[...]xt, which is to say in trying to engage with a ="trms">specific text or s="trms">cene of ="trms"nttrm="already,spread">reading.

(="trms">Writing is) is winking at someone (you like)  while ="trms"nttrm="listen,alist,ilist,llist,olist,ylist,ulist">listening to my favorite music.

A ="trms">writing that is not structurally ="trms"nttrm="already,spread">readable ='lgc'>-- iterable ='lgc'>-- beyond the death of the addressee, would not be ="trms">writing.

The supplementarity of digression, a ="trms">fictional supplementarity. ="ppl">Freud is compelled to tell a ="trms">story but in the act of doing so, he betrays the annulment or effective impossibility of this ="trms">story. Sons murder of primordial father. O="trms"nttrm="righ,rigo,riga,rigi,trig,rign">rigin of morality='lgc'>: earliest moral restrictions in primitive ="trms">society have been explained by us as reactions to a dead which gave those who performed it the concept of crime.

The feeling that a text is especially ="trms">written ‘for’ derrida... As if waiting for him to come along and point it out.

="large lg2" stl="font-size:111%"> ="ppl">Freud's ="trms">story is less the ="trms">narration of an ="trms">imaginary event than the simulacrum of ="trms">narration. ="ppl">Freud's quasi event, is at once of ="trms">fictional ="trms">narrative and as ="trms">narrative as ="trms">fictive. It is the o="trms"nttrm="righ,rigo,riga,rigi,trig,rign">rigin of ="trms">literature at the same time as the o="trms"nttrm="righ,rigo,riga,rigi,trig,rign">rigin of law, derrida sug="trms">gests.

="ppl">Kant, ="ppl">Freud, ="ppl">Kafka, what makes important all these thinkers for ="ppl">Derrida has to do with how each in their ="trms">different way brings out a ghostly or virtual ‘="trms">narrativity and ="trms">fiction’ at the very core of legal thought.

Law is always an idiom. An idiom is an expression with a meaning that cannot be guessed from the meanings of the individual words='lgc'>: its door concerns only you. One's ="trms">relation to the law is singular.

The drama of naming (='at'>@Sonja naming the dance, dancing the name, is she dancing the name of the dance)

john ="ppl">Keats, prospective; Williams ="ppl">Wordsworth, retrospective. Prospective work consists of hopeful preparation, anticipation of future power rather than meditative reflections on ="trms">past moments of insight and harmony. Oriented towards the future.

All i am doing today, like derrida, can be seen as a grafting (ghalameh zadan) or extension, supplement or prosthesis, an outgrowth from somewhere else, earlier on.

I will attach to the ="trms">story of maulwürfe like the shit on his head.

Recalling and reinventing ="ppl">Shakespeare, the idea is not to bring it from ="trms">past to ="trms">present, something that is al="trms"nttrm="already,spread">ready disjointed in time towards the future. I push the characters of ="ppl">King ="trms"nttrm="learn,clear,Clearl,Olearius">Lear to a future. The deconstructive ="trms"nttrm="already,spread">reading of the play has to do with the opening of the future itself. It is utterly important that you do something unpre="trms">dictable for yourself. If you are in the business of hate, ="trms">love suddenly, changing tracks brings the unexplainable to the ="trms">trajectory. Going in discipline is like riding a train on rails, i am not saying to go off the track and crash or stop, but to change track experimentally and to change gear. The tracks are built for us to move in the field of thought, they don't cover the whole surface, by moving along them we can witness the new to emerge from our ="trms">interdisciplinary run.

="ppl">Derrida shows, reminds, that we can never do anything ="trms">systematically.

="trms">Monstrosity in the ="trms">story Yal-o Ejdeha by ="ppl">Shamlu. ="trms">Monsters of the deep..

="large lg1" stl="font-size:146%"> my aim was to show the ="trms">monstrosity of all the characters in ="ppl">King ="trms"nttrm="learn,clear,Clearl,Olearius">Lear not just Edmond. Edmond is the artist of the self. ="ppl">Shakespeare makes unacceptable characters. ="ppl">King ="trms"nttrm="learn,clear,Clearl,Olearius">Lear play is intolerable itself, an encounter with the opening of the future itself. Instead of giving in to the normalizing and legitimating re="trms">presentations which identity, recognize, and reduce everything too quickly, why not rather be ="trms">interested in theoretical ="trms">monsters, in ="trms">monstrosities which announce themselves in theoretical ="trms"nttrm="already,spread">reading.

The proper significance is simply and ="trms">categorically deferred forever, insistent strangeness of the force of deferral, (effecting what derrida has called) the singularity of the here and now.

“explained” is “explained away.”

unreasonable is not concealed necessarily.

Duty to ir="trms">responsibility

any phantasmatic organization, whether collective or individual, is the invention of a ="trms">drug, or of a ="trms">rhetoric of ="trms">drugs, be it aphrodisiac or not.
In talk, i ="trms">respond to the how of a ="trms">poem or text ="trms">dictating a kind of ad="trms">dictive ="trms"nttrm="already,spread">reading or desire in the ="trms"nttrm="already,spread">reader.

The project of a text, the project of a theory

="trms">according to ="ppl">Freud, when the work of mourning is completed the ego becomes free and uninhabited again. Funeral speeches and related ="trms">writings, are possibilities that structures the movement of identification. Mourning is the ="trms">interiorization of the dead other, also its contrary. Politics is figured as first and foremost an organization of the time and space of mourning.

After him, it is all war and crumbling.

We know better than ever today that the dead must be able to work. And to cause to work, perhaps more than ever.


The meaning of meaning ='lgc'>[...='lgc'>]

="display:block;white-space:nowrap;margin-bottom:-1em;overflow:hidden;">...................................

='lgc'>[='strcls'>*='lgc'>]deconstruction='lgc'>: a ="trms">sort of strategic device ='lgc'>+ opening ="trms">onto its own ="trms">abyss (one of the most influential approaches to texts) ='lgc'>=/= ="trms">method

="ppl">Campbell ='lgc'>='lgc'>--> ="ppl">Derridean deconstruction is visual
="ppl">Derrida's thinking helps us take images ="trms">seriously (as philosophical artefacts)
="lsts lst1">•organizational image='lgc'>: the ="trms">aesthetic ambassador for the organization (it visualizes ='lgc'>+ gives ="trms">aesthetic value to it)
="lsts lst1">•advertisement='lgc'>: preeminent image of production and ="trms">consumption of the global economy

image='lgc'> = logocentric vision ='lgc'>--need='lgc'>='lgc'>--> problematizing ='lgc'>=/= solutionizing


="large lg3" stl="font-size:111%"> ="prgrph">-is there a spirit of critique that is not liberatory in purpose='qstn'>?

="ppl">Derridean deconstruction='lgc'>: a critical approach ='lgc'>--draw='lgc'>='lgc'>--> attention to the operations of ="trms">method itself (='lgc'>=/= ="trms">method)='lgc'>:
='lgc'>[='lgc'>~='qstn'>? feedback types:='lgc'>]
="lstsrd">1. ="trms">interventionist ='lgc'>--advocate='lgc'>='lgc'>--> ="trms">different/contradictory ="trms"nttrm="already,spread">readings (of images)
="lstsrd">2. radical ='lgc'>--="trms">interest='lgc'>='lgc'>--> roots of meaning-making activity
="lstsrd">3. liberatory ='lgc'>--seek='lgc'>='lgc'>--> evoke justice (forcing an image to account for itself)
="lstsrd">4. ethical ='lgc'>--concern='lgc'>='lgc'>--> what is overlooked
="lstsrd">5. innovative (productive) ='lgc'>--promote='lgc'>='lgc'>--> non-traditional ways of ="trms"nttrm="already,spread">reading (of ="trms">interpretting, of finding meaning)


intellectual climate in 1960s ='lgc'>='lgc'>==>
="lsts lst1">•="ppl">Derrida's deconstruction ='lgc'>='lgc'>--> bringing Saussure's own work to its own radical paradoxical con="trms">="trms"nttrm="cluster,club">clusion
="lsts lst1">•="ppl">="ppl">Foucault's ="trms"nttrm="search">archeological approach ='lgc'>[="trms">question ='thdf'>the idea that human is an a ="trms">priori ='lgc'>='lgc'>--> how humans have been diagnosed in psychiatry and (ab)normalized in criminal and sexual ='strcls'>*discourses='strcls'>* ='lgc'>==produce='lgc'>='lgc'>==> reality effects at the level of body='lgc'>]
="lsts lst1">•="ppl">Barthes's ="trms">semiology ='lgc'>=/= ='thdf'>the idea that the ="trms">author is the single and ="trms">authoritative source of meaning

="large lg4" stl="font-size:110%">
="ppl">Derrida's ="trms"nttrm="listen,alist,ilist,llist,olist,ylist,ulist">list of concepts='lgc'>:
differance
retrait
revenant
dissemination
deconstruction
hymen
invagination
archiécriture
supplement
khora
pharmakon
scrypt
parergon
subjectile
='lgc'>}='lgc'>='lgc'>--> levers applying torque گشتاور and displacement in the textual machinery


deconstruction
='lgc'>='lgc'>==> counter-intuitive analyses
='lgc'>='lgc'>--> pre="trms">supposes a detailed knowl="trms"nttrm="knowledge,Knowledge">edge of construction (one must become intimate with the ways something is assembled) ='lgc'>[='lgc'>=/= cart blanche for meaning='lgc'>]
='lgc'>='lgc'>--> (="frds scrmbld">Jassem's style of) ="trms"nttrm="already,spread">reading otherwise='lgc'>: passing the classical discipline (='lgc'>=/= abandon, jettison it) to explore what it omits, forgets, ex="trms"nttrm="cluster,club">cludes, expels, marginalizes, dismisses, ignores, scorns, slights, takes too lightly, waves off, not ="trms">serious enough

="lsts lst1">•="trms">anthropcentric truth='lgc'>: a truth that appears to human beings
="lsts lst1">•="trms">instrumental truth='lgc'>: a truth aimed at getting things done (making things work)
="lsts lst1">•teleological truth='lgc'>: a truth which closes debate and fastens meaning

="large lg5" stl="font-size:131%">
='lgc'>[='strcls'>*='lgc'>]visual='lgc'> = a form of control (='lgc'><='lgc'>--="ppl">Campbell='lgc'>-- this aspect makes it central to organizational analyses) ='lgc'><='lgc'>==
="lstsrd">1. ='strcls'>*visual organizes reality by claiming status as the preeminent form of re="trms">presentation='strcls'>* (vision is the dominant tyrannical ="trms">phenomenology of the contemporary ="trms">world ='lgc'>='lgc'>==> all forms of knowl="trms"nttrm="knowledge,Knowledge">edge can be ="trms">presented visually)
="lstsrd">2. ='strcls'>*conflation of the ‘seen='lgc'> = known’='strcls'>* ='lgc'>: “vision='lgc'> = ways of knowing='lgc'> = experiencing the ="trms">world” (='lgc'><='lgc'>-- ="trms">imagined inseparable) ='lgc'>='lgc'>==> ='thdf'>the idea that depiction/picturing/seeing are ubiquitous features of the process by which most human beings come to know the ="trms">world as it really is for them
="lstsrd">3. ='strcls'>*visual organizes the ="trms">worldview of the seer='strcls'>* ='lgc'>='lgc'>--> visual is at its most powerful when it is most invisble (='thdf'>for example ="trms">scientific diagrams, mapping ='at'>@="nms">apass)

='strcls'>***instances of visual control='lgc'>:
="lsts lst1">•uniforms
="lsts lst1">•packaging
="lsts lst1">•computer software packages
="lsts lst1">•brand logos
="lsts lst1">•buildings
="lsts lst1">•websites ='at'>@="nms">apass
[...]