Yoksulluk, Yazdığın Şeye Başlık Bile Bulamamaktır Biraz da | Kaos GL

Yoksulluk, Yazdığın Şeye Başlık Bile Bulamamaktır Biraz da | Kaos GL

Interview with Serres

A very good inteview with Michel Serres, not long after Gilles Deleuze's death.

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".