[...]ledge”
‘fantasy of the unproblematic mode’
regarding biographical work according to
what i am doing is not autopoiesis (self-making, making a poem out of yourself) rather sympoiesis (with-making, with people from different worlds and pasts)
(collecting all the modes of interpretation)
(for the psychoanalyst as writer,) the
unconscious
which is embodied by its participants, is shared and full of stories that hold foster curiosity and learning. a place where hybrid agents of interpretation are alive and at work, partly technological partly human partly animal shared knowing processes.
-one of our strongest ethical obligations is curiosity
(in writing) if i could choose i would promote something that comes close to the texture of the softening that opens and glides, allowing for sudden shocks and slippages.
the personality needs to be able to flow in order to move past anything that establishes itself firmly
Submitted to constant critique and revision
(Nietzsche) “We can destroy only as creators
invention's power over new things
work on aphorism and irony
radical critique of reason and truth
will to X
arguing that knowledge is contingent and conditional
Nietzsche's campaign against morality
(contrast between good and evil
(denying the inherent inequality
(Nietzsche hated christianity for its non-affirmation of life. for him sex was a fundamental affirmation of life, christianity's elevation of chastity (including, for example, the story of Mary's virginal pregnancy) is counter to the natural instincts of humanity, and therefore a contradiction of “natural values”.)
...to have no positive knowledge claim
appropriate
(let me) fast forward to ‘nowhere’
chance-encounters in your/my efforts of ecriture (in San'an text)
(it is not possible to choreograph chance, we can only report our encounters with it)
like San'an, many of us are facing an anxiety of withdrawal from the world that claims us
i am interested in to-link to that which (suddenly) interupts my reveries
to sharpen my capacity for incapacitation
not being afraid to look into many archives of mistakes (ajayeb?)
‘will to scientific knowledge’
(certain) seperation is political
when we are talking about (re)uniting curricula, linking fields in humanities we are talking about not bringing together two things that are separate, but actually interogating the distribution of power, a way a distributing agancies.
it is not a “common world” to discover, it is a common world to be produced. and the only way to produce it, is through the usual tools that we have in our disposal, which are comming from ‘representation.’
compose
enterances in ajayeb work, already generating form
“truth” is veild, according to middle east (truth
begining with the Greeks’ notion of basanos, relating truth to torture, a strictly constellated confluence of acts equally troubling to Aristotle and Aristophanes.
interpretation/hermenutice
(ta'vil bayad dar jahate axe harkate jami va moshtarek bashad)
(Kohn) to “provincialize” (rustayi
my point in animals without narrative is that the apparatus that is working for Attar in his representation of birds is the same as the narrative tool in the so-called wildlife documentary series which produces nature
transcend is about traveling from trope to truth (obur az majaz be haghighat
the main (and only?) question in my work/performance/lecture is ‘when’ the gift will/have pass(ed) on.
-my texture aversion and preference in soft/hard fabric of language and material tonality?
-“marvels of affinity” is the key to reality, revealing how things are, what is known, and how to behave.
cosmogony (keyhan-zayi
science studies
what was science before science studies? it was engaged in a sort of stupefaction that prevented meaningful study.
we do not take the fight against X (religion, fetish, etc.) for the truth about X.
i am adding “mama's boy” (bache-nane
(book, ketabat
to do something to resignify and breakup the serenity and the serene closure of the book, as the universiy values it and seals it
-what deals does it seal?
-the commitment to breaking up the book and its
-linguistic pollutants
-dirty talks
(what would this structure mean? and how is that expandable?)
(accourding to Egyptian 1550 BCE,) book
-are lists the origin of writing? (...way before the installation of the modern scriptural apparatus)
theory-minded academics have rigorously repudiated
cohabitation of two sovereign linguistic attitudes
18th century
rise of increasingly more mathematical and symbolic logics
more literary types of discursive formations,
Wordsworth, Rilke, and Keats disavowing Paul
Freud without Goethe or Schiller?!
Benjamin off Baudelaire?!
Derrida deprived of Mallarme, Ponge, or Celan?!
Heidegger abandoned by Trakl or Holderlin?!
increasing technicization of critical language
colloquy, soliloquy
they are called to witness distinct regions of being
% denken und dichten is at stake in the
the storyteller
(regarding my footnote fetish) ... because writing such footnotes implies
philosophy
to turn the
can we reappropriate without reanimate?
-how to train yourself in spotting relevant questions and unilaterally
(to put the ‘question’ at risk)
1. no reference to the ground
2. never separating from milieu
(Virgin Mary requires a milieu
what is the milieu of ajayeb? (ghalamrov
“nature”
Earth
Surrealists’ automatism to cultivate lucid trances is missing the techniques of imagination developed by Ibn
(Breton's subjectivity is still hopelessly European)
‘ideas’
(Plato knew this)
to lure us into relevant metamorphic attention
(Deleuze and Guattari
in order to determine what is “really” responsible for what
-an agency that doesn't belong to us (who is ‘us’ in
the efficacy of assemblages (in ajayeb)
(assemblage
(the point is) to play a referential game that puts one at risk (instead of protecting via quote)
(let's immediately turn off that) monotonous little critical or reflexive voice whispering that (the only defense we have against fanaticism and the rule of illusions is that) we should not accept being mystified
commenting
(lams kardan
-“The ways the senses themselves have, of throwing themselves beyond what is immediately given, in order to make tentative contact with the other sides of things that we do not sense directly, with the hidden or invisible aspects of the sensible.”
-“suggestions offered by the sensible itself.”
-we never step outside the “flux of participation.”
reading
rhetorical reading
who speaks, writes, and reads? not simply humans
“how can we have any chance of finding a way to say what we don't know how to say if we don't pay attention to the silence of the other inside us?”
literature, is then understood as the experience of risk, chance, the undecidable
(in Western ethical, political, and literary traditions
fable
fables open abyssal aporias
(the very condition of possibility of)
fable
politics of difficulty
...to fall back on the conceptual priority of the subject, agency, or identity as the grounds
(Keenan suggests) “deconstruction” is not offered here as an antiauthoritarian discourse, an attack on grounds, but as an attempt to think about this removal as the condition of any (political) action
(according to fables) responsibility begins in the bad example (
“What is at stake in the fable is, more than anything else, the interpretation and practice of responsibility-our exposure to calls, others, and the names with which we are constituted and which put us in question.” (Keenan)
...practical effectivity of literature