[-empyre-] 'deceleration' and dark matters

[dee reynolds]

Johannes, you always ask probing questions! you have been a great
choreographer of these discussions, always pushing things further in
interesting ways.
I'll try to respond - a bit improvised, as the midnight hour draws nigh . .
.
I think that the potential of the notion of 'corporeity' lies largely in
its link with history, both singular and collective. This is how I would
like to see it developed. Pre-movement, which founds corporeity, is a kind
of kinesthetic affect which becomes culturally and politically significant
when it registers in and across bodies, causing sensation to become
reflexive, through excess which is not 'captured' as a concept but
registers as escape.
This reflexivity of  sensation, I would suggest, is distributed across
bodies (in kind of affective empathy) at historical moments of particular
intensity and crisis. When this happens, the registering of affect can
produce behaviours of resistance, which is what we are seeing at the
moment, ranging from the political with a big to a little p and across a
spectrum inbetween, and whose effectiveness remains to be seen.
I didn't manage to finish by midnight so I don't know if this excess will
be effective or not so will attempt to send and see what happens!!
in any case, many thanks for this invite, Johannes, and to all for
inspirational sharings . . .
best
Dee

On Tue, Nov 1, 2011 at 6:33 PM, Johannes Birringer <
Johannes.Birringer at brunel.ac.uk> wrote:

>
> Dee, thanks for this very interesting response, on Godard, and what you
> have now described as analogies of "Impulse",  through singular and
> collective 'economies' and depending on how indviduals and collectivities
> work on "our 'corporeities'"
> -  assuming that they can be worked on (consciously) and are also worked
> on (unconsciously), yes?  I am trying to wrap my head around this, to see
> whether the gravitational theory is a humanist/anthropocentric body-mind
> theory or a somatic theory, and i do not know enough about somatic concepts
> to understand where they locate issues of choice, will, decision making,
> understanding, in relation to other organizations (organisms, and we are
> back to Artaud and Deleuze and the Body without Organs, yes?, and the
> hieroglyphics) that you refer to as "corporeities'  (= the body in terms of
> how it organises intensity and intentionality), how does "it" organize" and
> what is that it?   what if there was no id? and no anima?
>
> where do these intensities come from, are they similar to Deleuze's
> "flows" and Lyotard's libidinal economies and pulsations? (I think Lyotard
> speaks of undifferentiated libidinal pulsations when discussing life and
> death drives, and this discussion takes place when he looks at art & the
> sublime, I think).  I worry as usual about pure affective intensities, but
> you seem ti indicate that >>actions and interactions are specific to given
> situations and 'balances of power', >> ah
> what balances of power?  in gravitational sense or socio-political sense?
>  I think there are no balances of power, and I fear the predatory in
> capitalism overwhelms.
>
> regards
> Johannes
>
>
> Dee schreibt:
> >>
> This also opens up an area of communication between subjects, notably in
> contact improvisation where one can enter the gravitational system of
> another, leading to 'singular and moving geographies, comprised of and in
> flux' (same interview).
> There is much more of course - and this clearly has implications for how
> shared kinesthesia can be a driver for empathy
> I find this very suggestive in terms of the implications and repercussions
> of how we manage what Laban called Impuls (approximately translated as
> effort) through singular and collective 'economies'. The emphasis on the
> singular means that there is no question of universalism or totality - this
> is in answer to the last part of your question
> '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.'
> The way I see it, the pre-movement, the unconscious 'economy' which gives
> the impetus to our actions and interactions is specific to given situations
> and 'balances of power'. It is open to being worked on, to being modified -
> it is not a blind force which drives us (unless we allow that to be the
> case) - change is possible through how we work on our 'corporeities', and
> change is always both specific and provisional . . .
> >>
>
> _______________________________________________
> empyre forum
> empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
> http://www.subtle.net/empyre
>



-- 


Dee Reynolds

Dee.Reynolds at manchester.ac.uk
http://www.watchingdance.org/
http://watchingdance.ning.com/

School of Languages, Linguistics and Cultures
University of Manchester
M13 9PL
UK
tel: +44(0)161 275 3212
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20111102/49e056eb/attachment-0001.htm>