« Wealth Bondage Public Relations | Main | Philanthropic Bondage »

November 27, 2005

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

From via your link to BL above.


We need to adopt a stance that offers a radical alternative to both Bush and bin Laden, because it refuses to accept the self-evidence of the global capitalist marketplace as the only thinkable horizon of human life today. These are all things that very much need to be said, and that aren’t being said in mainstream discourse (not even, or especially not, in mainstream leftist discourse of the Chomsky kind).


It reminds me of recent comment discussions about imagining the possible, and how difficult it is to conjure up what has never been 'til now or soon. The worst part is the way this mainstream opperates to also ignore anything not thinkable in the present framework.

Anything that can show that the present framework is no more solid and eternal than any other, and that marketplace wealth isn't necessarily a good way to determine the future path of humanity is good work. The market is not magic, it is stupid, a good tool for some things, but still stupid.

Thanks, Gerry, a great quotation. BL reads Zizek.

Lovers! I have been cranking with a project that is taking longer than I'd hope. waahhh. i promise to get back and reply this weekend!

damnit. I went and read your comment and now I'm staying up late, and I should go to bed and get some sleep.

I'm not sure where you're getting irony from. And possibly you're seeing the word performance and reading too much into it? Which is to say, it's drawn from philosophy. E.g., Habermas talks about performative contradiction. It's kind of a clever "gotcha" in his theory of the ideal speech situation, yadda yadda.

Well, back to brushing my teeth and typing one-handed. :)

It means refusing the spectacle. It remains refusing to become the spectacle, to make a spectacle of oneself.

I think I understand it a little. As a long time reader/participant at WB and recently reading only a little at BL, I think Tutor's comment gets to the heart of it. Both sites by their names and styles draw in many who are only looking for a spectacle, but the substance of both sites is much more than spectacle.

Like Diogenes who was notorios for certain acts that on the surface are designed to draw attention to a spectacle, but what you get is a philosophy lesson. Obviously some few who were drawn to the spectacle, stayed for more or we would not have these stories today.

BL, we are working with the same materials. Yes, I know a little of Habermas, and more of J.L. Austin from whom he apparently pilfered the performative terminology. What I am really asking is what are your goals? Do you want to entertain, teach a little learning in the process, get a gig someday in the real media, get on TV, become a star, and be absorbed into the spectacle, or do you see a role for yourself in subverting same?

Very nice! I'm putting you at my favourits. Faithful, Standard, Faithful nothing comparative to International: http://www.ifilm.com/ , Anticipate Play Anticipate - that is all that Round is capable of when Chair is Circle it will Compute TV , Do Corner is very good Corner Astonishing is feature of Profound Chips

The comments to this entry are closed.