so what's your point? Mine was re-minding you (because you've obviously been
into ethnomethodology: my first degree centred upon conversational analysis)
of something we had in common in my depiction of a version of language that
had not benefited from its penetration, something you might have nodded to
in recognition. Instead you seem to be implying I am rubbing your nose in
something nasty because of my failure to respond at key moments. This is
what you are doing now in reverse. I apologise for not responding in the
past to you and others, but I can only say that (apart from the case of Jud)
in most cases this is down to not being able to find the time to act like a
'real' student, which I cannot be because I'm not! My reminder was a 'know
what I mean' thumbs up, not a taunt or irony: chill a bit, huh?
regards
michaelP
ariosto:
> peep,
>
> Fine let's do metacrap. When I was posting on Garfinkel I can't remember you
> saying anything. I can't find a thing in what I have kept from the week or
> two starting around august 19 where you mention Garfinkel. I have Tudor only
> showing interest in the sociology of conversation. I don't know if you are
> doing this just to make me step back and make more explicit what is implicit
> to you and me or maybe it's just too complicated. I don't know. I assume you
> are even more lucid than me since my thoughts are lost in different books
> than before and only now do I see an overview. But anyway as I look back my
> last long post to rene on the "dragon motif", BwO, "not-yet-conscious" is
> when I look closely pretty much an improvisational echo and variation on my
> post of aug 20 (re: membership construction) to Tudor. I'm stapling them
> together right now. No matter how lost I get in a line of research I know I
> can hook back into an old thread from wherever I am because I never change
> my overall subject which is the way (weg, tao) I am gesturing through
> indicative signs that are evocative. There on Aug. 20 the constitutional
> power of the not-yet-conscious or the intensity of a BwO I was discussing in
> terms of what the literature on Garfinkel calls the "missing whats" which
> was connected to Schutz's prospective sense of occurrence (Ereignis of Seyns
> ). These "missing whats" which were concretely refered to as "forthcoming
> movement publications, collectivity membership lists, programmatic tasks, an
> unfolding consensual vocabulary and other movement promises". Although the
> emphasis is on retention which in Holderlin is the whole process of
> remembrance or anamnesis which passes through an increasingly dark night of
> knowledge it is operating in tandem with protention (bow) as a tortous or
> corskscrewing intention that makes our feet into ears that dance and sing
> like corybants which gets Hades to release his bloody paws off of
> Persephone! It's a complex network of indicative sings where the imagination
> operates like Ariadne's thread throughtout a labyrinth in the image, as I
> fancy it, of a creation by Gaudi here http://hanumans.de/gaudi.htm or
> Serre's hermetic Harlequin's robe, or an American quilt and patchwork. The
> general idea is to motivate innovation which is to say the uprising of
> Persephone or a Dionysian rite of spring. I am changing the name of this
> complex system to Dionysus instead of Persephone. It's ah, more logical.
> Dyonisus is a radical research institute doing reasearch as I see it into
> what Walter Benjamin understood the surrealist as doing with their
> exploration of automatic writing or spontenous secretion of nectar which is
> to say motivating the energetic potential and spark of a transformative
> subject or multitude like a BwO or Indra or Dyonisus -- polyeidos kai
> polymorphos. I have been saying that this means as one of many ways of
> imaging this (which is not the construction of an object but a network of
> indicative sign-making production) that 'we' make like the fox (el zorro in
> spanish, robin hood, che guevara, the french resistance, dyonisus, BwO, etc
> and so on and so forth....) Okay I'm back to my old functional sociological
> self. So when you mention "coversational analysis" this is my reading of
> 'it', the vague it which like an 'object' of research itself or an emerging
> network of co-operative attunement is invented in the manner to some extent
> that Garfinkel and his cohorts describe when they describe the sociology
> knowledge in looking at anything from scientist discovering something new or
> a transvestite constructing her gender. My conceptual persona is clearly a
> neoplatonic orphic-dionysian shaman.You peep sound to me like a quietist
> along the lines of a Molinos or Fenelon for all the talk we get from you on
> anything resembling productive action. Did you find a copy of The
> Ethnological Movement? I can't see the authors name in the photocopies I
> have. It could take days to find in all my papers and books which I
> hopelessly try to organize. Anyway part of the challenge is developing a
> common bibliography which me and rene have had some success in doing. Also
> challenging is developing a common vocabulary that is sticky. The "bow" has
> a lot of potential because of it's *translatability* or ability to transform
> into all sorts of rhetorical devices or into family medals which the Italian
> renaissance often understood as a bow which gives color, nuance, tone to any
> cosa nostra kind of thing. The same can be said for Dionysus whose
> translatability or contextshifting and flexibility I have been showing. I'll
> come back to Italy and the bow later. I was just about to write on this but
> alas this summary has been useful.
>
> idiot.
>
> tympan
>
> tympan
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Don?t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search!
> http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/
>
>
>
> --- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---
>
--- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---
into ethnomethodology: my first degree centred upon conversational analysis)
of something we had in common in my depiction of a version of language that
had not benefited from its penetration, something you might have nodded to
in recognition. Instead you seem to be implying I am rubbing your nose in
something nasty because of my failure to respond at key moments. This is
what you are doing now in reverse. I apologise for not responding in the
past to you and others, but I can only say that (apart from the case of Jud)
in most cases this is down to not being able to find the time to act like a
'real' student, which I cannot be because I'm not! My reminder was a 'know
what I mean' thumbs up, not a taunt or irony: chill a bit, huh?
regards
michaelP
ariosto:
> peep,
>
> Fine let's do metacrap. When I was posting on Garfinkel I can't remember you
> saying anything. I can't find a thing in what I have kept from the week or
> two starting around august 19 where you mention Garfinkel. I have Tudor only
> showing interest in the sociology of conversation. I don't know if you are
> doing this just to make me step back and make more explicit what is implicit
> to you and me or maybe it's just too complicated. I don't know. I assume you
> are even more lucid than me since my thoughts are lost in different books
> than before and only now do I see an overview. But anyway as I look back my
> last long post to rene on the "dragon motif", BwO, "not-yet-conscious" is
> when I look closely pretty much an improvisational echo and variation on my
> post of aug 20 (re: membership construction) to Tudor. I'm stapling them
> together right now. No matter how lost I get in a line of research I know I
> can hook back into an old thread from wherever I am because I never change
> my overall subject which is the way (weg, tao) I am gesturing through
> indicative signs that are evocative. There on Aug. 20 the constitutional
> power of the not-yet-conscious or the intensity of a BwO I was discussing in
> terms of what the literature on Garfinkel calls the "missing whats" which
> was connected to Schutz's prospective sense of occurrence (Ereignis of Seyns
> ). These "missing whats" which were concretely refered to as "forthcoming
> movement publications, collectivity membership lists, programmatic tasks, an
> unfolding consensual vocabulary and other movement promises". Although the
> emphasis is on retention which in Holderlin is the whole process of
> remembrance or anamnesis which passes through an increasingly dark night of
> knowledge it is operating in tandem with protention (bow) as a tortous or
> corskscrewing intention that makes our feet into ears that dance and sing
> like corybants which gets Hades to release his bloody paws off of
> Persephone! It's a complex network of indicative sings where the imagination
> operates like Ariadne's thread throughtout a labyrinth in the image, as I
> fancy it, of a creation by Gaudi here http://hanumans.de/gaudi.htm or
> Serre's hermetic Harlequin's robe, or an American quilt and patchwork. The
> general idea is to motivate innovation which is to say the uprising of
> Persephone or a Dionysian rite of spring. I am changing the name of this
> complex system to Dionysus instead of Persephone. It's ah, more logical.
> Dyonisus is a radical research institute doing reasearch as I see it into
> what Walter Benjamin understood the surrealist as doing with their
> exploration of automatic writing or spontenous secretion of nectar which is
> to say motivating the energetic potential and spark of a transformative
> subject or multitude like a BwO or Indra or Dyonisus -- polyeidos kai
> polymorphos. I have been saying that this means as one of many ways of
> imaging this (which is not the construction of an object but a network of
> indicative sign-making production) that 'we' make like the fox (el zorro in
> spanish, robin hood, che guevara, the french resistance, dyonisus, BwO, etc
> and so on and so forth....) Okay I'm back to my old functional sociological
> self. So when you mention "coversational analysis" this is my reading of
> 'it', the vague it which like an 'object' of research itself or an emerging
> network of co-operative attunement is invented in the manner to some extent
> that Garfinkel and his cohorts describe when they describe the sociology
> knowledge in looking at anything from scientist discovering something new or
> a transvestite constructing her gender. My conceptual persona is clearly a
> neoplatonic orphic-dionysian shaman.You peep sound to me like a quietist
> along the lines of a Molinos or Fenelon for all the talk we get from you on
> anything resembling productive action. Did you find a copy of The
> Ethnological Movement? I can't see the authors name in the photocopies I
> have. It could take days to find in all my papers and books which I
> hopelessly try to organize. Anyway part of the challenge is developing a
> common bibliography which me and rene have had some success in doing. Also
> challenging is developing a common vocabulary that is sticky. The "bow" has
> a lot of potential because of it's *translatability* or ability to transform
> into all sorts of rhetorical devices or into family medals which the Italian
> renaissance often understood as a bow which gives color, nuance, tone to any
> cosa nostra kind of thing. The same can be said for Dionysus whose
> translatability or contextshifting and flexibility I have been showing. I'll
> come back to Italy and the bow later. I was just about to write on this but
> alas this summary has been useful.
>
> idiot.
>
> tympan
>
> tympan
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Don?t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search!
> http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/
>
>
>
> --- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---
>
--- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---