Re: [-empyre-] Baudrillard and the future of theory

[Aliette <aliette@criticalsecret.org>]

I agree... It is the ultimate irony from Jean, over all his texts that is
the shadow of Marx as imperfect - not uncompleted - theory:) I mean his
general installation being of Marx, that is certain. 'even the fool lover..


On 11/03/07 23:00, "McKenzie Wark" <mckenzie.wark@gmail.com> probably wrote:

> Marx doesn't belong to the 'militants', and neither does 'radical'
> thought. Baudrillard outflanked the Marxists in Mirror of Production,
> arguing that the critique of political economy did not go far enough.
> Like any critique it was still wedded to its object.
> 
> Going back to something (back to Marx, for example) does not
> necessarily signal a fidelity to the original. It isn't always an
> attempt to represent an origin. One can go back (to Marx, for example,
> or Freud, whoever) in order to diverge again from that point.
> 
> In this sense Baudrillard was an interesting reader of Marx. One thing
> one might do, however, is go back and read his reading of Marx, and
> diverge again, away from his critique of it. About which, ironically,
> we can say it is still to close.
> 
> But one can only do this once we stop using the proper names like
> trading cards.
> 
> 
> ___________________
> McKenzie Wark
> http://www.ludiccrew.org
> _______________________________________________
> empyre forum
> empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
> http://www.subtle.net/empyre
>