[-empyre-] empyre Digest, Vol 101, Issue 18

[fel reb]

 From the long-lost Prolegomenon to A Thousand Plateaus (found while
researching corner on the market) ca 6th Century BC: Thales of Miletus

According to Aristotle <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aristotle> in *The
Politics <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Politics>* (Book I Section
1259a),[3] <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cornering_the_market#cite_note-3>
Thales
of Miletus <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thales_of_Miletus> once cornered
the market in olive-oil presses:

Thales, so the story goes, because of his poverty was taunted with the
uselessness of philosophy; but from his knowledge of astronomy he had
observed while it was still winter that there was going to be a large crop
of olives, so he raised a small sum of money and paid round deposits for
the whole of the olive-presses in Miletus and Chios, which he hired at a
low rent as nobody was running him up; and when the season arrived, there
was a sudden demand for a number of presses at the same time, and by
letting them out on what terms he liked he realized a large sum of money,
so proving that it is easy for philosophers to be rich if they choose.

:)


Félix

Félix Rebolledo
Suite 400—Studio 514 Inc./Access Québec Enterprises Inc.
1744 William St. Suite 400
Montréal QC H3J 1R4
514 825 4652 C
514 935 7025 B


On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 10:00 PM, <empyre-request at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au>wrote:

> Send empyre mailing list submissions to
>         empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>         http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/empyre
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>         empyre-request at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>         empyre-owner at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of empyre digest..."
>
>
> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>    1. Re: into what midst? which collective? whose imaginary    space?
>       (Charlotte Farrell)
>    2. Re: into what midst? which collective? whose imaginary    space?
>       (Charlotte Farrell)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2013 01:47:11 +1000
> From: Charlotte Farrell <charlottefarrell at gmail.com>
> To: stamatia portanova <stamatiaportanova at yahoo.it>,
>         soft_skinned_space <empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au>
> Subject: Re: [-empyre-] into what midst? which collective? whose
>         imaginary       space?
> Message-ID:
>         <CAN0DWr_UKnci1xB3K4hxDfSoOuNJQB26hd=+
> P-LMTrDkgWtEyA at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
>
> An excerpt taken from Beth Hoffman's, 'Radicalism and the Theatre in
> Genealogies of Live Art', *Performance Research* 14 (1), pp.95-105
>
> "As director and playwright Charles Marowitz recalls, he, San Francisco
> artist Ken Dewey, New York-based Allan Kaprow and others were invited by
> Calder to present a ?sample of a curious art form called a Happening? as an
> example of what might constitute the ?theatre of the future? (Marowitz
> 1990: 56). The group of artists developed the piece over the course of the
> conference, driven by feelings of frustration with what Marowitz
> characterized as tired debates about whether the actor, the director or the
> writer is the primary artistic figure in the theatre, and about how to
> breathe new life into the problem of establishing political ?commitment?
> through arts practice. To underscore the empty pontificating that Marowitz
> felt comprised the general conversation, the performance of the Happening
> began when Marowitz stood up within the context of an actual conference
> debate and made a proposal. To mitigate against ?a multiplicity of
> interpretations [in Beckett?s Waiting for Godot] making it difficult to fix
> [the play?s] ?true meaning??, he argued that the delegates should take this
> opportunity to determine an ?official? interpretation, which, ?when passed
> by the conference, would become ?standard? and appear in the appendix of
> each printed edition thereby removing any confusion about the author?s
> intentions? (57). Marowitz then proceeded to declare that Waiting for Godot
> was an intricately coded allegory for racial politics during the American
> Civil War: Pozzo was Jefferson Davis, Estragon and Vladimir were the
> Generals Grant and Lee, Lucky a plantation slave etc. (57). Despite his
> sense that the whole proposal was obviously absurd, a patient audience
> allowed him to go on for quite some time until a planted heckler tried to
> interrupt him. Marowitz pointedly ignored the interruption; he recalls with
> glee that he ?droned on as if nothing untoward was happening? (58) ? until
> a series of surreal actions began to unfold in and around the edges of the
> auditorium, on and above the stage, and in the dome of the main hall. A
> nude model was wheeled in on a trolley, actress Carroll Baker scrambled
> across the backs of the audience as though mesmerized by Allan Kaprow, a
> bagpiper marched down the aisles, animal skeletons were suspended over the
> conference logo, a large number of white plaster heads were exposed at the
> rear of the speakers? platform, a woman with a baby and a toddler son
> walked through the spectators behaving as though the conference delegates
> were figures on display in a museum, and on and on. This strange cacophony
> of spectacles was accompanied by a jumbled ?tape-collage? of many of the
> speeches made at the conference. The actions lasted about 7 minutes."
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 1:16 AM, stamatia portanova <
> stamatiaportanova at yahoo.it> wrote:
>
> > ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------
> > Dear all,****
> >  ****
> > as a long-distance friend of the SenseLab, and having enjoyed the
> > conversations developed on this forum so far, I  would like to join in
> > and share some thoughts. ****
> >  ****
> > It was for me of particular interest to read about Erin and Brian?s idea
> > of a ?pragmatics of the useless?, of giving value to what is not already
> > valued as productive in contemporary capitalist societies, and I
> > particularly enjoyed the notion of a ?wasted effort? and of the delicious
> > dionysian joy that comes with it. Kristine also gave us Filliou?s
> beautiful
> > words about the good-at-nothing and good-at-everything (which I read as
> an
> > ode to open access, or a collectivization of aesthetic sensibility as a
> > political aim, if that makes sense). So I get this to be one of the core
> > concepts to think, in order to understand the SenseLab and its various
> > practices and events. Indeed, the first thing all of this reminds me of
> is
> > Chuang-Tzu?s story of the serrate oak, which was ?broad enough to shelter
> > several thousand oxen and measured a hundred spans around, towering above
> > the hills?, and yet remained untouched by carpenters for being ?a
> worthless
> > tree?. ?There's nothing it can be used for?, the wise man says, ?That's
> how
> > it got to be that old!" It is of course not a lack of value that is
> > attributed in this case to the tree, but what is at stake is a rethinking
> > of value in itself, and a questioning of the conventional economic and
> > moral senses we, as human beings, usually give to it and to our actions.
> > Another useful (!) reference in relation to this reverted pragmatism is
> > logician and philosopher C.S. Pierce, for whom the success of a pragmatic
> > action can never be seen as definitive and always has in it germs of
> > failure and traces of denial. It is exactly this character of novelty in
> > experience, Pierce goes on to say, that produces an evolution in our
> ideas.
> > Thinking does not derive from thoughts, but from the necessity of action,
> > and continuously mutates with it. On this matter, I would really point
> out
> > Pierce?s writings and thoughts on non-utilitarian pragmatism, and his
> logic
> > of relations and signs, as one of the best theoretical keys for entering
> a
> > collaborative midst. ****
> >  ****
> > But beyond these very philosophical reflections, what is important to
> > highlight here I think is the fact that all this pragmatic uselessness,
> in
> > research-creation events, is the plane from which new modes of
> > subjectivization and of social relationality can very concretely and
> > usefully emerge. This has been already well articulated by all the other
> > participants, and what catches one?s attention from the whole discussion
> so
> > far is indeed how generosity is emerging here as one of the main
> attractors
> > of this relationality. The SenseLab is certainly a creative hub where
> > challenging philosophical, artistic, aesthetic practices are experimented
> > with, but as such it is also a place where issues emerge and are dealt
> with
> > that go beyond these practices, such as the modulation of social
> relations
> > between its components, or money and fund-raising for its projects, or as
> > Erin was also pointing out, other pedagogical and distribution issues.
> The
> > rhizomatic composition of the Lab (of every lab at its best) therefore
> > extends, in all senses, much beyond the realm of art, to life itself. A
> > creative lab is an open model for life, and a modulation of life itself.
> > The way in which Sense Labbers are stimulated to deal with this
> modulation
> > (if ONE main way can exist) is generosity. From this comes the political
> > importance of its (and all such) projects, for they significantly manage
> to
> > replace the key notion of ?debt? (one that is today dominant in any form
> of
> > capitalist exploitation, from immaterial labour to power mining) with
> that
> > of the ?gift?. Instead of trying to fluidify relations and exchanges and
> > instead of making them increasingly and illusorily abstract (as in the
> myth
> > of total virtualisation proposed to us by forms of digital economic
> > commonality such as that, much discussed today, of the bitcoin), the goal
> > would be to pay the right attention to differences, to the various bodies
> > and qualities implied in all our relations, those same bodies and
> qualities
> > that still represent a hindrance for contemporary algorithmic and
> financial
> > capitalism, and are at best to be simply dismissed, or thrown away as
> > ?waste? (think of the tons of local fruits thrown away each year in many
> > countries in the name of import and profit, and think of all the wasted
> > efforts of unknown artists striving to produce some work and survive with
> > no support). ?Waste? is really such, of course, only in the capitalist
> > markets, where the very notion of value is totally submitted to a logic
> of
> > qualitative in/equivalence and debt repayment: would it be possible for
> the
> > unknown performer to repay the services of a prestigious lawyer with her
> > work? Under this light, all forms of recuperation, redistribution, of
> play
> > with what is excessive and wasted (wasted efforts, wasted matters, wasted
> > ideas), generously bestowing it without expecting anything in exchange,
> > become a vital for  not only of political critique but of creation (in
> > the sense of an excessive and dionysian political economy, as Georges
> > Bataille would define it). But I?ll stop here, before I start to waste
> time
> > philosophizing again?****
> >  ****
> > Best,****
> >  ****
> > Stamatia Portanova****
> >
> >   ------------------------------
> >  *Da:* Toni Pape <tonipape at gmail.com>
> > *A:* soft_skinned_space <empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au>
> > *Inviato:* Luned? 22 Aprile 2013 21:37
> > *Oggetto:* Re: [-empyre-] into what midst? which collective? whose
> > imaginary space?
> >
> > hello
> >
> > from erin's phrasing I would think that she means our "subtle
> allegiances"
> > with capital. if i may paraphrase in a somewhat simplistic way: even the
> > most anti-capitalist among us cannot escape capital. the goal is
> therefore
> > not to na?vely try and step out of capital but to step in and navigate
> our
> > complex entanglements with it differently.
> >
> > a really short note on friendship: we've had a lot of conversations about
> > this and here's what i took out it. friendship can be (but doesn't have
> to
> > be) an *outcome* of collaborative practice. it *cannot* be its basis. it
> > has to do with taking collaboration out of the personal. i'd be glad to
> go
> > over that one again if people are interested. :-)
> >
> > concerning "new forms of knowledge." this may sound evasive but i hope
> you
> > trust that it's not: i believe you cannot know *what* a new form of
> > knowledge is because it doesn't exist yet. that's the thing with novelty.
> > and taken seriously, this poses quite a demanding task:
> > if you go to a conventional conference, you know that the form of
> > knowledge you'll get is the 20-minute-paper. if you go to a
> > research-creation event, you will have to invent that form in the first
> > place. in any case, you will only ever know afterwards (and we've talked
> > about what that was in the case of the dome project). we obviously have
> > ideas and propositions. but you never know how the process will play out,
> > what will stick, what will fall away. speaking of "what" and "how", i'm
> > reminded of the first *Inflexions* issue which was called "How is
> > research-creation?" <http://www.inflexions.org/issues.html#i1> instead
> of
> > "What...".
> >
> > i'd say the point about failure and uselessness is not that our
> > collaborative efforts *have to *result in that. but failure is always an
> > option. obviously, one doesn't need an instrument for failure. i'd say
> > failure has a habit of falling into place all by itself and doesn't need
> > much help. also, it would be weird (paradoxical?) to have instruments for
> > failure. applied correctly, they would allow us to "succeed in failing."
> >  sadly enough, failure still feels like failure to me.
> > and the notion of uselessness, for me, simply implies that the standard
> by
> > which you measure value does not pre-exist that which is measured. for
> > instance, it's very easy to say *Logic of Sensation* is useless because
> > Francis Bacon hated it and he was a good painter. so it's of no use to
> the
> > obvious authority in place. fine. but a more interesting and generous
> > question would be to ask: what can a book, or movement of thought, a
> > creative process *generate*? how might it *create *its own use?
> >
> > toni
> >
> > Am 22.04.2013 um 13:53 schrieb Johannes Birringer <
> > Johannes.Birringer at brunel.ac.uk>:
> >
> > ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------
> > dear all
> >
> > on a less humorous note, i have been thinking much about the recent
> > response posting by Erin, which I felt was
> > thought-provoking and frustrating at the same time, so i wondered how
> > others here responded to the language
> > and the philosophical stance (the term failure has been mentioned
> > repeatedly but so far was excised from the discussion
> > - and I'm glad it was as I don't particularly enjoyed recent academic
> > rhetorical valuations of the merits of 'failure' in theory and
> > praxis), so my question is rather simple - in response to the valid
> claims
> > that might be made in favor of trying to un-align oneself
> > with "value"  or prestige in the art marker or art system ...
> >
> > [Erin writes]
> >
> > ...a collective practice of working out how to connect with and at the
> > same time leave behind modes of value-added (prestige value, for
> instance)
> > so often associated to how art operates in the market. And the fact that
> > many of us are academics also keeps us on our toes. But our point is not
> to
> > suggest that we can create conditions that escape capital. Our hope is
> that
> > in developing techniques that can create conditions for emergent
> collective
> > processes, we will better be able to negotiate these subtle allegiances
> all
> > of us participate in, and create lines of resistance that are curious and
> > open-ended. >>
> >
> >
> >
> > could you elaborate what keeps you on your toes  -- that you have to
> > produce something that is not waste?
> >
> >
> > Claims that art is useless had been made a long time ago and repeatedly,
> > of course the ironies abound.
> > Yet collectively, cultures tend to remember art works and performances
> >  and certain beliefs/rhythms (here I remind you of the
> > text that Olu Taiwo had sent and which I quoted last sweek) they found
> > useful and very much worth remembering or
> > reinventing, that were instrumental in more than one sense.
> >
> > So what is your instrument of waste, of rigorous effort resulting in
> > nothing? or anything (work) but only "affinities" and "subtle
> allegiances"?
> >  What are these subtle allegiances,
> > and where to they take us? are they your friendships?  surely that is
> > fine, so are work-related creative temporary partnerships and production
> > teams, we all enjoy them. What then
> > are the "new forms of knowledge" you speak of?  and how could they be
> > collective beyond your particular affinity group? is this the collective
> > mode you meant to introduce?
> >
> > respectfully
> >
> > Johannes Birringer
> > dap / interaktionslabor
> > _______________________________________________
> > empyre forum
> > empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
> > http://www.subtle.net/empyre
> >
> >
> >
> > ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------
> > _______________________________________________
> > empyre forum
> > empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
> > http://www.subtle.net/empyre
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > empyre forum
> > empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
> > http://www.subtle.net/empyre
> >
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20130425/745b1cd6/attachment-0001.htm
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Thu, 25 Apr 2013 01:47:38 +1000
> From: Charlotte Farrell <charlottefarrell at gmail.com>
> To: stamatia portanova <stamatiaportanova at yahoo.it>,
>         soft_skinned_space <empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au>
> Subject: Re: [-empyre-] into what midst? which collective? whose
>         imaginary       space?
> Message-ID:
>         <CAN0DWr9R0W2dNYMts+M2W=-J1nXJ-PBNTLRAC46xgqFETN_Y=
> A at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="windows-1252"
>
> (2009)
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 25, 2013 at 1:47 AM, Charlotte Farrell <
> charlottefarrell at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > An excerpt taken from Beth Hoffman's, 'Radicalism and the Theatre in
> > Genealogies of Live Art', *Performance Research* 14 (1), pp.95-105
> >
> > "As director and playwright Charles Marowitz recalls, he, San Francisco
> > artist Ken Dewey, New York-based Allan Kaprow and others were invited by
> > Calder to present a ?sample of a curious art form called a Happening? as
> an
> > example of what might constitute the ?theatre of the future? (Marowitz
> > 1990: 56). The group of artists developed the piece over the course of
> the
> > conference, driven by feelings of frustration with what Marowitz
> > characterized as tired debates about whether the actor, the director or
> the
> > writer is the primary artistic figure in the theatre, and about how to
> > breathe new life into the problem of establishing political ?commitment?
> > through arts practice. To underscore the empty pontificating that
> Marowitz
> > felt comprised the general conversation, the performance of the Happening
> > began when Marowitz stood up within the context of an actual conference
> > debate and made a proposal. To mitigate against ?a multiplicity of
> > interpretations [in Beckett?s Waiting for Godot] making it difficult to
> fix
> > [the play?s] ?true meaning??, he argued that the delegates should take
> this
> > opportunity to determine an ?official? interpretation, which, ?when
> passed
> > by the conference, would become ?standard? and appear in the appendix of
> > each printed edition thereby removing any confusion about the author?s
> > intentions? (57). Marowitz then proceeded to declare that Waiting for
> Godot
> > was an intricately coded allegory for racial politics during the American
> > Civil War: Pozzo was Jefferson Davis, Estragon and Vladimir were the
> > Generals Grant and Lee, Lucky a plantation slave etc. (57). Despite his
> > sense that the whole proposal was obviously absurd, a patient audience
> > allowed him to go on for quite some time until a planted heckler tried to
> > interrupt him. Marowitz pointedly ignored the interruption; he recalls
> with
> > glee that he ?droned on as if nothing untoward was happening? (58) ?
> until
> > a series of surreal actions began to unfold in and around the edges of
> the
> > auditorium, on and above the stage, and in the dome of the main hall. A
> > nude model was wheeled in on a trolley, actress Carroll Baker scrambled
> > across the backs of the audience as though mesmerized by Allan Kaprow, a
> > bagpiper marched down the aisles, animal skeletons were suspended over
> the
> > conference logo, a large number of white plaster heads were exposed at
> the
> > rear of the speakers? platform, a woman with a baby and a toddler son
> > walked through the spectators behaving as though the conference delegates
> > were figures on display in a museum, and on and on. This strange
> cacophony
> > of spectacles was accompanied by a jumbled ?tape-collage? of many of the
> > speeches made at the conference. The actions lasted about 7 minutes."
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 1:16 AM, stamatia portanova <
> > stamatiaportanova at yahoo.it> wrote:
> >
> >> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------
> >>  Dear all,****
> >>  ****
> >> as a long-distance friend of the SenseLab, and having enjoyed the
> >> conversations developed on this forum so far, I  would like to join in
> >> and share some thoughts. ****
> >>  ****
> >> It was for me of particular interest to read about Erin and Brian?s idea
> >> of a ?pragmatics of the useless?, of giving value to what is not already
> >> valued as productive in contemporary capitalist societies, and I
> >> particularly enjoyed the notion of a ?wasted effort? and of the
> delicious
> >> dionysian joy that comes with it. Kristine also gave us Filliou?s
> beautiful
> >> words about the good-at-nothing and good-at-everything (which I read as
> an
> >> ode to open access, or a collectivization of aesthetic sensibility as a
> >> political aim, if that makes sense). So I get this to be one of the core
> >> concepts to think, in order to understand the SenseLab and its various
> >> practices and events. Indeed, the first thing all of this reminds me of
> is
> >> Chuang-Tzu?s story of the serrate oak, which was ?broad enough to
> shelter
> >> several thousand oxen and measured a hundred spans around, towering
> above
> >> the hills?, and yet remained untouched by carpenters for being ?a
> worthless
> >> tree?. ?There's nothing it can be used for?, the wise man says, ?That's
> how
> >> it got to be that old!" It is of course not a lack of value that is
> >> attributed in this case to the tree, but what is at stake is a
> rethinking
> >> of value in itself, and a questioning of the conventional economic and
> >> moral senses we, as human beings, usually give to it and to our actions.
> >> Another useful (!) reference in relation to this reverted pragmatism is
> >> logician and philosopher C.S. Pierce, for whom the success of a
> pragmatic
> >> action can never be seen as definitive and always has in it germs of
> >> failure and traces of denial. It is exactly this character of novelty in
> >> experience, Pierce goes on to say, that produces an evolution in our
> ideas.
> >> Thinking does not derive from thoughts, but from the necessity of
> action,
> >> and continuously mutates with it. On this matter, I would really point
> out
> >> Pierce?s writings and thoughts on non-utilitarian pragmatism, and his
> logic
> >> of relations and signs, as one of the best theoretical keys for
> entering a
> >> collaborative midst. ****
> >>  ****
> >> But beyond these very philosophical reflections, what is important to
> >> highlight here I think is the fact that all this pragmatic uselessness,
> in
> >> research-creation events, is the plane from which new modes of
> >> subjectivization and of social relationality can very concretely and
> >> usefully emerge. This has been already well articulated by all the other
> >> participants, and what catches one?s attention from the whole
> discussion so
> >> far is indeed how generosity is emerging here as one of the main
> attractors
> >> of this relationality. The SenseLab is certainly a creative hub where
> >> challenging philosophical, artistic, aesthetic practices are
> experimented
> >> with, but as such it is also a place where issues emerge and are dealt
> with
> >> that go beyond these practices, such as the modulation of social
> relations
> >> between its components, or money and fund-raising for its projects, or
> as
> >> Erin was also pointing out, other pedagogical and distribution issues.
> The
> >> rhizomatic composition of the Lab (of every lab at its best) therefore
> >> extends, in all senses, much beyond the realm of art, to life itself. A
> >> creative lab is an open model for life, and a modulation of life itself.
> >> The way in which Sense Labbers are stimulated to deal with this
> modulation
> >> (if ONE main way can exist) is generosity. From this comes the political
> >> importance of its (and all such) projects, for they significantly
> manage to
> >> replace the key notion of ?debt? (one that is today dominant in any
> form of
> >> capitalist exploitation, from immaterial labour to power mining) with
> that
> >> of the ?gift?. Instead of trying to fluidify relations and exchanges and
> >> instead of making them increasingly and illusorily abstract (as in the
> myth
> >> of total virtualisation proposed to us by forms of digital economic
> >> commonality such as that, much discussed today, of the bitcoin), the
> goal
> >> would be to pay the right attention to differences, to the various
> bodies
> >> and qualities implied in all our relations, those same bodies and
> qualities
> >> that still represent a hindrance for contemporary algorithmic and
> financial
> >> capitalism, and are at best to be simply dismissed, or thrown away as
> >> ?waste? (think of the tons of local fruits thrown away each year in many
> >> countries in the name of import and profit, and think of all the wasted
> >> efforts of unknown artists striving to produce some work and survive
> with
> >> no support). ?Waste? is really such, of course, only in the capitalist
> >> markets, where the very notion of value is totally submitted to a logic
> of
> >> qualitative in/equivalence and debt repayment: would it be possible for
> the
> >> unknown performer to repay the services of a prestigious lawyer with her
> >> work? Under this light, all forms of recuperation, redistribution, of
> play
> >> with what is excessive and wasted (wasted efforts, wasted matters,
> wasted
> >> ideas), generously bestowing it without expecting anything in exchange,
> >> become a vital for  not only of political critique but of creation (in
> >> the sense of an excessive and dionysian political economy, as Georges
> >> Bataille would define it). But I?ll stop here, before I start to waste
> time
> >> philosophizing again?****
> >>  ****
> >> Best,****
> >>  ****
> >> Stamatia Portanova****
> >>
> >>   ------------------------------
> >>  *Da:* Toni Pape <tonipape at gmail.com>
> >> *A:* soft_skinned_space <empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au>
> >> *Inviato:* Luned? 22 Aprile 2013 21:37
> >> *Oggetto:* Re: [-empyre-] into what midst? which collective? whose
> >> imaginary space?
> >>
> >> hello
> >>
> >> from erin's phrasing I would think that she means our "subtle
> >> allegiances" with capital. if i may paraphrase in a somewhat simplistic
> >> way: even the most anti-capitalist among us cannot escape capital. the
> goal
> >> is therefore not to na?vely try and step out of capital but to step in
> and
> >> navigate our complex entanglements with it differently.
> >>
> >> a really short note on friendship: we've had a lot of conversations
> about
> >> this and here's what i took out it. friendship can be (but doesn't have
> to
> >> be) an *outcome* of collaborative practice. it *cannot* be its basis. it
> >> has to do with taking collaboration out of the personal. i'd be glad to
> go
> >> over that one again if people are interested. :-)
> >>
> >> concerning "new forms of knowledge." this may sound evasive but i hope
> >> you trust that it's not: i believe you cannot know *what* a new form of
> >> knowledge is because it doesn't exist yet. that's the thing with
> novelty.
> >> and taken seriously, this poses quite a demanding task:
> >> if you go to a conventional conference, you know that the form of
> >> knowledge you'll get is the 20-minute-paper. if you go to a
> >> research-creation event, you will have to invent that form in the first
> >> place. in any case, you will only ever know afterwards (and we've talked
> >> about what that was in the case of the dome project). we obviously have
> >> ideas and propositions. but you never know how the process will play
> out,
> >> what will stick, what will fall away. speaking of "what" and "how", i'm
> >> reminded of the first *Inflexions* issue which was called "How is
> >> research-creation?" <http://www.inflexions.org/issues.html#i1> instead
> >> of "What...".
> >>
> >> i'd say the point about failure and uselessness is not that our
> >> collaborative efforts *have to *result in that. but failure is always an
> >> option. obviously, one doesn't need an instrument for failure. i'd say
> >> failure has a habit of falling into place all by itself and doesn't need
> >> much help. also, it would be weird (paradoxical?) to have instruments
> for
> >> failure. applied correctly, they would allow us to "succeed in failing."
> >>  sadly enough, failure still feels like failure to me.
> >> and the notion of uselessness, for me, simply implies that the standard
> >> by which you measure value does not pre-exist that which is measured.
> for
> >> instance, it's very easy to say *Logic of Sensation* is useless because
> >> Francis Bacon hated it and he was a good painter. so it's of no use to
> the
> >> obvious authority in place. fine. but a more interesting and generous
> >> question would be to ask: what can a book, or movement of thought, a
> >> creative process *generate*? how might it *create *its own use?
> >>
> >> toni
> >>
> >> Am 22.04.2013 um 13:53 schrieb Johannes Birringer <
> >> Johannes.Birringer at brunel.ac.uk>:
> >>
> >> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------
> >> dear all
> >>
> >> on a less humorous note, i have been thinking much about the recent
> >> response posting by Erin, which I felt was
> >> thought-provoking and frustrating at the same time, so i wondered how
> >> others here responded to the language
> >> and the philosophical stance (the term failure has been mentioned
> >> repeatedly but so far was excised from the discussion
> >> - and I'm glad it was as I don't particularly enjoyed recent academic
> >> rhetorical valuations of the merits of 'failure' in theory and
> >> praxis), so my question is rather simple - in response to the valid
> >> claims that might be made in favor of trying to un-align oneself
> >> with "value"  or prestige in the art marker or art system ...
> >>
> >> [Erin writes]
> >>
> >> ...a collective practice of working out how to connect with and at the
> >> same time leave behind modes of value-added (prestige value, for
> instance)
> >> so often associated to how art operates in the market. And the fact that
> >> many of us are academics also keeps us on our toes. But our point is
> not to
> >> suggest that we can create conditions that escape capital. Our hope is
> that
> >> in developing techniques that can create conditions for emergent
> collective
> >> processes, we will better be able to negotiate these subtle allegiances
> all
> >> of us participate in, and create lines of resistance that are curious
> and
> >> open-ended. >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> could you elaborate what keeps you on your toes  -- that you have to
> >> produce something that is not waste?
> >>
> >>
> >> Claims that art is useless had been made a long time ago and repeatedly,
> >> of course the ironies abound.
> >> Yet collectively, cultures tend to remember art works and performances
> >>  and certain beliefs/rhythms (here I remind you of the
> >> text that Olu Taiwo had sent and which I quoted last sweek) they found
> >> useful and very much worth remembering or
> >> reinventing, that were instrumental in more than one sense.
> >>
> >> So what is your instrument of waste, of rigorous effort resulting in
> >> nothing? or anything (work) but only "affinities" and "subtle
> allegiances"?
> >>  What are these subtle allegiances,
> >> and where to they take us? are they your friendships?  surely that is
> >> fine, so are work-related creative temporary partnerships and production
> >> teams, we all enjoy them. What then
> >> are the "new forms of knowledge" you speak of?  and how could they be
> >> collective beyond your particular affinity group? is this the collective
> >> mode you meant to introduce?
> >>
> >> respectfully
> >>
> >> Johannes Birringer
> >> dap / interaktionslabor
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> empyre forum
> >> empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
> >> http://www.subtle.net/empyre
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> ----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> empyre forum
> >> empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
> >> http://www.subtle.net/empyre
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> empyre forum
> >> empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
> >> http://www.subtle.net/empyre
> >>
> >
> >
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL: <
> http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20130425/36043d6e/attachment-0001.htm
> >
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> empyre mailing list
> empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
> http://www.subtle.net/empyre
>
> End of empyre Digest, Vol 101, Issue 18
> ***************************************
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au/pipermail/empyre/attachments/20130424/56f83047/attachment.htm>