analogy should be a point of departure for a broader review of the scene, to map a figurative ground, considering the full array of senses driving human invention.gluehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06940686366088454214noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7348548058792416256.post-85829994803331565542013-03-23T20:29:00.000-04:002013-03-27T10:34:22.013-04:00Outline: Learning From Florida<table align="center" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto; text-align: center;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg_GKyMRKdkHaFABJNj5QKp6hp6ADKR8HGPYTwL9pUaN3A0F14DyhQTYTM2Cx_KQ2P7hNLsYe8LDEgyDxJSdLBT294awPPEaGYpYpPNSGedDlxSsZjYWo_oT8M8VyPOhPoJ3ne-8MfTM0M/s1600/Konsult.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEg_GKyMRKdkHaFABJNj5QKp6hp6ADKR8HGPYTwL9pUaN3A0F14DyhQTYTM2Cx_KQ2P7hNLsYe8LDEgyDxJSdLBT294awPPEaGYpYpPNSGedDlxSsZjYWo_oT8M8VyPOhPoJ3ne-8MfTM0M/s1600/Konsult.jpg" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Reference: CATTt </td></tr>
</tbody></table>
<br />
Apparatus theory (grammatology) reminds us that ubiquitous computing is an example of technics: the technology is one register among three in an inventive matrix (institutional practices + identity formations). The primary focalizer for the responsibilities of konsult has been Paul Virilio and his warnings about the General Accident, and more conventionally the historical fact that every invention comes with a Gift Cause, the unintended but inevitable byproduct of the accident. In consulting on well-being relative to the Superfund Site in Gainesville, we may consider pollution resulting from pine tar production as emblem for the accident potential in ubicomp as well. It is worth remembering also, in designing our Existential Positioning System, that Heidegger anticipates Virilio's warnings in a way that makes catastrophe inherent in being.<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
The actively violent one, the creator, who moves out into the un-said, breaks into the un-thought, who compels the unhappened and makes the unseen appear, this actively violent one stands at all times in peril. In risking a prevailing over being, he must take a risk with regard to the onrush of non-being, with regard to disintegration, un-constancy, lack of structural order and disorder. (Heidegger, <i>Introduction to Metaphysics</i>).</blockquote>
Heidegger's account foregrounds the "violence" of creative invention that produces both human prevailing against the overwhelming (nature) and also catastrophe (the lesson of tragedy in general). His insight is that aporia is an irreducible dimension of poros. Our terms should register this complexity: a/poria, im/mobility. Ubimage for well-being is a practice of a/poria (im/mobile media).gluehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06940686366088454214noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7348548058792416256.post-28983145607687520192013-02-28T11:00:00.000-05:002013-02-28T11:02:50.866-05:00Part II: Fla4 (Fla Vor; Flavor) Florida Still<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em; text-align: left;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgq6wzvq03ul-S55gT-gZqi2jqaA20RHNn5S-GGY5HmQcSanr8DqqptrUZi-JdkuojfPNnrpefgsxkbHltVhVSQDmlPXXM5p1ehscWmYd-4cnSN85WQsoF-VYYeRx6dfeH4dO0j8ozLvys/s1600/KoppersSun1.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" height="400" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgq6wzvq03ul-S55gT-gZqi2jqaA20RHNn5S-GGY5HmQcSanr8DqqptrUZi-JdkuojfPNnrpefgsxkbHltVhVSQDmlPXXM5p1ehscWmYd-4cnSN85WQsoF-VYYeRx6dfeH4dO0j8ozLvys/s400/KoppersSun1.jpg" width="282" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="text-align: center;">Nemesis</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Part II of the seminar begins now, continuing with the project to invent konsult. <i>Konsult</i> is to the EmerAgency what <i>dialogue</i> was to the Academy in Athens. We are inventing a discourse on method for electrate consulting -- pedagogy among institutions, for (in)corporate beings. It is self-help deliberative reason for citizen decision on behalf of well-being. The heuretic project begins with this name for a practice that remains to be designed and tested. Konsult may occur within tourism or other leisure experience (<i>skole</i> = "leisure" in Greek), reoccupying the ancient practice of <i>Theoria</i> (theory tour), supported by Appiphany and related devices of ubimage. It is not only equipment of ubiquitous computing, but a practice of deliberative rhetoric, framing experience with an aesthetic attitude, to receive counsel (<i>der Rat</i>) from avatar (function).<br />
<br />
The prototype encounters Cabot-Koppers Superfund site in Gainesville, Florida, included within Region 4 of the 10 Regions organizing <a href="http://www.epa.gov/superfund/sites/" target="_blank">Superfund administration</a>. Konsult appropriates the discourses of popular culture that inculcate aesthetic attitude as vernacular discourse: tourism, cinema, television, digital games, to develop a behavior or conduct of sitesensing. Call it <i>flavor</i> for short -- #Fla4: fla (Fl) vor (four), to use conductive (Wake) linguistics. <i>Vor</i> as German preposition carries us to the matter. Place (Dative) of course: "though in referring to place only when it indicates condition or rest (if it answers the question 'where?') before, previous or prior to, ere, antecedent to (in time); before, in front of, ahead of (in place); in presence of; for, on account of, through, because of, with (joy, etc.)' from or against (with verbs of protection, warning, etc.); in preference to, more than, above." Let us skip to the adverb: "only in <i>nach vie</i> -, as always, as ever, still, now as before." <b><i>Still </i></b>(guide word). <br />
<br />
More to come, but to review: konsult functions as flash reason in dromosphere conditions, turbulence of <i>Entstellung</i> (distortion) as norm. Tropics of dreamwork, condensation, displacement, mise-en-scene, secondary elaboration: defenses, nescience, resistance to thought and feeling, diversion as constant turning (away) of attention, framing not just gaze but every part object and its sense: Perception and its cultural project are created (deliberately) to filter out stimuli/information/realization. The logic known as "fetish" operates freely and seemingly without resistance (it is resistance as such): I know, but still... (current locus classicus: "I know Obama has a U.S. birth certificate, but still..."). Cynical reason (Sloterdijk). Against <i>but still</i>, there is flavor.gluehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06940686366088454214noreply@blogger.com1