"bodies and pleasures"
if these are repressed by power as negative and MF is dreaming of their
release, then we are--yes--in the same old top-down power field that HSv.1
was dedicated to avoiding.
and what else could they be?
I figure the whole of HSv.1 is a reason for not resting content with the
discovery that.....MF has failed...rather it is a reason for rooting around
for another account of bodies and pleasures....
so i was tickled by the thought that the new economy (if that is the word) of
"bodies and pleasures" is indicated by what Deleuze and/or Guattari call the
body without organs. this might have a few things going for it.
(1)
it would
steer clear of sex as the deep truth about our being hidden beneath the
surface....such a deep truth unifying a multiplicity of phenomena is naturally
figured as an organ organizing our lives....and the BwO, from the time of
Logic of Sense, is a surface phenomena not deep and not high
(2)
making
oneself a BwO need not be construed as a negation of a negation...the power
fields that orgnanize our body can be contrued as positive in the HS v.1 sort
of way...and making oneself a BwO could also be construed in nietzschean terms
as possitive, affirmative, saying yes, not in dialectial terms as negating a
repressive negation.....
(3)
making oneself a BwO might...i guess this is a big
stretch.....be construed as part of an aesthetics of the self which later
Foucault was pushing as a way to make "use of pleasures" and bodies to
construct a self.....the BwO might be a model of a non-kantian aesthetic
object...not isolated from action not framed away from the rest of lifes
activities...but rather energizing them....there..energy links to vitality and
hence to vitalism. (From Foucault, through Deleuze to Vitalism)
this is not an interpretation of any MF text, just a sort of hypothesis in
search of....whatever hypotheses seek
gordon
------------------
if these are repressed by power as negative and MF is dreaming of their
release, then we are--yes--in the same old top-down power field that HSv.1
was dedicated to avoiding.
and what else could they be?
I figure the whole of HSv.1 is a reason for not resting content with the
discovery that.....MF has failed...rather it is a reason for rooting around
for another account of bodies and pleasures....
so i was tickled by the thought that the new economy (if that is the word) of
"bodies and pleasures" is indicated by what Deleuze and/or Guattari call the
body without organs. this might have a few things going for it.
(1)
it would
steer clear of sex as the deep truth about our being hidden beneath the
surface....such a deep truth unifying a multiplicity of phenomena is naturally
figured as an organ organizing our lives....and the BwO, from the time of
Logic of Sense, is a surface phenomena not deep and not high
(2)
making
oneself a BwO need not be construed as a negation of a negation...the power
fields that orgnanize our body can be contrued as positive in the HS v.1 sort
of way...and making oneself a BwO could also be construed in nietzschean terms
as possitive, affirmative, saying yes, not in dialectial terms as negating a
repressive negation.....
(3)
making oneself a BwO might...i guess this is a big
stretch.....be construed as part of an aesthetics of the self which later
Foucault was pushing as a way to make "use of pleasures" and bodies to
construct a self.....the BwO might be a model of a non-kantian aesthetic
object...not isolated from action not framed away from the rest of lifes
activities...but rather energizing them....there..energy links to vitality and
hence to vitalism. (From Foucault, through Deleuze to Vitalism)
this is not an interpretation of any MF text, just a sort of hypothesis in
search of....whatever hypotheses seek
gordon
------------------