Too much peddling in ‘flat ontology’ when it should really be process ontology. (not to even mention the impossibly pernicious ‘paracite‘ of D&G that claims ‘ontology first’ when it’s really ‘politics first’ –> “For politics precedes being. Practice does not come after the emplacement of the terms and their relations, but actively participates in the drawing [...]
Archive for April, 2011
death to “flat ontology”
Posted in Reading Notes, tagged bergson, D&G, emergence, expression, flat ontology, materialism, multiplicity, ontology, singularity, toscano, transcendence on April 21, 2011 | Leave a Comment »
is empire a haecceity?
Posted in Reading Notes, tagged D&G, empire, haecceity, singularity on April 21, 2011 | Leave a Comment »
if empire ain’t a thing, then is it a haecceity (a fog, a wind, a storm, a summer, an hour)? there’s all this talk about ‘the multitude’ being a haecceity. but let’s clarify our terms so we’re not caught up in ‘multitude is better than empire because it shares an ontologically privileged status’ or all [...]
becoming-affective
Posted in Ideas, tagged affect, affectivity, becoming, D&G, deleuze, individuation, massumi, simondon, subjectivity on April 20, 2011 | 1 Comment »
Affect, like many other psychoanalytic concepts, was stratified by ego psychology. Just another box to check or a short line to scribble one- or two-word phrases — “Affect: __flat___”. Little did these clinicians know that they suffered from the same condition: “blunted affect.” Massumi injects a little Bergson into cultural studies in an attempt to [...]
affect: a definition (2)
Posted in Reading Notes, tagged affect, D&G on April 20, 2011 | 1 Comment »
AFFECT/AFFECTION: Neither word denotes a personal feeling (_sentimental_ in Deleuze and Guattari). L’affect (Spinoza’s affectus) is an ability to affect and be affected.
affect: a definition
Posted in Ideas, tagged affect, bergson, deleuze, spinoza on April 18, 2011 | 5 Comments »
‘affect’ describes both (i) the power of bodies to combine and (ii) the felt effects of power in the body. the content and expression of affecting and being affected. bodies combine in a very concrete sense, like nourishment or poison, to produce passional sensations of joy or sadness. affect is caught like one catches a [...]
Embodiment
Posted in Reading Notes, tagged affect, deleuze, lived communism, materialism, spinoza, transversality on April 11, 2011 | 1 Comment »
we don’t even know what a body is capable of. there is all of this talk of the soul and the mind, and we still don’t know what a body can do. [for those of you reading this on RSS, I've embedded a video here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=awtiZEiiAE8&feature=player_embedded] a series of propositions:
picking the right midwife for the birth of the post-human
Posted in Reading Notes, tagged D&G, foucault, materialism, psychoanalysis, schizoanalysis on April 7, 2011 | Leave a Comment »
Lévi-Strauss’s structuralism was, therefore similar in motivation to psychoanalysis, phenomenology, and certain forms of Marxism and existentialism; all these movements depicted ‘man’ as the being who is _other than mere_ life, whose desire for what is not immediate and present separates him from all positive being and compels him to enter some structure of deferral [...]
diagram:environment::archive:discourse
Posted in Reading Notes, tagged deleuze, discourse, expression, foucault, materialism, power on April 1, 2011 | 6 Comments »
If the ‘archive’ is the structure of what is sayable (discourse), then the ‘diagram’ is the structure of an environment. Deleuze, Foucault, p31-2, 34:
