its difficult to be clear on the internet.
i was trying to think about smooth/striated
space. i am trying to understand why indeed
can't we be complete, spiritual, in the old
sense may be. ie. why are we in closed
activities. what is the secret beauty of the
artists work. how is it a territorial activity.
how can it deterritorialise. to do this
movement, and to find the way to do it together,
would be less dangerous. the danger is that, as
though its always possible to find a specific
smooth space, and that, so much do we live
partly in a very striated society, (are u
agreeing?), the practical danger i was talking
about, is to lose long term relation with the
slow, striating world. so part of what i say is
that we would need an Elie Faure for the
modernity. the philosophical and the artistical
part must join in us. its so difficult. but its
a way to deal with the "danger" of being forced
to reterritorialise, because of other lines you
encounter, etc.
if you disagree with some of what i say don't
hesitate to 'make a sign'. the relation between
collective arrangement of the socius, and the
territorial force, is still quite unclear to me
at this moment.
i am not sure i understand well capitalism. i am
still unexperienced. immediate knowledge is most
of the time better than mediated one. we are
crumbling under mediated knowledge. i for
instance don't understand why deleuzeguattari
say capitalism is decoding the territories, if
not because the territories, are giving towards
bigger 'machines', social arrangements, which
force the territories into new encounters,
urging deterritorialisation, converters of
arrangements, molecularisation also. so the
interest artist have had to work with machine,
because of their synthetising capacities of
social flows. the effort is really to ask as
Gaugain: where are we going to, ? what
deterritorialisation do we grant ourselves, or
at the contrary what reterritorialisation, at
what cost of independence, and intelligence of
our development. i was wanting to say, it would
be interesting that we'd see ourselves in the
process of constituting a territory, so as to be
better able to reach the beyound. if i had time
i would have licked to explain
retteritorialisation is /that may be its not
even humanity which is evoluting, mutating, but
the cosmos. that is also what is interesting in
gravitation and deterritorialisation./this kind
of question, the question of movement and time,
should get to the spirit of the people
interested by the socius, the media people have
a becoming philosopher somehow there.
i hope this makes some sense. its not easy on
the net, because we don't share same humour ,
visions, micro-perception, easily .
bye.
Get a free e-mail address at http://dashnet.zzn.com
____________________________________________________________
Get your own FREE Web and POP E-mail Service in 14 languages at http://www.zzn.com.
i was trying to think about smooth/striated
space. i am trying to understand why indeed
can't we be complete, spiritual, in the old
sense may be. ie. why are we in closed
activities. what is the secret beauty of the
artists work. how is it a territorial activity.
how can it deterritorialise. to do this
movement, and to find the way to do it together,
would be less dangerous. the danger is that, as
though its always possible to find a specific
smooth space, and that, so much do we live
partly in a very striated society, (are u
agreeing?), the practical danger i was talking
about, is to lose long term relation with the
slow, striating world. so part of what i say is
that we would need an Elie Faure for the
modernity. the philosophical and the artistical
part must join in us. its so difficult. but its
a way to deal with the "danger" of being forced
to reterritorialise, because of other lines you
encounter, etc.
if you disagree with some of what i say don't
hesitate to 'make a sign'. the relation between
collective arrangement of the socius, and the
territorial force, is still quite unclear to me
at this moment.
i am not sure i understand well capitalism. i am
still unexperienced. immediate knowledge is most
of the time better than mediated one. we are
crumbling under mediated knowledge. i for
instance don't understand why deleuzeguattari
say capitalism is decoding the territories, if
not because the territories, are giving towards
bigger 'machines', social arrangements, which
force the territories into new encounters,
urging deterritorialisation, converters of
arrangements, molecularisation also. so the
interest artist have had to work with machine,
because of their synthetising capacities of
social flows. the effort is really to ask as
Gaugain: where are we going to, ? what
deterritorialisation do we grant ourselves, or
at the contrary what reterritorialisation, at
what cost of independence, and intelligence of
our development. i was wanting to say, it would
be interesting that we'd see ourselves in the
process of constituting a territory, so as to be
better able to reach the beyound. if i had time
i would have licked to explain
retteritorialisation is /that may be its not
even humanity which is evoluting, mutating, but
the cosmos. that is also what is interesting in
gravitation and deterritorialisation./this kind
of question, the question of movement and time,
should get to the spirit of the people
interested by the socius, the media people have
a becoming philosopher somehow there.
i hope this makes some sense. its not easy on
the net, because we don't share same humour ,
visions, micro-perception, easily .
bye.
Get a free e-mail address at http://dashnet.zzn.com
____________________________________________________________
Get your own FREE Web and POP E-mail Service in 14 languages at http://www.zzn.com.