[-empyre-] Second Response to Judith on Bourriaud and Foucault / "Relational Aesthetics" and "Aesthetics of Existence"

[Robert Summers]

"Obvious" to whom?

I do not think I have ever stated, nor would I ever, that Foucault,
Deleuze, and Guattari (and others) are the "guardians of thought" --
nor the guardians of anything.  I think we should take Sedgwick's
later writing, or last writings, seriously, and think "besides" --
where she appears to be more DeleuzoGuattarian than ever, and which I
was alluding to in the pervious posts re: "relational aesthetics" and
an "aesthetics of existence" -- to think besides and relationally.

Also, I do not understand this "material practice" of which you write,
of which you make a rigid binary.  So, there are "immaterial
practices"?  And it so, then which to follow?  Which is better?  Who
sets up these terms and the conditions?  And, which, in the end, gets
into retrograde modernist thinking I would argue because it seems to
verge on a theory / praxis divide.

I deeply appreciate your passion and articulations, and here we are at
what Raciere would call "political disagreement" where politics
emerges as a means of transformation. Finally, may you, perhaps,
"enlighten me" as to what you are attempting to convey, if I have
misunderstood your two posts, which are, I think, semiotic subjugation
-- to the letter.

Oh, the youtube video is nice.

As ever, Robert

Robert Summers, PhD/ABD
Lecturer, Art History and Visual Culture
LAS Dept.
Otis College of Art and Design
e: rsummers at otis.edu

Robert Summers, PhD/ABD
Lecturer
Art History and Visual Culture
Otis College of Art and Design
e: rsummers at otis.edu
w: http://ospace.otis.edu/robtsum/Welcome