[-empyre-] 'deceleration' and dark matters
eastwest at q.com
Tue Nov 1 10:17:48 EST 2011
I would like to pick up just one thread that has entered into our conversation about "movement towards life," a term that entered through a reference to Anna Halprin's work - movement toward life, or moving toward life. Anyway, the movement/life connection.
We have already said in many ways that movement is not outside of life. How could it possibly be? Wouldn't it be more to the point of our conversations if we saw "movement inside life," or "movement in life," or "movement as life"? I just think there is a better way to say what we are talking about in this matter - it could be put in several ways in fact that are less dualistic. Are we indeed moving toward life?
Maxine Sheets Johnstone wrote a long book to show from many studied points of view that movement is primary in life - The Primacy of Movement.
To put it in a phenomenological description and in terms of self-evidence: I am not moving toward life. I don't see life out there as anything I can move toward. I'm in the flow of life now. I feel its halts and abrasions, its releases and orgasms. Its panorama is in me, moves through me, and sometimes just beyond. I don't want to miss out on life by moving toward it.
Best to all, Sondra
On Oct 31, 2011, at 2:56 PM, Johannes Birringer wrote:
> what would such a cultural pre-movement / effort be, "pre-movement' as discussed by Hubert Godard, "which is not under the control of the conscious subject and combines the cultural as well as the individual"?
> what notion of affects or forces is posited here, Dee? I am curious what Godard's writings are on "pre-movement," since Michèle Danjoux had earlier invoked Erin Manning on "pre-acceleration," and I had not come across the notion of pre-movement in a soma/cultural context before;
> and it seems that Godard's somatic studies are connected to developmental psychology and emotion studies? or am I wrong? is Godard a neurophysiologist working in cancer research or a rolfer ? and to what extent is a "theory" of energetics (unconscious / uncontrolled) liable to be misunderstood, if we think back/recollect again, through our collective trauma corpus, the fascist and totalitarian collectivizing movements of the 20th century? a very bad dream time.
>>> Dee schreibt:
> I'd like to pick up on Elisita's earlier point about combining the political and the aesthetic/meditational sense in a sensible 'movement towards life' - I think it is worthwhile reflecting more here on the possibility of a 'politics of effort' , which also relates to the pre-effort, pre-acceleration or 'pre-movement' as discussed by Hubert Godard, which is not under the control of the conscious subject and combines the cultural as well as the individual. If we think of (pre) movement as a corporeal textuality, a weaving of energies where the cultural and pre-conscious are inseparably intertwined, then interventions in this economy are going to have repercussions which 'affect' both the individual and culture, which to my mind is the most far-reaching form of political intervention, and does affect the 'balance' of power.
> empyre forum
> empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
More information about the empyre