Ereignis: 0, (Max.: 500+)

[...]rican woman slaves served as domestic servants and concubines) who remained in iran, married local people, and could live normal lives as iranians (although they might be identified as black)
==> *some percentage of the iranian population is of african descent (especially among the wealthy clases who could afford slaves) <-- this heritage has never hardened into a clear ratial category within the society*

we must regard them as actors *even when we cannot see their choices*

...................................

childhood Elias chap1

[*]childhood: idealized romantic construct, with denied legal rights, reflection of adults about themselves:
nostalgia for an individual and collective past

=/= children vacillate between innocence & awareness, morality & immorality, cruelty & kindness, foolishness & wisdom, , , **children act as sophisticated consumers**
--Elias--> ***children make emotional, political, consumerist choices***

how adults construct childhood --> ***aesthetic social imagination***

how adults imagine children (in idealized forms ==> evocation of emotions) ==> give meaning to (individual and) collective realities

childhood --> worry + obligation =/= adulthood --> ease + freedom

(my childhood is sometimes remembered by me so different than of my friends --> makes the universal media objects specifically precious: cartoons that were watched by us across border and time ---> go to Sina's Children's Media Watch List childrensmedia.net)

imagine children -->
nature of emotions
relationship to religion
relationship to society
articulation of attitude towards society
constructing concept of:
individual
community
nation
gender
age

Elias's notion of emotion --> a broad category to index concepts of morally, ethics, politics, aspirational acts,

(everything depends on the ways we remember our [emotional experience of] childhood)

(memory = salad of) fragments of memory + emotions from our experience + emotions experienced by others + what we have been told by others about our childhood


common theory --> age between two and eleven children are most sensitive to external factors ==> most vulnerable to advertising

*age seven*
children are increasingly controlled by symbolic relationships and images (+ make judgment about things)

interference animal jewellery treasure ganj mountain force intensification material plane intra-action percept media data plot [source: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Prachtk%C3%A4fer_aus_der_Grube_Messel.JPG] *under five*
{human characters ~?/= animated characters}--> belief in imaginary characters and monsters, management of emotions

*age two*
(end of) two --> children begin pretending (until age of five)

*over four*
idiosyncratic system of thinking about causality (extraordinary plays larger role than adults)


create and identify emotions in visual images

fantasizing =/= fantastical thinking

(for children) wishing = mental + magical + it exists in relatio to skill [---> go to Cinderella, waiting]


Elias's study of children images (visual material featuring children) in Persianate cultures (turkey, pakistan, iran) --> (role of) ***childhood/children = location of enacted emotion***
childhood + religion + visual culture <-- implementation of ideology in society

turkey, pakistan, iran:
strongly ideological (like other states)
multiethnic
shaped by encounter with colonial empire
strategic (=/= cultural) engagement with (west) global powers
belief in the existence of charismatic religious authority
belief in barkat برکت

Iran special relation to *religious visual art*


(Elias's) aesthetic: social imagination, creating reaction without words (= showing)
=/= telling
=/= nonutilitarian form of contemplation of art
=/= cognitive


Western mid 18th century philosophy ==>aesthetics”
lower cognitive faculties
experience of sensate body
how the world strikes the body
emotional and affective response

modern aesthetics --> contemplation of beauty (superior to idleness and boredom <-- some sort of failure of moral vigilance)
“art = description of beauty”
==> Kant: aesthetics = sublime beauty (=/= quotidien)
}--> (fable of) the idea that **beauty engenders virtue** --> the beauty must be formal


(social system --> people) interacting with visual objects
making consumer choices [--(is not always)-->] interacting with visual objects in ways that further ideological formations


*religious reaction to sensory inputs are aesthetic* <-- they anticipate knowledge to be revealed in the future =/= rest contemplatively in the present
*religious gaze = apocalyptic glance*
=/= Kantian aesthetics (noninstrumental form of enjoyment)

Plato + Aristoteles ==> premodern islamic thinkers --> “beauty = virtue” (harmony of physical and moral)


(problem with) philosophical aesthetics of disinterested contemplations --Elias-->
ignores majority of human experience
(favors) apophatic (transcendent + ineffable غیر قابل توصیف) =/= cataphatic (immanent + experiential)

unstable & somatic ways we respond to (and seek out) everyday images

evocative & powerful (<--Sina-- nonartisitic images)

(art or not art) ***aesthetic response***


[*]children's media: aesthetic social imagination

(moral components of:)
cruelty, hurt, disgust, disdain
kindness, happiness, admiration, love

physical, material, somatic relation to the ethereal, metaphysical, intellectual

(?how can we) confidently treat “images = sources of socioculturel information”

(from) Islamic culture --to--> cultures associated with isalm


strong opposition to representational religious art <-- modern Islamic societies --> unproblematic accepting of representational religious materials intended for children

didactic islamic visual media:
(Kuwait) the 99 --> heroes for each name of the God
(Pakistan, India, Afghanistan) burqa avenger --> burqa clad superhero against a corrupt view of traditional religion, using veil as costume
(Pakistan) Ferozsons publisher
Uysal press
Timas press (Cem Kiziltug)


age-graded sequences of children's religious books --> progressively decreasing use of images


questions (> Elias:)
are there culturally specific ways of seeing --answer--> yes
does religion requires its own categories for understanding visuality and sensory systems? --> *religion is a problematic category* <== inherently unstable {religion referring simultaneously to systematic ideological systems, atomized and multivalent beliefs, range of individual and cultural practices}--> constant flux + relative to each other =/= religion: discrete phenomena


scholars who argue for a transcendental quality to religion
Durkheim + Weber --> religious = behavioral
Otto --> location of religion: a fascinating incomprehensible force outside of the human person
Eliade --> essential unity of the religious (~= commensurate human behavior)
Elias --> manifestation of belief and ideology in visual written emotive forms --functionalist--> [*]religion = visual art

visual material --serve-->
aesthetic
generator of meaning
generator of affirmation شعاری
icon
talisman
objects imbued with religious function
token of aspiration
instrument of aspiration (or other emotions)
explicit reminder (of good behavior)
gesture towards a better future : wish images


seeing = embodied act (---> go to Gossip Girl)
(individuals make complicated interpretive choices concerning) what to look at & what they have seen
*we feel through, about, from the visual* ~= visuality is embodied ~= visuality is multisensory + emotional


Merleau-Ponty --> prereflective bodily consciousness: ‘body = instrument of comprehension’ (all material and other objects are woven into the body's fabric) --example--> blind man's stick
[Groz --> phantom limb]

(Asad > Elias) power of things is their ability to act within a network enabling conditions (physical + mental --> feeling, remembering, hoping) -->{capacity of objects ==> society and politics become vitally material}

(the idea of power:) objects have agency in the complex web of interactions that joins them to other [--> object having itinerary] =/= objects have abilities or sentience that they use autonomously [--> object having life]

}--Elias--> critique of the idea of scopic regime


Elias furnishing the minimum information necessary to create an informed context (to frame of discussion) =/= give comprehensive history (about iran, pakistan, or turkey)


objects --> *affecting presence* (objects elicit affects)
[*]object: location of emotion, happiness pointer (---> go to index finger)
visual object: signifier of individual and collective emotion and aspiration


index
we do not have access to reliable system of deductible reasoning that assures us of an accurate interpretation of one value to the index --> lack of precise causative relationship between *observed phenomena* and their *affective consequences* (manifested on individuals and human societies)
}<-- this plagues visial material cultural studies


(Gell's notion of) abduction: a form of reasoning to abduce a possible (=/= actual) agent or effect
abductive reasoning (=/= deduction, communication, translation)
--> ***to analyze and experiment in the lack of data or causal relationships*** (which happens most of the time)
(i have been using the term speculation as synonym for abduction)
abduction = informed abduction : you need as much contextually relevant information as possible


(learning from Elias)
specificity of emotions and affects <-- much more interesting
specificity of objects or people

[*]emotion: object of (unintentional) human manufacture ==> location of human meaning & motivation

...................................

childhood Elias chap2

philosophical notions of selfhood in late antiquity (= islam + europe) ==> study of emotions & feelings

Platonic + Aristotelian : “emotion = ambivalent urges need to be disciplined and harnessed through some process of education” ==> islamic ideas of body & mind

favorite emotion (~ religious expression + motivator) in islam [+ sufism]: love & virtue [----> my interest in hate & monster]

it was only one and half a century ago that William James argued that human mental states were incapable inseparable from our bodily forms (=/= “mind =/= body”)


modern theories of emotion:
universalism <-- sentimental desire to believe in the essential community of all human beings + appeal of neuroscientific inquiries into the biological bases of emotions + certain linguistics theories [--> for example (the fable of universal emotion) *fear in the face of the enemy* transcends time and space]
social constructivism <-- 80s sociology and cultural studies

using clinical data for humanistic arguments <-- problematic and unpersuasive


*******generation of new knowledge --approached-->
humanistic method (also applies to art?) --> authoritative: establishing control over the previous scholarship in the field + incremental advancement to collective knowledge
(*written as eureka moments of the revelation of knowledge* --> book: definitive work that closes discussion)
=/=
scientific method --> testing hypothesis, expecting one's own hypothesis to be proven wrong or incomplete in a very short time
(*written as progress reports on findings in ongoing research* --> article)

}--> this makes it dangerous for humanity scholars to take advantage of scientific research

[*]emotion
cognitive psychology --> humanistic + social-scientific theories of emotions --promoting--> (fables of)
universal basic emotions: happiness, anger, disgust, fear, sadness, surprise [--> regardless what these terms might be in other languages other than english, or even if there are equivalent concepts]
emotions do not occur in language but are physically manifested in the face [--> micro-expression in business negotiations]
(the fable of) artworks can convey emotions accurately and reliably across time and culture [---> go to the fable of *unmediated response* + emotional appeal of “great art"]
distinguish the essential from the optional, to capture the invariant, to break complex concepts into maximally simple ones [conceptual primes + lexicogrammatical universals] (<-- Wierzbicka's NSM)

=/=

emotion --> Joseph leDoux 1996
emotion --> Klaus Scherer 1979
affects --> Deleuze and Guattari 1980
perasaan hati --> indonasia 1980
affect --> Massumi 2002
emozioni --> Cesare Lombroso 1976

social constructivism approach:
emotional experience is not precultural but preeminently cultural --> Lutz

anthropological approach l:
metaphors/words for different emotions --Kovecses--> individuals choose to conceptualize their emotions differently within the constraints impressed on them by in universal physiology {*force: the primary emotional metaphor*}
body-based constructivism

(William Reddy >) emotive: (for example saying “i am happy.”) performative (effects change) + constative (describes the world)
emotive utterance --> getting through of something nonverbal into verbal --> failure of representation --> a person
}--Elias-->
logocentric concept of emotive <-- comes from speech act theory (there is no evidence that thinking and saying out loud “i am happy” have the same effects, or forcing one self to smile)
there is no reason to consider one action more or less descriptive than performative than the other [--Sina--> my whole work has been about arguing the performativity of descriptive acts, there are no descriptions that do not generate emotions]
lack of methodological distinction between (anthropological) fieldwork [: subject is changed by the presence of researcher] =/= historical research
problem of synchrony in “emotive” <-- ignoring memory, aspiration (on the list of the emotional actor)

emotional states can be evoked or avoided(?)
conditions can be manipulated with the goal of shaping emotions in the future


emotion and its affects
emotion --> medicated and sustained
affect (a very recent idea) --> ephemeral instantaneously rises and dissipates (leaving residual effects)
}<-- a heuristic device (difference) to highlight different kinds of experiences, their perception and impact

affect is under inquiry in understand:
customer culture
entertainment industry

(individual located in larger communities)

[*]affect: embodied thought : culturally and corporealy informed cognition = thoughts + apprehension “i am involved”
[emotion = i am involved]

(Elias) arguments in favor of affect (affect-culture):
1. (help us to understand) relationship between *(human) bodies, nature, action*
2. explains cooperative living, sacrifice, generosity, attachment, affection (better than theories that focus on economics, politics, power)
3. critical apparatus for gaining knowledge from human interaction and social movements --understand--> future
(concept of) affect --> productive way of understanding human attitude and behavior

_____________
affect theory
(Spinoza ==>) Deleuze's ethnology of bodily capacities ==> Massumi
(Darwin --?-->) Tomkins's psychobiology and differential affect ==> Sedgwick

Tomkins
basic affect transcend culture
durable and socially meaningful

Deleuze
[*]affect = innateness + external stimuli, “entire, vital modulating field of myriad becomings across human and nonhuman”

Spinoza
“no one has yet determined what the body can do”
1. the body's capacity is not determined by the body alone but that it is amplified and assisted by its external context
2. even though we might not understand the videos nature, we can comprehend how a specific body functions in a particular social context
affectus --> the force of an affecting body =/=
affectio --> impact of an affecting body on the one affected (==generate==> bodily capacities)
[*]affect: a relational phenomena that draws that draws together: a body + sentient aspects of the human being inhabiting it + social context within which that person is embedded

Massumi
(--> self-professed affect theorists)
[*]affect: essentially bodily, pre-social (=/= asocial), filled with motion, vibratory motion, resonation, a nonconscious (never-to-be-conscious) automatic remainder
visceral perception
precognitive visceral moment (=/= physical reaction)
--> think of affect in virtual terms {virtual: sphere of potential + emergent + indeterminate tendencies}
***conscious perception = narration of affect*** [to perceive = to narrate your affects ---> go to #feedback of artwork: actualization of the affective event (?can it include the excess of affect, the virtual?), feedback: narration of unconscious perception] --Massumi--> outside of this perception is the virtual domain (nonconscious automatic remainder, disconnected from meaning) []
-->affect is the whole world” (<-- Massumi's attraction to indeterminacy)
--Sina--> affect: the deep historical remainder (fossil) of a pre-civilizational (pre-social) open-ended togetherness (I-am-involved-ness)

Flatley
affect --> (nonvirtual) they come out unpredictability in dreams and physical symptoms
(interaction of) affect + habit, belief, thought, ideas = emotion


neuropolitics: neurobiological universals can predictively manifest themselves


article =/= book (more rewarded in the humanities)

...technical, symbolic, formula-filled language of scientific research


antirationalism of turn to body in affect theory --Leys--> “the claim is that we human beings are corporeal creatures imbued with subliminal affective intensifies and resonances that so decisively influence it condition our political and other beliefs that that we ignore those affective intensities or resonances at our peril--not only because doing so leads us to underestimate the political harm that the deliberate manipulation of our affective lives can do but also because we will otherwise miss the*potential for ethical creativity* and transformation that ‘technologies of the self’ designed to work on our embodied being can help bring about.”



enterprise of theorizing affect --Elias-->

(1) ideologically driven by an attempt to reverse an imagined poststructuralist theoretical hegemony ==> conscious turn from rational methods --> *asignifying transcendence*
-Massumi's affect: asocial virtual potential (=/= actualizes) ==> affect: unformed & unstructured (potential: transmitable + socially powerful) ~= undefinable & unknowable  ~= unanalyzable & unpredictable <-- not usable as a theoretical concept
Massumi (moving away from linguistic towards t) --> affect becomes ethereal abstraction (=/= historical materiality) removed from the grasp of critical assessment
feeling --> personal & biographical
emotions --> social
affect --> prepersonal (non-conscious experience of intensity)

(2) florid and convoluted use of language --> fail to eschew obfuscation (without it there is not so much to say)
Massumi: “thought strikes like lightning, with sheering ontogenic force. It is felt.” <--Elias-- meaningless metaphor

the notion of precognitive affective event
do nothing to help one understand the nature of conscious, felt, enacted emotion + its social ramifications
provides no rubric through which one can engage in comparative analysis (or informed discussion)



(Brennan) affect: physiological in effect, social in origin

(Grossberg) affect: to locate human beings in their environment (why ideology is only effective some of the time? quotidien = pleasure + ideology) *it is in the affect (affective life) that people struggle to care about something, find the energy to survive, enact their projects and possibilities*
ideology -->
affective intensities
affective investments

(Hennessey) *affect-culture: transmission of sensation and cognitive emotion through cultural practices* (materially shaped by social networks, circulating of natives, they work with & against structured relationships, can operate intuitively or oblique)
[*]sense: obvious knowledge [--> awareness of right & wrong] (=/= cognitive or learned knowledge) --> ***meaning-making through sense ~= ideology***

(Reddy) emotion: range of loosely connected thought material --> when activated it exceeds attention's capacity to translate it to action/talk
(emotive:) emotional regime: how public emotional acts and *emotional standards* [go to --> soup opera integrating emotional ecosystem] help to shape the lives of individuals
affect: explain (historical) events that elude (political, economical) explanation

*emotion exists in its expression and description* (spoken, written, bodily enacted, visually represented, etc.)


...emotion of “i am scared” in an early modern persian miniature painting



in premodern texts
emotion is more prescriptive: how it should be enacted and experienced (=/= descriptive) emotion are evoked:
1. through teleologically constructed sensory regime
2. through reflective/contemplative practices

kindi --> how colors and combinations could elicit specific emotions
haytham --> visual factors that make up beauty
farabi --> impact of musical notes on human mood
button Christian texts --> specific ways in which a worshipper was expected to react upon seeing an icon of relic (crying, rolling on the ground, rubbing, caressing, etc.)
biruni --> if uneducated Muslims were presented with a picture of prophet or ka'ba, their not in looking at the thing would bring them to kiss the picture or rub their cheeks against it and to roll themselves in the first before it


Leys's shame =/= guilt
guilt:
1. mimetic: victim identifies with the aggressor + accepts the situation by not distinguishing belief =/= behavior }--> *guilt*
2. antimimetic: victim identifies with fellow victims + might imitate the aggressor only as a survival mechanism ==> preserve a sense of self + keep the atrocities external to herself ==> ‘victim =/= perpetrator’ that can be held in memory without losing one's sense of self and victimhood }--> (awareness of being observed by others in one's abject state of victimhood ==>) *shame*

Leys --> (problem of shift from guilt to) shame: deprives one from agency and responsibility


web archive environmental scan wonder [source: Qazwini / ids.lib.harvard.edu] =/= muslim-majority society (use of shame in critical ways)


**performative ~=/& constructed nature of emotions**

-in my youth in iran (middle class) the context of singing together آواز in small gatherings was a context of expressing emotions within groups (a form of *networked living*) that give voice to specific emotion (grief, sadness, love, heartache, etc.)
[i always felt outside of it]

public expression of feelings --associate--> weakness & sexuality
==> everyday life denial of emotions (of jealousy, desire, heartache)

(sociologically)
*something is performed = something cannot be addressed informally* }<-- for example emotions


sharm
sharmamdegi
haya
aberu
gheirat
nang
namus
--> emotion words for honor and shame (shared between pakistan and iran, used with meanings that overlap and inconsistent)

honor selfsubsistent male
honor related to women
notions of virtue
notions of shyness

gheirat غیرت : an emotional alarm system [for one's personal image (aberu آبرو), family, religion, country]
gheirat specifies one's appropriate reactions to the particular acts of the other --> in the form of emotions: anger, hatred, jealousy


(Elias’ problematic and useful definition of) [*]affect: perceivable measurable describable effect of emotional events and experiences, what is felt + what is emoted at an individual and collective level, (enacted + perceived) ‘happening’ of the human experience (=/= undefined protoevent)
affect: a way in which one knows an experience is occurring + a way in which one reacts to an experience ==shape==> future human experience

1. enactment (performativity) of emotion is inseparable from its experience
2. emotions, enjoying words, emotion events cannot be comprehended apart from the sociopolitical context in which they occur (emotion act ~/?= emotion evoked)

somatic activity (crying) ==make==> emotions (sadness)

(in islam) happiness <--> virtue
(robust genre of literature) marvels and bestiary --> wonder at natural & manufactured wonders of the world (pyramids ~= mortality) “==encourage==>” contemplation of God's creative powers

(in sufism) tension between good and bad feelings (ugly, outlaw emotions...) ==> progress (spiritual advancement)
--> (sufi) scandalous behavior: performative form of cultivating negative emotions in oneself and others

emotional regime
ecological phenomenology
emotional habitus

habitus = [*]mood: collective feeling --Bourdieu--> *making and using moods have to be integral part of (the goal of) any sociopolitical process* (@Foad, @Sina)
(**collective action if impossible if people are not in the mood**)


*educational material (~= ideological material) : integrated attitude toward the world*

regulatory forces of society construct (=/= control) behavior
[two feelings: you are *constructed* but still might find yourself with agency =/= you are original (essential, special) and might find yourself *controlled* by forces of society <-- bad idea for political engagement]

**politics --> a sphere that is deeply imbricated in the visual regimes of societies** (--> for me that is why visual arts are so important: politics is always visual)
**politics --> affect can explain the processes that are inexplicable through other functional explanations + affect exists as an object of power (political formations are reactive to and formed by affect)


(Naveeda Khan)

Jinns and children

a place for a child to build conviviality / continuity with a creature made of smokeless fire

(the girl) she charts through a modality of “hearing”

..that which defines the normative, the duties, and responsibilities that accompany observance of a religious tradition.

different intensities by which the normative is reiterated

Jinns are also known to eavesdrop (esteragh-e sam’) on the angels in the lower reaches of heaven to acquire limited knowledge of the future

the little mischievous spirits (nafs) that make up a self



**wonders of children

children are born free of sin and have the ability to communicate without reason (aghl) and therefore carry the threat of being easily led astray


8 year-old Maryam, channeling communication between the jinn and her family
a time that she would look into the palms of her hand (to see what the jinn would have her see)
she instructed the jinn that he could enter her father's body, with his permission, jinn wanted to taste human food

her father and brothers would listen carefully to her descriptions
(authoritative figure of the father becomes the pupil of his little daughter hearing her words of advice)--alterity



“in the middle east, the child is seen as the crucial generational link in the family unit, the key to its continuation, the living person that ties the present to the past and to the future” (Ferena 1005)

“in the indian case ...the child is seen as already being full person in domains to which the mother does not have access” (Veena Das 1989)


...healer or magician may utilize a child to bring into presence or communicate with the spiritual being
(***the presence of child in Ma'rekeh-Giri معرکه گیری?***)

...................................

ecstatic identifications with...


one could legitimately dream of the prophet, but one could never call him forth
both these paths escape jinn, having a dynamic if disruptive presence within human world, alongside the presence of angels and saints

there can be no other experience of the prophet other than through the record of his words and deeds??!!!



the daily struggle to presence the prophet


علما olama =/= بچه bache
face-to-face =/= via-jinn

face-to-face learning from the olama (the authoritative transmitters) versus a faceless and voiceless jinn with his child serving as its ventriloquist (arusak gardan)

activating competing bodies of knowledge and sets of relations
(in the hope that one of them will pay off)


insistence on a modicum [minimum amount] of consistency

...................................

...enmeshed within a certain unintentional malevolence existing alongside generosity.
-malevolence is something that holds out the possibility of harm rather than actively intending it
-generosity is the willingness to concede to others rather than a nobility of character


(also the dilemma of introducing the jinn to your child)
“exposing” his children to their disruptive yet generative powers


‘exposure of children to evil’
the innate resource of children
(for Zezru) the children are pure, they represent non-evil. they belong to shades. their innocence does not imply a state of passivity.


what regions of experience and expression the child has access to?

innate resources of children
Reynolds
children’s own resources are bolstered by the protection afforded by living and dead kin
a parent (or guardian), cannot know in advance what regions of experience and expression the child has access to or what he or she is capable of

in Islam: children are considered to have a certain strength and prescience that makes them effective as conduits to the world of spirits =/= innocent creatures to be protected
children are free of religious obligations up to the age when they are seen as maturing
protected by countercharms and exorcism only to an extent


a certain unintentional malevolence existing alongside generosity
[*]malevolence: something that holds out the possibility of harm (=/= actively intending harm)
[*]generosity: the willingness to concede to others (=/= a nobility of character)
religious differences --materialized-->
as a malevolent witch
in a father’s potentially malevolent instrumentalization of his daughter (bringing the jinn home)


parsayi پارسایی
*pious self = composition of a series of *presubjective singularities* (standing alongside one another [within a milieu comprising other such series/seriousnesses])
=/= self-contradictory subject arching toward resolution
=/= norm-bearing subject that has achieved coherence


(*presubjective singularities*)
let's explore how a self moves alone this series of singularities, what brings about movement, and where may it be tending [wohin]

---Naveeda--> presubjective singularities: different versions of oneself that are not sharply distinguished from one another but are nonetheless distinct

[*]subjectivity: whatever you do set yourself apart from others

Maryam's father, has moved from a version of himself that he knew to other versions of himself of which he did not have prior knowledge

his movement was toward the jinn and then away from them. so not in the series that constituted ‘him’, but also moved toward the series constituting the jinn. a zone of jinn becoming.
(or human becoming for the jinn)

allowing himself to be a multiplicity


“Our faith had become weak and our obligatory worship was suffering.”


is Sulayman (the jinn) then the arc of a certain line of flight for Maryam?

friendship between a human (little sunni girl) and a nonhuman (jinn) [<-- enabled & nurtured by the possibilities of malevolence + generosity] ==> movement within a field of negativity ==Naveeda==> a means of gaining voice



artificiality of need in the everyday --> this view eclipses what is at stake in the everyday life, what jeopardized it internally and externally

...................................

*the formation of selves within contemporary Muslim societies:
(A) existence of multiple selves within an individual, which is context-dependent and intersubjective. the individual may espouse different self-representations at different moments, these are not viewed as inconsistent to the illusion of wholeness (Ewing 1997)
(B) the subject acts on herself in such a way as to make the norm constitute her as pious self. this is a self that is generated through its particular emergence from and interpenetration with, the norm. (Mahmood 2001)
(C) the self as the realm of presubjective possibilities. in Deleuze words “impersonal and pre-individual singularities” exists within a plane of immanence. “far from being individual or personal, singularities preside (take over and govern) over the genesis of individuals and persons; they are distributed in a ‘potential’ which admits neither Self not I, but which produces them by actualizing or realizing itself, although the figures of this actualization do not at all resemble the realized potential.” the actualizations are in link with his plane of immanence. (Deleuze 1990)

a given individual moves between these qualities without necessarily morphing into entirely different selves --> ***difference internal to being***
(that ‘difference’ is internal to being)



to betray the immediate norm (of this society) (to ensure a continued relationship with them)

but i am already moving to my next self



*ethics of listening
(1) gestures as cultural text (Clifford Geertz)
(2) codes to crack the regulative mechanisms of a society (Pierre Bourdieu)
(3) how thinking proceeds apace with gestures, how gestures gather thought, sounded and unsounded, and how voice is incorporative [tending to incorporate or include things] of these gestures

(Heidegger shows)
metaphysical relation: think ==> speech
(only when one speaks, does he think--not the other way around)



temporality of memory
(...it took them two years to remember to tell me this)



possession: is to be struck by any number of somatic illnesses or psychic effects of mysterious origins (Bown 1993)



mythopoetic (registers of Qur'an)
mythopoetic registers of everyday life



Jinn can trick the humans into looking at a copy of them (and then change form or into formlessness)


the copies of time-honored practice of embodying and transmitting the islamic tradition is now haunted by *modern anxieties*


Asb-e Imam-Hossein



it is in islamic tradition that being a muslim entails keeping up the illusory nature of everyday life while also participating in it. (not excessive withdrawal nor excessive attachment)
[why isis breaks this?]

...................................

[] technologies of the “here and now”
[] semiotic-tech of “elsewheres”
}-->
(separated in the past, *ontological difference*, a fiction) in West: (--> that is why Latour anthropologizes modernism)
*[philosophy]--signals--> here (in Europe and West), selves
*[anthropology]--signals--> elsewhere, others }--> a wannabe discourse on Others
}--> (ontological difference between anthropology & philosophy [in their mode of immersion in the metaphysical] is part of) colonial community, a form of ‘negation’ =/= my recent antagonism [the way i am studying is for *extension*{= extending but also standing in tension with, a lineage(=/= rupture)} rather than *negation*]: since i got into Olearius, 2017, I am developing recently a philosphpical-genealogical antagonism. (in Iran we are used to philosophy naturally inhabiting the otherness of Europe, among others, we never see them as anthropological objects, but they see us as such. *we don't think ethnographically about Others*)
}--> my aim is to mix this while i am “here” --> i say life (also power and ethics) comes to attention simultaneously anthropologically and philosophically from elsewhere and here [--> to reed something from the outside ~= reterritorialization (of concepts, interests, affects, percepts,)]--> when concepts are reterritorialized they illuminate the world differently


*we need better construction of past for building truly decolonial community* <-- is my antagonism needed for this?


anthropology: a mode of heightened attentiveness to life
(Singh)

Foucault, Benjamin, Derrida, Deleuze --> a loss of anthropologically generated theory

(more than once in a single day i find myself paused to wonder at) how thought moves

(long-standing philosophical between) dialectical and nondialectical genealogies of thought
-to be drawn to nondialectical is not the negation of dialectical, it is a way of thinking about the “meta"-physics (Singh)

philosophy reconciders this: ‘concepts come more explicitly to the surface as impressions grow into thoughts’ --> no! no!

how philosophy relates to and draws on nonphilosophy (is usually geographical*)

more differences:
geographical: western/non-western
naional: indian/french
subdisciplinary: analytic/continental

(trajectories of Derrica, a tradition of) negative transcendence: différance, an absence that transcends “a” and “not a” [=/= (trajectories of Deleuze, a tradition of) affirmative immanence, the self-differentiating intensities of “a”, compresence of “a"]

some Deleuzian terms:
assemblages
deterritorization
becoming
multiplicities
excess
schizophrenia (~ nondialectical thought, a nondialectical expression of different polarities held together. use ‘split’ to create a philosophy, [the ‘split’ metaphore is] an argument for the dynamism and temporality of the structure =/= dialectical historism and the Freudian unconscious) -- schizophrenia marks an unresolved, nondialectical tension
}--> giving me a range of concepts with which to inhabit a plenitude of life --> we need to create/borrow/steal/appropriate a range of concepts with which to inhabit the plenitude of life (in Tehran) that exceeds all the time. (that which the political consciousness of contemporary Tehran fails to grasp.) ***between moments of (my) departure and return (to Iran) lay a whole world, full of life (and hope)***

Deleuze's hostility to dialectics
“we will misunderstand the whole of Nietzsche's work if we do not see ‘against whom’ its principal concepts are directed”
[*]dialectics:
1- the idea of a power of the negative as a theoretical principle manifested in opposition and contradiction
2- the valorization of the “sad passions” as a practical principle --> “the unhappy consciousness is the subject of the whole dialectic” (Nietzsche)
3- the idea of positivity as a theoretical and practical product of negation itself
Hegelian: a determinate negation, followed by a “higher” synthesis
Badiou 2000, Jameson 2009, Zizek 200k, a counterwave of contemporary dialecticians
dialectics: a habit of thought--variably expressed in anthropology and philosophy and critical theory

postcolonial theory, critical theory, cultural studies <--(descendants of)-- negative dialectics =/= affirmative nondialectics

to notice (over time) in Tehran:
relations involving intergenerational servitude and nonnegotiable indebtedness
expressed relations of power
other modes of spiritual and material relatedness (that would be lost if i were to tell a story that was only a variant of a master-slave dialectic)*
ascetic qualities
activist qualities
*ways in which state power is implicated (behampichidan به هم پیچیدن) in the lives*

how do we piece together a world?

ajayeb.net =/= catalogue of ethnographic curiosities (<-- be very carefull with this kind, #wunderkammer)

encroachment tajavoz تجاوز


super important questions for Iranians:
(the question of) *how we conceive of the state* and the hopes and disappointments that issue from those conceptions
are there other ways to conceive sovereignty? [other than the Agambenian conception: the sovereign power exerts a near totalizing force over an abyss of “bare life" = state. (Agamben's) decisionist totalizing authority <-- (Schmitt's) secularized theological concepts <-- (Hobbes’) theological assumption of an omnipotence god] (----> Singh's very nice criticism:) “Agamben's transcendentally negative dialectical concept of sovereingnty entails a totalizing elevation of Varuna (the terrible) in such a way as to wholly eliminate the potentialities, threats, and possibilities of Mitra --> in its contemporary political philosophy most iranians tend this way (in everyday life and forms)
how might we imagine a political theology that enfolds more ambivalent potentialities? ****


(Agamben swinging between the heightened extremes of redemption and catastrophe [@Lenna] =/= ) Singh's bipolar concept, reconceptualization (of Dumezil arguing, [...]