Subject: Re: Dennis and his new girl

Date: Sun, 26 Oct 1997 04:03:21 -0500

From: "Rev. Random the Other" <cmcjp02@nt.com>

Organization: TOXIC COW

Newsgroups: alt.slack

References: 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8

 

Sketchy Albedo wrote:

>

> Previously, Nully Fydyan wrote:

> : We only have to choose between surrealism and patriarchialist nihilism if

> : we accept those as our basic premises. Whereas many accept

> : patriarchialist nihilism out of hand, I contend that it is subject to a

> : basic fallacy, that is, patriarchy is the defining element of what is

> : sexual. If we accept that, your conclusion becomes obvious. But there is

> : no a priori knowledge that what is defined by the patriarchy does

> : actually constitute sexual identy, and, moreover,

> : should be accepted as the standard for such. As Baudrillard points out,

> : the realm of the hyperreal is daily encroaching on everyday life, and

> : reality, existing as that which can be copied, is coming now to exist as

> : that which may be mutated. Lee, therefore, is equipped to iterate both a

> : postcapitalist theory and surrealism, and perhaps shall wed them in one

> : film. Although, as a truly postmodern move he may abandon the partriarchal

> : conceptions altogether and examen the natural lack of any matriarchalist

> : nihilism.

 

This I agree with entirely. And the obvious conclusion, as I see it, is

that the subject is contextualised into a neopatriarchialist

deconstruction that includes consciousness as a reality. I'm sure you

will agree that the illusion of a priori knowledge is no more than that

- an illusion.

 

>

> "Stochastic culturosexualism begets heterotropic macrocategorization,"

> says Hipwell[1]. The premise of patriarchialist situationism suggests that

> sexuality is used to entrench the hegemony of class divisions over class,

> but only if consciousness is equal to culture; if that is not the case,

> Lacan's model of cultural situationism is one of "Adornian aesthetics",

> and thus part of the fatal flaw of language. Thus, Baudrillard uses the

> term 'Baudrillardian simulation' to denote not, in fact, discourse, but

> subdiscourse. Hamburger holds that the works of Burroughs are postmodern.

> However, the characteristic theme of the works of Burroughs is the

> difference between society and sexual identity.

>

> --

> _________________

> revjack@radix.net

> Ask your body

 

Jack, don't take "Baudrillard simulation" at face value. Baudrillard

suggests the use of neopatriarchialist deconstruction to modify and

transgress the boundaries of society. In a sense, a number of

deappropriations concerning not narrative per se, but prenarrative

may be found. I've always been concerned by this.

If one examines neopatriarchialist deconstruction, one is faced with

a choice: either accept socialism or conclude that class,

surprisingly, has significance. If socialism holds, we have to

choose between conceptualist discourse and neopatriarchialist

deconstruction. Sontag uses the term 'textual dialectic theory' to

denote the role of the writer as reader. It could be said that

in 8 1/2, Fellini analyses neocultural socialism; in Satyricon,

Fellini deconstructs socialism.

In the works of Fellini, a predominant concept is the concept of

posttextual culture. However, the main theme of Hamburger's essay

on substructural rationalism is the failure, and eventually the

praxis, of neomodernist class. But Baudrillard suggests the use

of neopatriarchialist deconstruction to modify and transgress the

boundaries of society. In a sense, a number of deappropriations

concerning not narrative per se, but prenarrative may be found.

Sure, Hamburger finds Burroughs to be postmodern. But failure

and praxis of neomodernist class is interpolated into a socialism

that includes art as a paradox. It could be said that Parry implies

that we have to choose between socialism and neopatriarchialist

deconstruction. I can see what he refers to.

 

Rev. Random the Other

"Class is unattainable" - Mensonge