[...]br />
Schilder's “zones of sensitivity”: bodily orifices + its sensation experienced about one centimeter from the opening (-for example how the diseases of internal organs are not experienced in their precise anatomical locations)
*zones outside the body* --> intrusion into this bodily space is considered as much a violation as penetration of the body itself, the size and form of this surrounding space of safety is individually, sexually, racially, and culturally variable [--> #clean and dirt for my mother; my body image outside space surrounding it when i am in my room is the room itself, every corner, every niche accumulates senses and thoughts...]
the space surrounding the body is not uniform:
•thinner in some places (which more readily tolerate body contact)
•thicker in some places (which are particularly psychically, socially, and culturally “privatized”)
•

-acting uses body image --> body image can shrink or expand; it can give parts to the outside world and can take other parts into itself
-playing setar --> (part of the difficulty of learning how to use instruments, such as setar) the libidinal problem of how they become psychically invested (=/= simply the technical problem of how they are used)

surgeon's body image

in driving, trying to fit into a small parking spot <-- experienced in the body image of the driver (and sometimes, to their horror, in that of the passengers) [--> by inability to drive is related to a bad body image?]

body image is capable of accommodating and incorporating an extremely wide range of objects:
•clothing
•jewelry
•other bodies
•objects
•nail polish
•jets, ships, cars
•bodily zones:
◦orifices
◦curves
◦convex spaces
◦concave spaces
•“detachable” or intermediate category of objects, midway between the inanimate and the bodily [~= Lacanian objet a, Kristeva's abject]:
◦body's excretions
◦body's waste products
◦bodily byproducts
◾urine
◾faeces
◾saliva
◾sperm
◾blood
◾vomit
◾hair
◾nails
◾skin
  }--> retain something of the cathexis and value of the body (--> keeping my chopped nails, old toys, art-works... ?! --?--> ‘detachment = your work (art, etc.) is not bound up with your body image’), they remain magically linked to the body --> narcissistic investment in the body image

}--> ****human subjects never simply have a body****
the body is always necessarily the object and subject of attitudes and judgments, psychically invested, never a matter of indifference
-the body never has merely instrumental or utilitarian value for the subject --Grosz--> which organs are libidinally invested and the kinds of investments that animate them are functions of the subject's psychical, interpersonal, and sociohistorical relations and are malleable and continually changing --> *always potentially open to new meanings and investments*

body image: (to a large extent) function of socially shared significance
-(for example) male and female genitals have a particular social meaning in western patriarchal cultures that the individual alone or even in groups is unable to transform (-these meanings are deeply etched into and lived as part of the body image) [=/= Frankenstein]
==> () very different self-perception and very different organic body =/= dichotomous division of sexed bodies

Grosz generally finds Schilder useful --but-->
•he writes in terms of a sexually neutral subject who experiences cerebral lesions and neurological or psychological disorders in a sexually neutral way
•he develops a single frame of reference (not so clearly relevant for women and female sexuality)
•he does not specify that male experience is taken as the norm and woman's experience is discussed only insofar as it deviates from or compares to this referential framework (<== influence that studies of war injuries had on the developement of this field + vast disproportion of male subjects in active war)

Schilder: attainment of a stable genital form of sexuality ==>
•unification of the body image
•cohesion of our self-identities
--> phallic = genital phallic sexuality hierarchically *subordinates the pregenital drives* =/= female sexuality is already genitality multilocational, plural, ambiguous, polymorphous, and *not clearly able to subordinate the earlier stages*

shared sociocultural conceptions of bodies in general and shared familial and interpersonal fantasy about particular bodies ==> [*]body image: unifies and coordinates postural, tactile, kinesthetic, and visual sensations ==> (so that these are experienced as) the *sensations of a subject coordinated into a single space*

***any willful action requires a plan of bodily action --> the function of the body image*** (--> this explains my fucked up body image!)

-we cannot talk about space whithout body image <== the body image determines both the localization of sensations in different concrete regions of the body and the position of the body as a whole within space


body image ==> “=/=” :
•figure =/= ground
•central action =/= peripheral action
•(subject's) body =/= (background of) forces
•movement of limbs =/= corporeal context (of the rest of the body)
•outside (skin) =/= inside (organs [=/= process])
•active relations =/= passive relationship
•position of subject =/= position of object


moving from a state of amorphousness to increasing differentiation and specialization

a single movement reorients the whole of the body, creating what might be called a gait or posture, an individual and cultural bodily style

appersonization: treatment of one's own body as an outside object:
+ psychical vampirism: identification with the symptoms, actions, and fantasies of othe people
--> identification, incorporation, introjection

example of aging
-body image seems resistant to the changes brought about by aging
-they seem to have aged, whereas the subject feels as if he or she has not
--> condition of continual transformation + time lag in the perception and registeration of real changes in the body image

body image: condition of the subject's access to spatiality (including built environments) = a postural schema of the body [=/= mapping a biological body onto a psychological domain, providing a kind of translation of material into conceptual terms]
-->
•radical inseparability of biological from psychical elements
•connection between the question of sexual specificity (biological sexual difference)
•connection between the question of psychical identity


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

Grosz realizes two human perversion in psychoanalysis literature:
•male --> fetishism (sexual gratification from the use of inanimate partial objects alone)
•feminine --> exhibitionism, kleptomania

female fetishism --> lesbianism

fetishism --> excess of their psychoanalytic descriptions
feminism --> collective psychosis (~ a political disavowal of women's social reality as oppressed)

[*]play: a form of mastery (= a conversion of passivity into activity) + a technique for the production of pleasure

Freud:
•deviation in the sexual object --> homosexuality, pedophilia, bestiality
•deviation in the sexual aim --> transvestism, voyeurism, exhibitionism
fetishism: sexual overvaluation of a part (of the body or an inanimate object)
[--Grosz--> ‘overvaluation’ is a characteristic of masculine forms of loving]
“perversion =/= neuroses” --> pervert expresses precisely what it is that the neurotic represses (*perversion: to avoid the repression)

sexual normality = copulative nonincestual heterosexuality

fetishist: the boy/child who is unable to resolve the oedipal conflict in its various alternatives (unable or unwilling to abandon the mother as love object)
-he cannot, like the homosexual son, accept symbolic castration in order to take on the “feminine” position and adopt a passive sexual role in relation to his father
-he is not prepared to “pay” for his desire by facing the oedipal prohibition (give up the mother or lose the penis) --> fetish: a token of triumph over the threat of castration (and a protection against it) -->{makes women tolerable as sexual objects + saves the fetishist from becoming a homosexual}
[*]fetish: (a substitute for or) *a talisman of the phallus*

(most significant one in the child's erotic life -->) mother's phallus: that which endows her with power and authority

fetish --> a way of both preserving his belief in the missing maternal phallus and at the same time accepting her castration and the possibility of his own

disavowal =/= repression (--> neurosis) =/= negation (denial) =/= repudiation (foreclosure --> psychosis)

negation: a provisional lifting of repression (not through acceptance, the repressed contents are verbally and affectively negated) --> affirmation: the process of registering or fixing a drive to an ideational content (signifying the former by the latter), both the condition of signification and of repression

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

Grosz on Deleuze and Guattari

problem with “becoming woman”
the process of becoming-X [marginal, woman, non-western, etc.] means nothing as a strategy if one is already X =/= question of difference, specificity

*desire
*machinic functions
*assemblages
*rhizomatics
*cartography
*intensities
*speed
*planes

appropriation (recuperation) of the positions and struggles of X ==risks==> depoliticizing aestheticizing struggles and political challenges crucial to the survival and self-definition of X

problem with becoming
(Deleuze and Guattari are invested in a) romantic elevation of models of psychosis, schizophrenia, and madness ==>
•ignore the very real pain and torment of individuals
•raise pathology to an unlivable, unviable ideal for others


our reservations and suspicions (in apass when we face each other)

Deleuzian rhizomatics & feminist theory --> reversal of Platonism: “ideal =/= real” (opposition integral to Western thought)


rhizomatics, cartography, schizoanalysis (deconstruction, grammatology) ==> clear the ground of metaphysical concepts ==> (others) may be able to devise their own knowledges

four “illusions” of representation:
•identity
•opposition
•analogy
•resemblance
}--✕--> becoming (beyond the logic and confines of being)
}--✕--> multiplicity [defined by the outside] (beyond doubling or multicentering of proliferating subjects)


Deleuzian-Foucauldian understanding of politics theorizes in a clearer and more direct form than *rival (alternative) political philosophies* (including Marxism, socialism, liberalism, and anarchism), the kinds of theoretical and political struggles in which feminists are involved

[*]body: a discontinuous, nontotalized series of processes, organs, flows, energies, corporeal substances and events, intensities, and durations --link--> organs + biological processes + material objects + social practices

[Spinoza's rare affirmative understanding of] body: (is analyzed and assessed more) in terms of *what it can do*, the things it can perform, the linkages it establishes, the transformations it undergoes, the machinic connections it forms with other bodies (=/= a locus for a conscious subject, as an organically determined object, by their genus and species, by their organs and functions)

from Plato to Lacan --> desire: negative, abyssal, a lack at the level of ontology itself (an effect of frustration) [desire is frustrated by the real]
=/= Spinoza Nietzsche Deleuze --> desire: immanent, positive and productive, ***desire is a relation of effectuation, not of satisfaction*** [desire is productive of reality] --> aleatory, bricolage

Spinoza's ethics: capacity for action and passion, increase or decrease one's capacities and strengths <-- good & bad
=/= Levinasian ethics (modeled on a subject-to-subject, self-to-other relation)

(psychoanalysis) *partial objects: organs, processes, and flows, which show no respect for the autonomy of the subject*

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

(Archer > Saint Lauren:) “fashion fades, style is eternal" = 'notions of style <--> notions of history’ ={"to have style" = to have the means of inserting oneself into history / “to lack style" = to risk oblivion}

Archer --> how critical considerations of style can offer opportunities to think across sets of subjectivities and cultural practices that are often disassociated or pitted against one another

erotic stylization of deadly force --(Archer asks)--> why is it stylish for one to be attracted to the kind of power that “the uniform” signifies?
how styles (sartorial, campy, grotesque) serve as a serious index of our collective complicity in the ongoing production of state violence?

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

Chen on animacy

animacy --> how matter that is considered insensate, immobile, deathly (or otherwise “wrong”) animates cultural life in important ways

[*]animacy: a quality of agency, awareness, mobility, liveness
--linguistics--> grammatical effects of the sentience or liveness of nouns

change of animacy ==> violates a cross-linguistic preference among speakers
(for example “the hikers that rocks crush” --> rock: the source of causality)

animacy
filled with life, disposed, inclined, animare to breathe, to quicken
anima, air, breath, life, soul, mind (mental impulse)
--connected--> animals
animosity --> animating spirit or temper of a hostile character

animating principle [--> rigging]

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

Ihde: playing a musical instrument (= a technological mediation) =/= the process of genetic manipulation
=/= Heidegger's technology: a metaphysically totalizing context (<-- every technology ended up with exactly the same output or analysis)

Ihde =/= utopian & dystopian views of technology

...to understand yourself to be thinking and acting ‘in the midst of’ the pervasive technoscientific character of life (@CG hacker)

Ihde --> ***technologies and humans constitute themselves interactively***

*technological mediation: heterogeneous relationships between individual human beings and the world + artifacts used for mediations =/= ideals of efficiency and clear communication



“breakdown ==> new gestalt” : something that had usually taken for granted, which then under breakdown conditions, now gets revealed in a new way (revelatory function)
=/= Ihde's *variational practice* : variations ==forefront==> new gestalts

(our) world = powerful effective & failing technology
we =/= tragic hero (+ broken hammer) or Enlightenment scientist (+ laboratory)



matrix --> female
those that move in the matrix --> formative male principle

(Foucault's) episteme: social-moral-religious stability


Latour
modernity <== settlement: (a clear and sharp distinction) society =/= nature --obscure--> the proliferation of hybrids: entities that are both cultural & natural (for example material technologies are both “real” & “constructed”)


Ihde --> technologies are in *mediating positions*

interrelational relativistic ontologies : there is interaction and mutual “non-neutral” and “noninnocent” productive and emergent shaping between humans + technologies + animals --> knowledge is “situated” and particular, not “transcendentally” true ==> putative symmetry between the human & nonhuman


bestiality (interrelational, sin?) is embedded in what has to appear to us today as an antiquated or surpassed stability

•(Merleau-Ponty + Ihde) embodiment is the location of all intelligent behavior [situated + embodied]
•(Pickering) cybernetic (self-organizing set) is the location of all intelligent behavior [situated]


---> go to Galison's Einstein


(the old notion that) ***phenomenology is primarily descriptive =/= prescriptive

[ethicalization of knowledge, in Iran, in artists reading choices based on gender, etc. turning research into applied ethics]
•contemporary ethics of a cosmopolitan pluricultural tolerant sort
•absolutisms of politically incarnated groups had to transform absolute beliefs into “private” ones (taken off the streets and battlegrounds) <--now-- returning!


****technologies are multistable: having unpredictable side-effects and embedd[...]