Sanat olarak Futbol; adım adım

Choreography is the art of designing sequences of movements in which motion, form, or both are specified. Choreography may also refer to the design itself, which is sometimes expressed by means of dance notation. The word choreography literally means "dance-writing" from the Greek words "χορεία" (circular dance, see choreia) and "γραφή" (writing). A choreographer is one who creates choreographies.

The term choreography first appeared in the American English dictionary in the 1950s.[1] Prior to this, movie credits used various terms to mean choreography, such as "ensembles staged by"[2] and "dances staged by"[3].

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Choreography

Şimdilerde futbol, hareket ve dizilim-dağıtım üzerine biraz düşünmeye çalışıyorum. Sanırım bakması ilginç olacak bir alan koreografi gibi sahne/performans sanatları kavramları olabilir.

Football and theory: Game-play, ball as object cause and the match

The moment that the two series resonate and communicate, we pass from one distribution to another. (this is Deleuzean description of a game-play) The moment that the series are traversed by the paradoxical agent, singularities are displaced, redistributed, transformed into another, and change sets. (followed by a description of the movement of the ball as the object cause of the game-play)If the singularities are veritable events, they communicate in one and the same Event which endlessly redistributes them, while their transformations form a history. (history here is analagous to the match as limited)

quote from Logic of Sense, p.64

Revolution

"Any society whatsoevver has all of its rules at once - juridical, religious, political, economic; laws governing love and labor, kinship and marriage, servitude and freedom, life and death. But the conquest of nature, without which it would no longer be a society, is achieved progressively, from one source of energy to another, from one object to another. This is why law weighs with all its might, even before its object is known, and without ever its object becoming exactly known. It is this disequilibrium that makes revolutions possible. It is not at all the case that revolutions are determined by technical progress. Rather, they are made possible by this gap between the two series, which solicits realignments of the economic and political totality in relation to the parts of the technical progress. There are therefore two errors which in truth are one and the same: the error of reformism or technocracy, which aspires to promote or impose partial arrangements of social relations according to the rhythm of technical achievements; and the error of totalitarianism, which aspires to constitute a totalization of the signifiable and the known, according to the rhythm of the social totality existing at a given moment. The technocrat is the natural friend of the dictator - computers and dictatorship; but the revolutionary lives in the gap which separates technical progress from social totality, and inscribes there his dream of permanent revolution. This dream, therefore, is itself action, reality, and an effective menace to all established order; it renders possible what it dreams about."

Deleuze, The Logic of Sense, p.59

To watch list...

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1167077802155984674&ei=UeGtSanzH4va2gLzkJGyBQ&q=escape+the+overcode

http://brianholmes.wordpress.com/2009/02/27/guattaris-schizoanalytic-cartographies/

Brian Holmes

Deleuze and Proletariat: path to Ranciere

" ... it is as though each affirmation referred to its negative, or has 'sense' only by virtue of its negation, while at the same time a generalised negation takes the place of the problem. Thus begins the long history of the distortion of the dialectic, which culminates in Hegel and consists in substituting the labour of the negative for the play of difference and the differential. ... Furthermore, if the truth be told, none of this would amount to much were it not for the moral presuppositions and practical implications of such a distortion. We have seen all that this valorisation of the negative signified, including the conservative spirit of such an enterprise, the platitude of the affirmations supposed to be engendered thereby, and the manner in which we are led away from the most important task, that of determining problems and realising in them our power of creation and decision. This is why conflicts, oppositions and contradictions seemed to us to be surface effects and conscious epiphenomena, while the unconscious lived on problems and differences. History progresses not by negation and the negation of negation, but by deciding problems and affirming differences. It is no less bloody and cruel as a result. Only the shadows of history live by negation: the good enter into it with all the power of a posited differential or a difference affirmed; they repel shadows into the shadows and deny only as the consequence of a primary positivity and affirmation. For them, as Nietzche says, affirmation is primary; it affirms difference, while the negative is only a consequence or a reflection in which affirmation is doubled. That is why real revolutions have the atmosphere of fetes. Contradiction is not the weapon of the proletariat but, rather, the manner in which the bourgeoisie defends and preserves itself, the shadow behind which it maintains its claim to decide what the problems are."

Difference and Repetition, p.267-8

Ranciere, in the Misadventures of Critical Thought makes a very similar point with regard to 19th century elites and their use of critical thought. The premise of critical theory to reveal what's hidden beneath mystifications is what Ranciere criticizes there. He argues that this pattern of thought which acts like an authority, revealing the reality of problems was acquired by the elites for social engineering, leading to the assimilation of labour movements into social democratic regimes. On top of that the quote above would reject any interpretaion of Deleuze as "a non-political philosopher before he met Guattari".

Jean Luc Nancy "On Communism" July 3rd 2010, Birkbeck

Thanks to backdoorbroadcasting, we are able to listen to Jean Luc Nancy give his talk "On Communism", the same one he was supposed to give in Birkbeck last year if not for his bronchitis.

Nancy starts his talk by emphasizing the charge that the word communism has and states that the historical or real process of communism cannot shadow the philosophical-metaphysical-spiritual charge of the world communism. He refers to Heidegger's Dasein as "the new title for Man", which is always "mit Dasein" or being-with.

"Com" of the common finds its English equivalent in "with". With belongs to the existence, Nancy quotes Heidegger, (paragraph 25 of Being and Time) it is not categorical but existentiel. What is emphasized is an existential understanding of the "with", which is crucial for Nancy's defense of the word communism. According to Nancy, this proposition to take "with" as existential is the first step for a non-Humanist analysis, taking man as always being-with, being-there, opening a place in the world. Although Heidegger says that "with" belongs with existence, according to Nancy, he stops before the "How" question.

What Heiddeger does in paragraph 70, Nancy says, is to introduce people-community (Volksgemainschaft) as a sort of content of this being-with, where Dasein becomes able to have a history, or enters historical destiny. What Nancy points to is that the emphasis on the existential belonging of "with" dissapears in Heidegger's discussion of the Volksgemainschaft, where community finds its ontos in the people. Whereas according to Nancy, in the first part Heidegger dealt with the question of writing on "with" as such.

Then Nancy goes on to discuss the word common. (gemain in German) He points to the double meaning of the word as togetherness and also vulgar or profane. This divorce between two "common"s Nancy reminds the audience, is not Heidegger's invention but exists throughout the all heritage of Western thought. The question according to Nancy is; "How to be together with vulgarity?" or "Can we be together without being jeopardized of being vulgar?"

Nancy talks about two French phrases which he translates as "sir everybody" and "man on the street", which are figures presupposed as being always the bearer of ideology, of being vulgar and common sense, therefore low. The real experiences of communism in the last two centuries according to Nancy created a sort of suspicion, where communism was understood as vulgarity and low, with all the package of totalitarianism etc. This creates an understanding where "common does not belong to the high" but to the vulgar and low.

From hereon, Nancy briefly refers to Hegel, to point to a tradition of thought which understand the social bond as an exteriority of the relationships between individuals, where the individual always comes first. The word society appears exactly for this reason opposed to community. The sublimation of the state as high, is possible when the starting point is the individual which comes before. Even in Heidegger, Nancy says, "with" comes later, as being-with.

Nancy's question is to think a way which can present the "with", or common belonging without being political authority or without religious authority. He proposes the totem as the name of that way. The place of the totem is empty and this emptiness is the essential condition of democracy. (Nancy refers to Claude Lefort) This empty place appeared in the first part of Heidegger's Being and Time, where he dealt with the question of "with as such".

This empty place is the foundation for togetherness. Yet Nancy brings in Rousseau and his discussion of civil religion. He emphasizes two things. One is that the empty place as the foundation allows us to start with the contract rather than Man or Individual. (This is similar to E.Balibar when he says Man or Human is always mediated by citizenship as a third term)

Two is that the empty place has to be felt, it presents a possibility of feeling. The civil religion means that the contract and the empty place of the totem has to be sensible to the heart of the citizen, the contract has to be felt. There has to be something beyond law which makes the contract be felt. What is at stake in vulgarity (as gemain-common)is a feeling Nancy says, in that "we don't like vulgarity". Nancy relates this to Kant's "unsocial sociability" and an oscilliation between attraction and repulsion. (He probably refers to the psychoanalytical tradition). If am not mistaken, Nancy is talking about the impossibility of an equilibrium of forces where the force of feeling finds its ground. In contrast to money as general equivalence (capitalism) and/or individual as equivalence (liberalism-Human Rights), Nancy says that feeling is rooted in difference of value. "Power to" comes from the realm of feeling in a sort of impulse. Whereas in "liberal society", difference of value is reduced to the private sphere and its link with the common is not established.

Individuation

"The individuating factors or the implicated factors of individuation therefore have neither the form of the I nor the matter of the Self. This is because the I is inseperable form a form of identity, while the Self is indistinguishable from a matter constituted by a continuity of resemblances. ... By contrast, every individuating factor is already difference and difference of difference. It is constructed upon a fundemental disparity, and functions on the edges of that disparity as such. That is why these factors endlessly communicate with one another across fields of individuation, becoming enveloped in one another in a demesne which disrupts the matter of the Self as well as the form of the I. Individuation is mobile, strangely supple, fortitious and endowed with fringes and margins; all because the intensities which contribute to it communicate with each other, envelop other intensities and are in turn enveloped. The individual is far from indivisible, never ceasing to divide and change its nature. It is not a Self with regard to what it expresses, for it expresses Ideas in the form of internal multiplicities, made up of differential relations and distinctive points or pre-individual singularities."

Deleuze, Difference and Repetition, p.257-8

Cyborg Art

"Sanatçı hiç bir zaman "hah şimdi oturup güzel bir resim yapayım" demez. Bu, Columbus'un "şimdi gidip Amerika'yı keşfedeyim bakalım" demesi gibidir. Ancak çözülmesi gereken acil bir sorun, bir zorunluluk, olmazsa olmaz bir şeyin üretilmesi kaçınılmaz hale geldiğinde sanat ürünü ortaya çıkabilecektir. Dijital performans birileri için "zorunlu" bir ifade aracıysa üretilenin "sanat" olmayacağını söyleyenlere bu yüzden ancak gülünebilir."

Ulus Baker, İnternette Sanat Olur Mu? Korotonomedya.

Spectral Histories

"A messianic promise, even if it was not fulfilled, at least in the form in which it was uttered, even if it rushed headlong toward an ontological content, will have imprinted an inaugural and unique mark in history. And whether we like it or not, whatever consciousness we have of it, we cannot not be its heirs. There is no inheritance without a call to responsibility."

Jacques Derrida, quoted in Zhivka Valiavicharska, Socialist Modes of Governance and the "Withering Away of the State", Theory&Event Volume 13, Issue 2, 2010

The article is another one of a series of attempts to re-Present the Left-wing past as a political possibility of today. A close reading of State&Revolution is all the more interesting given that we attempted a similar reading this smester with Ozselcuk.

Valiavicharska does not use psychoanalysis, but her point is similar to that of Yahya-Ozselcuk's discussion of the forms of the commune, especially when Valiavicharska refers to retrospective studies on Soviet experience and the practice of property law. The close reading of State and Revolution gives us a sense of Lenin flirting with what Madra&Ozselcuk call feminine jouissance following Lacan, countering arguments on the domination of beuracratic specialists as the anthropological truth of Soviet experience in all its aspects.

The article is an attempt to re-Present Soviet past and rescue the "pure memory" of communism from its representational chains.

Futbol'a aforizmalar

Oyun ve strateji kavramları üzerine düşünmek, düşünceye o kadar da uzak değildir.

Futbol sahasını yapısal bir dağılım-hareket artikülasyonu olarak ele almalıyız. Toplu oyun sahasını belirleyen çizgiler maç boyu hiç sabit durmayan defans oyuncuları tarafından belirleniyor. Ofsayt kuralı bu minvalde oyunun kurucu kuralıdır.

Dağılım-hareket çatışması çok önemli. Takımlar sahada sürekli hareket halinde olsalar da sürekli bir dizilime veya dağılıma strive ederler uygulanması beklenen bir strateji etrafında. Hata dediğimiz şey temel olarak bu dağıl-toparlan devinimindeki slip'ler, ya da accident'lar. (tabi bireysel teknik hatalardan bahsetmiyoruz burada, onlar şansın bastırılamaz varlığına tekabül eder ve şansı tame etmenin sınırlarına) Bireysel beden teknikleri ve "sahanın yapısı" ya da "yapı olarak saha" arasındaki çatışmalarda doğar bu hatalar ama o dizilimden kopup sonucu belirlerler. Bir equilibrium fikri futbolla uyumsuzdur. Dağılımı yapısal sedimentasyon (or the failure of it) olarak düşünürsek bir structure'dır aslında, ve oyun kuralları çerçevesinde özellikle de ofsayt kuralı çerçevesinde şekillenir. Ancak hareket ve hareketin izlediği "differentials of intensities" (Deleuze-Spinoza) or "techniques of the body" (Mauss) yapısal olanın sınırıdır. (aynı zamanda yapının yeniden-üretiminin de koşuludur) Bu sınırlar yapısal dizilim-stratejik formasyon ve bireysel yetenek-phenomenology of the body etrafında negotiate edilir ve oyunun "özü" (essence as effect of workings of power) de budur.

Yeğinlik farklılaşımları ve beden tekniklerini birlikte düşününce, yetenek-motivasyon fikirlerini de birlikte düşünmek mümkündür. "Kondisyon" ve "duygulanım". Keyifsiz çıktığım maçların ilk 5 dakikasında hep yorgun düştüm. Ya da yorgun çıktığım maçlardan keyif alamadım.

Strateji, oyunda taktisyenlik olarak adlandırılsa da biz teknik direktörün yaptığına strateji diyelim, oyuncuların sahadaki stratejik inisiyatifine de taktik diyelim. (de Certau) İyi strateji, sahanın soyut değil, belki de "concrete abstract" bir haritacılığı ile mümkündür ve aslında iyi antrenör soyut olarak taktik bilen uygulayan değildir, oyuncularını iyi tanıyan ve o oyuncuların yeteneklerinin/capability'lerinin nasıl assemble edileceğini her seferinde tekrar düşünebilen, bir bir tasarlayandır. Oyuncuların tekil yetenekleri ve bu bedenlerin nasıl assemblage'lar kuracağına dair bir ilişkisel tasarıdır yani. Her bağlama uygun mükemmel strateji yoktur. (istisna mantığıdır bu - Copjec) Çok övülen o joga bonito bir istisna olarak koyutlanamaz. Ya da sürekli olarak kınanan catenaccio da aynı şekilde. İyi teknik direktörlüğün ya da daha genel olarak iyi futbolun gerektidiği oryantasyon, bu istisna mantığını reddetmeli, her koşulla veya her yeni girdiyle bir bir uğraşmalıdır ve görece sürekliliğe yormalıdır tekil koşulları. Oyunu nihai olarak belirleyebilecek veya güzel kılacak bir stratejik tutum yoktur, tam da stratejik olanın radikal olumsallğının kabulü iyi teknik direktörlüğün-güzel futbolun koşuludur. Ayrıca gol'ün event olarak, accidental varlığının, tam olarak planlanarak belirlenemeyeceğinin olumlanmasını da gerektirir. Joga Bonito'yu "estetik" futbol olarak solun tarafında görmek anlamsız bir burjuva dalkavukluğudur. Güzel oyun düşünce ve emekle makbuldur.

Gol bir event olarak ortaya çıkar, oyunun skorunu dolayısıyla iktidarın dağılımını değiştirir. Sonrasında dizilim-hareket diyalektiği (position-disposition-Bourdieu) başka bir "saha" da oynanır. Sahanın haritasını değiştirir gol. Değiştiremediği yerlerde ya bireysel yetenekler arasında bir uçurum ya da stratejik atalet vardır. Ya da bu ikisinin bir artikülasyonu.

TV'ye çekim şeklinin algıda etkisi: maçı TV den izleyen, yedek kulübesinden izleyen ya da tribünden izleyen teknik direktörler arasında nasıl bir fark var? Strateji hep bir haritacılık yoluyla, mekanın ve hareketin temsiliyeti yoluyla yapılır bu yüzden perspektif ve montage çok mühim. (Jameson and cartography) Aslında futbolun endüstrileşmesi vs. tartışmalarında konuşulmayan kesim bu, mesele sırf taraftarlık, bağırmak, çağırmak değil. 4-4-2, 4-3-3 gibi takıntılar aslında belirleyiciliği olmayan soyutlamalardır, futbol oyunu her zaman taşkın-belirlenir. Ancak bu soyutlamalarla konuşmak futbol medyasını yani futbolun endüstriyel temsilini mümkün kılıyor. Bu stratejik dağılımlar oyunun gidişatına doğrudan etki etmezler, tam tersi yukarıda belirttiğimiz gibi sınırlarına götürülerek, bedensel ve "taktik" anlamda act out edilmeleri yoluyla görünmez-leşirler.

Futbol istatistik dinlemez. Yönetimselin sınırı, "sahanın" radikal kapanımsızlığıdır.

Konferans

Boğaziçi Üniversitesi Eleştiri ve Kültür Araştırmaları Yüksek Lisans Programı'nın ilkini 2004 yılında düzenlediği “ 'Queer', Türkiye ve Kimlik” konferansının “transgender” temalı ikincisi 21-22 Ekim 2010 tarihinde Boğaziçi Üniversitesi'nde gerçekleştirilecektir.
Konferans, bütün alanlardan gelecek sunumlara açıktır.Program kapsamında yer verilebilecek muhtemel konu başlıkları şunlardır:

• Queer ve transgender temsilleri
• Erkeklik, militarizm ve milliyetçilik söylemleri
• Transgender ve feminizm
• Dil-din-ırk ekseninde transgender
• Beden politikaları
• Transgender ve göç
• İnterseks
• Seks işçiliği
• Nefret cinayetleri ve transfobi
• “Cross-dressing”
• Medikal Pratikler
• Transaktivizm ve queer yoldaşlığı

250-350 kelime aralığında olmasını beklediğimiz sunum özetlerinin en geç 15 Ağustos 2010 tarihine kadar, kısa özgeçmiş ve iletişim bilgileriyle birlikte queer.turkiye.ve.transkimlik@gmail.com adresine gönderilmesini rica ederiz.

Previously on Heroes

"He opens a copy of Living in the End Times, and finds the contents page. "I will tell you the truth now," he says, pointing to the first chapter, then the second. "Bullshit. Some more bullshit. Blah, blah, blah." He flicks furiously through the pages. "Chapter 3, where I try to read Marx anew, is maybe OK. I like this part where I analyse Kafka's last story and here where I use the community of outcasts in the TV series Heroes as a model for the communist collective. But, this section, the Architectural Parallax, this is pure bluff. Also the part where I analyse Avatar, the movie, that is also pure bluff. When I wrote it, I had not even seen the film, but I am a good Hegelian. If you have a good theory, forget about the reality."

Jodi Dean on Zizek.


carnivalesque, Heroes and communism!

Contingency of an Encounter

Thought is primarily trespass and violence, the enemy, and nothing presupposes philosophy: everything begins with misosophy. Do not count upon thought to ensure the relative necessity of what it thinks. Rather, count upon the contingency of an encounter with that which forces thought to raise up and educate the absolute necessity of an act of thought or a passion to think. The conditions of a true critique and a true creation are the same: the destruction of an image of thought which presupposes itself and the genesis of the act of thinking in thought itself."

Difference and Repetition, p.139