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

[Aliette <aliette@criticalsecret.org>]

I am so sad because Cesare Battisti just being arrested in Brasil that is
not a good sign to the next FR elections (and very dark sign on the diffuse
relationship of intervention from Gladio in a country as ours - being
outside NATO till the foundation of UE parliament - in Europe...)

That is some more of the past freedom trusting our consciousness of
insubordination which leave us more after Baudrillard's death.

One thing which is certain when Baudrillard telling that he is among the
intellectuals who do not want to be useful it makes us refer of course the
object of the aesthetic from Kant to Baudelaire : beautiful cannot be
useful. But more the question of the symbolic exchange being all over the
question of utility (even the potlatch). What is a pure contradiction with
if face versus Marx. But an existing contradiction that makes the difference
of Jean as contemporary having integrated the past in the side of paradox as
actual paradigm of predictable future..

Just wait and see his next book (posthumous that was finished since a month)
to be out next month I think: "The end of politic" - or something like that.
 
He is said to have claim lately just before he died that it did not more
import him to be hermetic (as having tried to be light and clear that had
not made more understand his works). I guess which forest that not being
really an event from our readings of his works under the regime of the
disappearance of the system of equivalence of the value as proper
disappearance of the system of the production as last modernity, we will
discover in his new book. But something to be discover regarding the
question of struggling otherwise, more than reverse - from it - I'm inside
me sure of that. May be I'm wrong, wait and see.

>From a part I remember Barthes just returning from Japan claiming for
inaugurate his exhibition of his Japanese tracks, in Paris, that "Suddenly
be modern became indifferent to me" - somewhere modernity was over passed as
Philosophic question (as he was properly marxo-freudian himself) - and yet
know having to recover the basic Phenomenologic observation of the actual
whatever subjectively. It stays that Baudrillard is exactly at the cross
after the relevance to be modern, from Barthes, more after the end of
History, from Canetti : so yet know both having to compose to the end of
politic and more with the end of the question of intelligibility - his
proper return to the emergent thought of enigmatic disposition of the
thought able to predictability at the moment the productive thought to the
productive society is closed.

I do not know but...

But something that more theory being beautiful as unuseful itself that is
the project. Yes, a great provocation to artists under the request than
being so much unintelligible the world from his proper part as intellectual
having the project to make the world more unintelligible. The exact question
being posed as that one of anthropologic enigma of predictability which
cross over all the culture of anagram (Hermetic thoughts included) since
antiquity to the future.

>From another part just want to remind something radically showing the
confusion on Baudrillard (that I have answered later on Idc but it appears
that Trebor would have a rest for the week-end). More something that I have
not tell in my answer  because it would be too much aggressive that
projections on him are blind ate the moment nobody has noticed my proper
error ;

The proper stupidity I have written by lapsus on the question of the value
of the money being of course a lapsus from my part that in 1973 (at the
moment Jean is very active) it is the floating value of the change
liberating the money from the dollar base, not the liberation from gold
(that was something since in 1933 - Bretton Woods agreement - or something
like that): but the proper answer was on the barricades and who is the best
and the plagiarist between Debord and Baudrillard. Nobody appearing be
interested by the question of the value from its economic indices at the
point to note my lapsus but being a consequent transformation of the modern
world. 

Great damage because the krach arriving will follow to learn of its
consequences at the moment the politic philosophy has disappeared, can be.





On 18/03/07 17:04, "Christina McPhee" <christina112@earthlink.net> probably
wrote:

> This is a forward from McKenzie Wark:
> 
> 
> 
> On 3/15/07, Danny Butt <db@dannybutt.net> wrote:
> 
> Perhaps rather than talking about Baudrillard in the negative (wasn't
> captured by academia, escaped being pinned down by discipline x,
> 
> --although one should never under estimate the negative as an
> acheivement!
> 
> But perhaps the answer is that JB's approach to theory was itself
> aesthetic, and prompts artists to think aesthetically, rather than
> merely making aesthetically pleasing things.
> 
> Something of a mixed blessing. Sometimes there's a falling short,
> into merely illustrated theory. But sometimes theory is a great
> provocation to artists. JB, of course, was usually mute on anything
> done in his name. A great resistance to temptation.
> 
> 
>   
> _______________________________________________
> empyre forum
> empyre@lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
> http://www.subtle.net/empyre
>