Rave Radio: Offline (0/0)
Adresse électronique: Mot de passe:
Archives
June 2018 (1)
January 2018 (1)
May 2017 (1)
April 2015 (1)
March 2015 (1)
October 2013 (1)
December 2012 (2)
September 2012 (1)
August 2012 (1)
July 2012 (1)
June 2012 (2)
May 2012 (2)
April 2012 (2)
February 2012 (2)
January 2012 (4)
December 2011 (3)
November 2011 (1)
October 2011 (3)
September 2011 (3)
August 2011 (3)
July 2011 (2)
June 2011 (3)
May 2011 (2)
April 2011 (1)
March 2011 (2)
February 2011 (4)
January 2011 (1)
December 2010 (3)
November 2010 (4)
October 2010 (1)
September 2010 (1)
August 2010 (1)
July 2010 (3)
June 2010 (7)
May 2010 (2)
April 2010 (4)
March 2010 (8)
February 2010 (4)
January 2010 (4)
December 2009 (6)
November 2009 (9)
October 2009 (7)
September 2009 (8)
August 2009 (4)
July 2009 (4)
June 2009 (12)
May 2009 (13)
April 2009 (11)
March 2009 (7)
February 2009 (9)
January 2009 (8)
December 2008 (17)
November 2008 (14)
October 2008 (16)
September 2008 (5)
August 2008 (6)
July 2008 (10)
June 2008 (6)
May 2008 (17)
April 2008 (17)
March 2008 (24)
February 2008 (17)
January 2008 (13)
December 2007 (12)
November 2007 (25)
October 2007 (13)
September 2007 (14)
August 2007 (33)
July 2007 (11)
June 2007 (11)
May 2007 (26)
April 2007 (15)
March 2007 (22)
February 2007 (19)
January 2007 (20)
December 2006 (28)
November 2006 (23)
October 2006 (21)
September 2006 (20)
August 2006 (29)
July 2006 (10)
June 2006 (15)
May 2006 (14)
April 2006 (10)
March 2006 (10)
February 2006 (11)
January 2006 (18)
December 2005 (10)
November 2005 (14)
October 2005 (16)
September 2005 (12)
August 2005 (20)
July 2005 (8)
June 2005 (18)
May 2005 (29)
April 2005 (39)
March 2005 (8)
February 2005 (10)
January 2005 (9)
December 2004 (4)
November 2004 (2)
October 2004 (2)
September 2004 (1)
July 2004 (2)
May 2004 (4)
April 2004 (1)
February 2004 (3)
January 2004 (5)
December 2003 (2)
November 2003 (3)
October 2003 (3)
September 2003 (2)
August 2003 (2)
Tag Cloud
 (400), Djinthebox (22), Trance (18), Dj In The Box (16), Rave (14), Dj In The Box! (11), Podcast (10), 2009 (8), Music (4), Inthebox (3), After (3), Techno (3), Stylised Mannequin (2), Muzik4machines (2), Deejay (2), House (2), Love (2), Black Magik (2), Saphir (2), Lantreh (2), "dj In The Box!" (2), Csgrn (1), Boring (1), Panty (1), Accident (1)
» moohk on Sat 30 Dec, 2006 @ 10:50am
Title:"zizazig-ha"
Posted On:2006-12-30 10:50:36
Posted By:» moohk
"It's probably a fair assumption to say that "zizazig-ha" is not Spice shorthand for "subvert the dominant Paradigm"..... (Jennifer L Pozner)

"Depression moods lead, almost invariably, to accidents. But, when they occur, our mood changes again, since the accident shows we can draw the world in our wake, and that we still retain some degree of power even when our spirits are low. A series of accidents creates a positively light-hearted state, out of consideration for this strange power."
Jean Baudrillard

» moohk on Wed 27 Dec, 2006 @ 5:47pm
Title:How To Wake Up In The Morning And Take On The Day Like You Mean It
Posted On:2006-12-27 17:47:40
Posted By:» moohk
Well bitches, try playing Black Sabbath. The first album is the best one. And the
their first song, of the same name as the band, is also, the best one. Fairies Wears Boots is only one supreme example of their impressive lyrics.

Admittedly, so far on the menu for my journal, it seems an homage to old dead white guys (well, i dunno really if they're all dead, so to speak, Nancy could probably at least philosophize over that one for awhile with you, i've no idea about the AAA dude, but I am willing to bet), but for all intents and purposes, yeah, if you were thinking that, sadly, so far you are right. Except Ozzy isn't dead, bitches. Far from it. And he bit the head off a bat. Do that and come talk to me about not being heady, cutting-edge or progressive enough for rave.ca. (It is also true that Sharon Osbourne is pure gold. I give her due props here, NOT because she stood behind her man, but because she is truly, hardcore). Like a good wine, though, maybe you just have to give me some time.

yeah i know, it is true that Black Sabbath certainly seem dated, at least in terms of how their 'dark and heavy' lyrics translate, but this, unfortunately is a sad sign of our times. 'Killing Yourself To Live' still makes sense, but irony has become ironic. we'll talk Baudrillard later.

right now i'm going to go eat some corn pops and whiskey in my underwear. i'd say that i fukkin love the holidays, if i did, maybe, but i think i just like looking really hot in my underwear, good music, really sugary cereal, liquor and drugs. (occasionally, of course). oh, and i've new taste for jewelry. you know. the good things in life.

Listening To: Black Sabbath, Black Sabbath

» BooTcHou3 on Wed 27 Dec, 2006 @ 12:58pm
Title:Sagesse pour la vie !!
Posted On:2006-12-27 12:58:23
Posted By:» BooTcHou3
-Quoi que vous fassiez, le monde vous regarde.
-Si vous voulez être compris, dites exactement votre pensée.
-Il est aussi important de suivre vos rêves quand tout va mal que quand tout va bien.
-Tout le monde peut avoir son opinion sur vous, mais ne le prenez pas à coeur: ce qui compte, c'est votre opinion sur vous.
-Les souvenirs sont formidables, mais ne les laissez jamais jeter une ombre sur vos rêves.
-Évitez de parler sous l'emprise de la colère: une parole malheureuse ne s'efface pas.
-C'est quand vous avez le plus envie d'abandonner que vous être au plus près du but.
-Si vous laissez l'autre vous mettre en colère, il a gagné.
-Pourquoi les 3 aveux les plus difficiles sont-ils:
'' je suis désolé ''
'' J'ai eu tort ''
et '' je T'aime ''

-Le mensonge est dans l'intention, pas dans les mots.

» BooTcHou3 on Wed 27 Dec, 2006 @ 12:53pm
Title:Pensées
Posted On:2006-12-27 12:53:02
Posted By:» BooTcHou3
- On peut parier sur un bon cheval... mais on ne parie jamais assez sur le bon cheval.
- Une imagination puissante est un atout inestimable.
-Oublier est tout aussi important que se rappeler.
-Les gens dépensent des fortunes à essayer d'améliorer leur apparence alors que le meilleur soin de beauté se trouve gratuitement dans un sourire.
-L'amour a le pouvoir de révéler le meilleur et le pire de nous-mêmes.
-Un héro est un homme qui fait se qu'il peut.
-Ce ne sont pas toujours les plus agités qui en font le plus.
-Il faut énormément de savoir pour savoir vraiment combien nous sommes ignorants.
-Qui n'a jamais aimé, n'a jamais menti.
-On peut toujours critiqué le temps qu'il fait, il n'en tiendra pas compte.
-Les mensonges sont la vérité déguisée.
-Le désir est l'aiguillon de la créativité.
-Chacun a sa chance dans la vie, mais il est souvent difficile de la reconnaître lorsqu'elle se présente.
-Qui ne sait pas pleurer de tout son coeur ne saura jamais rire.
-Notre intelligence est ce qui nous permet d'avoir deux pensées contradictoires en même temps.
-Bon caractère est parfois plus agaçant qui mauvais caractère.
-Éviter la supertition est un acte superticieux.
-On n'est jamais plus seul qu'au milieu de la foule.
-Dans tout projets, les deux passages les plus difficile sont le début et la fin.
-Imaginer, c'est créer.
-Rien n'est plus satisfaisant que de transformer l'imagination en action.

» moohk on Tue 26 Dec, 2006 @ 4:32pm
Title:Comment Devenir Un Astronaute Autonome
Posted On:2006-12-26 16:32:41
Posted By:» moohk
http://www.lyber-eclat.net/lyber/aaa/devenir.html

Comment devenir un astronaute autonome

Lecture à la Conferenza Intergallactica, Bologne, 18 avril 1998
John Eden, Raido AAA


1
LA GUERRE DE
L'INFORMATION

«Cet homme a une vie merveilleuse ! Depuis qu’il est petit garçon, il lit avec intérêt des livres et des histoires sur l’astronomie. Avec son premier argent de poche il s’est acheté un télescope... Le nom de sa fille est Astra, le nom de son fils Mercury. Chaque pensée, chaque geste, manifestent son aspiration pour le voyage interplanétaire !»
Editorial de la Pravda, 1934



24 mai 1962: John Glenn, un pilote des US Marine Corps, devient le deuxième américain en orbite. Il a utilisé une bonne partie de la réserve de l’Aurora pour atteindre une position satisfaisante pour pouvoir photographier des couchers de soleil. Il a été sévèrement réprimandé par la NASA pour cela.

Pour devenir un Astronaute Autonome vous n’avez pas simplement besoin de comprendre l’histoire du voyage spatial indépendant et d’agir en conséquence. Vous devez également vous représenter quelque chose de différent des attitudes et valeurs de la société que nous voulons laisser derrière nous. Nous devons être nous-mêmes d’abord et par dessus tout – où que cela puisse nous mener. La posture «militante» qu’adorent tellement les activistes politiques puritains n’est d’aucune utilité pour l’AAA. C’est une construction de l’esprit qui divise l’individu, distinguant les besoins réels de la personne, individuels et sociaux – les raisons pour lesquelles ils ne supportent pas la vie sur la planète Terre, de leurs actions – leurs tentatives pour laisser ce monde derrière eux. Si le programme de l’AAA devient un nouveau job, même pour une seule personne, alors nous aurons échoué totalement.

Le militant en tant qu’individu, et les groupes politiques en tant qu’organisations, souffrent d’une sorte de déplacement de la personnalité. Leurs désirs et la manière par laquelle ils tentent de les mettre en pratique sont deux choses complètement différentes. C’est pourquoi nos fêtes ont autant de valeur que nos textes. C’est pourquoi nous allons dans plusieurs directions à la fois.

L’AAA n’est pas un programme qu’une personne met en pratique ou encourage les autres à mettre en pratique, mais un mouvement social. Ceux qui parmi nous développent et défendent les idées de l’AAA n’ont aucun avantage sur les autres, excepté une meilleure compréhension et une expression plus rigoureuse; comme toutes les personnes qui ne sont pas spécialement concernées par la théorie, nous ressentons le besoin pratique d’établir des communautés autonomes dans l’Espace.

Nous ne sommes pas des leaders ou des experts – et nous ne le serons jamais. Ceux qui attendent que chaque personne impliquée dans le réseau soit capable de connaître tous les aspects du voyage spatial se leurrent eux-mêmes. Nous chérissons le processus d’apprentissage, le dialogue entre les individus intéressés. C’est comme cela que toutes nos idées se sont développées, et c’est comme cela que nous atteindrons nos objectifs. Nos méthodes d’entraînement à cette conférence reflètent cette approche – elles sont autant relatives à des interactions sociales qu’à la volonté d’acquérir certaines capacités. Ceux qui projettent leurs espoirs et leurs désirs sur nous doivent comprendre qu’ils sont impliqués – ils sont aussi des astronautes.

Il n’y a absolument aucune sorte de groupe «d’élite» d’astronautes autonomes allant dans l’Espace, nos trajectoires doivent être ouvertes à tous. Nous ne proposons pas de communauté marginale de hippies en gravité zéro qui exclurait qui que ce soit.

Nous n’avons pas de futur projeté, attendant le bon moment pour prendre notre envol. Nous avons seulement une idée limitée de ce à quoi ressembleront les communautés dans l’outre-espace à leurs débuts, ou laissées à elles-mêmes après une centaine d’années. La recherche est souvent le meilleur des objectifs, l’aspiration centrale des jeux que nous jouons. Nous sommes concernés par les possibilités et les expérimentations, et non par l’idée d’être dans la «bonne ligne» ou d’avoir raison rétrospectivement.

La difficulté réside dans la nécessité d’aller au-delà des notions traditionnelles de voyage spatial sans pour autant en rejeter les concepts les plus pertinents. Ce n’est pas suffisant de comprendre que la NASA, l’ESA ou leurs équivalents en Europe de l’Est n’ont rien en commun avec ce que nous tentons de réaliser. Il faut également comprendre ce qui a changé depuis les soixante dernières années, et quels aspects de leurs technologies peuvent être adaptés à la lumière de la situation présente.



Les communautés en gravité zéro sont à portée de main, seule l’inertie de la société empêche leur formation. Mais leurs bases sont là, et nous développerons la propulsion pour les atteindre.

La première étape est de considérer les problèmes, d’engager le dialogue avec les personnes concernées. Le réseau de groupes AAA est le reflet de cette étape. N’importe qui ici peut y contribuer. Nous avons été conditionnés par les médias depuis soixante ans pour placer nos espoirs et nos aspirations dans l’Espace, mais seule l’AAA a pris ce défi au sérieux. En tant qu’individus nous sommes isolés, atomisés. Mais si nous pouvons nous rassembler et mettre en commun nos idées et nos talents, alors le voyage spatial en communautés de base ne deviendra pas simplement une possibilité mais une nécessité. Nous avons été dupés, escroqués en laissant les gouvernements et les armées aller dans l’Espace à nos places. Occasionnellement ils nous font miroiter quelques friandises comme «la vie sur Mars» ou «de la glace sur la Lune», mais rien ne change véritablement. Il doit être bien clair que leurs intérêts ne sont pas les nôtres. Maintenant, il est temps pour chacun, pour tous ici, de le faire pour soi-même – et pour tous les autres.

Chaq[un]est un astronaute autonome.

Listening To: http://www.archive.org/details/Trancer-Tears_of_Ecstasy

» moohk on Sun 24 Dec, 2006 @ 6:44pm
Title:“The real outside is 'at the heart' of the inside“ - An interview with Jean-Luc Nancy
Posted On:2006-12-24 18:44:44
Posted By:» moohk
http://www.atopia.tk/index.php?option=com_content&...

“The real outside is 'at the heart' of the inside“ - An interview with Jean-Luc Nancy
ATOPIA: Jean-Luc Nancy, you are—in numerous respects—a survivor…

Jean-Luc Nancy: “In numerous respects,” you say… I feel like asking the questions right away : what do you mean by that? But you will specify that for me later. I will try, first, to understand you, or to guess what you mean. A survivor—I certainly am in the sense that I would have died in 1991 if it hadn’t been possible for me to have a heart transplant. Which means either that I would have died ten years earlier, or that without a the availability of a transplant on time I would be dead (I had, when I received the transplant, about six months to live). In 1997 as well, I could have died from lymphoma provoked by the transplant treatment (it’s one of the possible effects, fortunately quite rare, of ciclosporin, which as you know prevents the rejection of the rejection of the transplant…the ambivalence of the pharmakon!), if a partly new treatment hadn’t been in the course of being tested.

But in responding to you like this, beyond still asking myself about your “numerous respects”, I eventually tell myself that these two forms of “survival” are after all really banal: who couldn’t say “at such a moment, if such a circumstance hadn’t been avoided, I could have, or should have, died”? for example someone who did not go, because he was held up, to the World Trade Center on “September 11th”; or who cancelled a trip to Indonesia during the tsunami; or else who has pulled through from a serious illness. For example, at this very moment, an inhabitant of Réunion, exposed to chikunguya (I have a friend who just returned from there). So I can tell you that at the age of 15 I could have died in the sea, having fallen from a little boat capsized in a stom, had they not come looking for us from the coast (I was with my father). But what then? I’ve often been told that I was born strangled by my umbilical cord and that it was necessary to disentangle me and restart my breathing—no sooner found than lost! I imagine that more than one newborn has died in a similar manner…

So, what does “survival” mean? Isn’t life always an escape from death? And this escape from death—which at the same time doesn’t cease moving towards death, of course—what is it if not life itself—that is, not the grand movement of all the living of the world, vegetable and animal, which for its part integrates into itself the death of individuals, all the dead, from the most premature to the most belated, but rather the quite small, the slight, singular movement of a “some one” that accidentally slips it “own” life to the heart of and to the edge of this great living thing? This “some one,” this “anyone” in the accident [fortuité] of its singular escape, always accompanied by the great life-death of everything [l’ensemble], doesn’t live in the same sense: it sur-vives, that is, it is always on the escape, skimming non-existence, contingent, and which, at the same time, is beyond the great life of all. It is in “survival” in the sense Derrida gave that word: more than life. But this “more” is a “less”: less than Life as a meeting between self and auto-affection, but more than Life as exposure [exposition] to chance, to the accident of existing [l’exister]…With that, I doubtless still haven’t guessed all the “respects” you were thinking of….

A: At bottom, if I understand you correctly, it is necessary to understand this double “à” in every survival. “Survivre à” is at once an a quo and an ad quem, a “from” and a “towards.” That reminds me of a Persian story of a man from the city of Shiraz who, learning that death was to come looking for him the next day, harnesses his horse to get away from Shiraz as quickly as possible. That evening, exhausted, he comes upon the gates of Ispahan, where death is already waiting, obviously surprised: “But what are you doing here already? I wasn’t expecting you until tomorrow…” You eveoke something similar in the new postface to L’Intrus/The Intruder. Time’s passing would be at once what distances you from and what brings you closer to that to which you, that which we, survive.

JLN: Yes. But you had hinted at a second question, and I don’t discern it in your response, which I find on the other hand develops quite well one of your thoughts. Perhaps I could only add this: death one encounters inevitably, and fleeing it only leads to it, but even then in an unpredictable fashion. Now this unpredictability, which is also the reason we can’t believe in our own death, and which remains what it is even though all concrete signs can be gathered to make a short-term prognosis (I’m not talking about myself here, but of people I know or have known) and which even a doctor can only give for an extremely short period, this unpredictability which only the administration of a lethal substance can cancel—and in that case, what is there of “anticipation,” of “prediction” [prévision]? What is really “foreseen” [prévu]? What do you see coming?—this unpredictability, thus, is also what forms “survival” ad quem according to your expresion (or ad quod, for it is remarkable that, mistake or not, you used a masculine and not a neuter…). As I can’t go “toward death,” I go “towards” something else, knowing all the while that life goes toward death. In me something other than the living being, or the living-knowing being, goes towards… what? (or whom?—to come back to your masculine, which could just as well be a feminine!) Perhaps one could say that this “survivor” goes towards… survival itself: if the latter is “more than life,” it is the non-relation to self, the neither-conservation-nor-transformation of self, the departure of self towards an absoluteness outside of space and outside of time—this eternitas that Spinoza says we feel is provided for us, that is itself our experientia..

“Survival” consequently seems to me to be a risky term, which can slide towards a “super-life,” [“super-vie”] a life beyond, in short an insidious return to a religious belief. (Assuredly, it is necessary just as well to reinterpret this type of belief, to tear it away from the representation of a “second” or “new” life. But let’s leave that for the moment.) It is necessary to say “other than life,” precisely instead of an “other life.” For the other-than-life is death… It is a matter of thinking death, or rather in death this other-than-life that is itself other than the cessation of life, the extinction and disappearance of a “self.” And thus the departure of this self beside itself [“hors de soi”].[1]

What comes with the experience of the “intruder” ["l’intrus”] could be the feeling that this “other” that is not an opposite, not a negation, although an absolute other, is already sensibly inserted in me. However, it is not a matter of saying that I will encounter this other in death. Precisely not, for by its nature as other it is cannot be encountered. Unpredictable and unknowable, inappropriable death means this: the alterity of this other…

Of this other that is “me beside myself” [moi hors de moi], or even the outside-of [hors] in the middle of me [hors au milieu de moi], opening it, opening me to the outside [dehors] as well as to the truth of “me,” but truth as unappropriable. That comes back to saying differently what Heidegger says about the “ownmost possibility” of Dasein as the impossibility of living its death. It remains, without a doubt, impossible to go further –except on this point: that “the ownmost” in this case is precisely improper and depropriating, and that qualifying it as “ownmost” tempts us to a sort of insidious superappropriation, particularly in a heroic mode. We can’t avoid dreaming of and wishing for a heroic, or even sovereign, death, which is to say not pulling back before death (to return to Hegel’s words on “the life of spirit”).

So in the end, this dream to the contrary, we have to leave death to its unpredictable work and ourselves to our weakness, to our fear, to our unconsciousness. (It’s the model of consciousness that torments us…) On the other hand, we have to “survive” at every instant: always to relate to the other-than-life and to the other-than-self. Thus to confide in others as well, in the sense of the concrete, determinate others who are the reality of the absolute “other.” Not only other people, their thoughts of us, our place in their their lives, but the other beings all the way to the earth to which we will “return”, as pulvis in quem reverteris…

Yes, to go towards… dust as towards the absolute, to go towards the dust of the absolute…

A: I’d like to come back to your expression of the “outside-of in the middle of me” [hors au milieu de moi]. In “L’Intrus,” this incomparable autobiographical (but wouldn’t it be better to say xenographical?) testimony, you point out that the intruder is not so much what penetrates into the proper as what, as intruder, is already lodged there. Its work would then consist less in an intrusion than in what you call an opening “extrusion.” I seem to notice a recurrent attention in your work to the question of the opening character of “work”[ouvrage].What link is there between your reflection on worklessness [désoeuvrement] and this opening [ouverture] of extrusion?

JLN: “Outside-of in the middle of me,” yes: let’s make it clear that the only “outside” that there really is is never the one we see out the window, which is only “outside” due to its difference from the “inside.” The real outside is not another inside than this inside: it is at the heart (you can say that again!) of the inside. My model here would be Wittgenstein’s sentence: “The meaning [sens] of the world is outside the world.” As this sentence is not that of a believer in another world transcending ours, in a “world-behind,” to speak like Nietzsche, it can mean nothing but this: the meaning of the world is an “outside-of” “in” the world. That is, an opening, a gaping hole that can be understood as a wound or as an access route—of entry and exit—or even as mouth, ear, nostril, anus, sex, eye. You can easily imagine how each of these openings can give rise to ample variation on the proper modality of the outside-of it evokes: the outside-of of the breath, of desire, of excrement, of speech, of all kinds of sensations, and in the end in each of these modes a modalization of “sense” [sens], that is of reference from “me,” to other, to “outside” [du renvoi de “moi” à de l’autre, à du “dehors”]. More precisely, I would say: to that of the other which is outside or is done outside, that is, not the presence of another before me (with its own “inside”) but non-closure, non-return to the self, neither of the other, nor of me.

This is what the outside-of opens: the non-closure of the inside, its déclosion. So—and which is effectively the same thing, since you remind me of it—I thought that the “intruder” in me was less the transplanted organ from another’s body than my own heart’s removing itself from its organic service and “extruding” itself in some way of its own (such that in my case it wasn’t the effect of an illness, but congenital), in the same way my spiritual heart, if you will allow me the expression, or my ontological, essential heart, my mystical heart if you prefer (in the sense of “mystical body”) is what, in me, opens and extracts itself from “me,” that is from the return-into-oneself [retour-en-soi] or as-self that the “me” implies.

We are beside ourselves [hors de nous], essentially. The state that we call in French “being beside onself” [“être hors de soi”]—the exasperation of anger, the extreme irritation of desire, the exaltation of passion, the enthusiasm of admiration, of ambition, or of worship, everything that removes “us” from “ourselves” opens, quite simply, an outside-of according to which we don’t come back to ourselves, we don’t recover ourselves, nor do we find ourselves. It isn’t a matter of invoking madness. The models of madness that have exerted influence recently recall something of what I’ve said—but without implying an alteration of the “self” that remains an alteration of the self. While the outside-of [hors] that opens us and that opens in us opens our “in,” our “in [our]self” to every other thing that doesn’t change it, that only projects it far, very far, infinitely far “to the heart” of it-“self.”

Since you add a question on the oeuvre, the work [l’ouvrage], and unworking [désoeuvrement], I’d say this: unworking opens the oeuvre, it opens it right in the middle.[2] Unworking doesn’t come after the oeuvre, it comes in it and by it. It’s for this reason that an oeuvre always opens a gaping hole in the heart of its “author” by which the oeuvre shows it is not “his,” that it creates itself—it which is not an “itself” [“même”], which is nothing in the end but an opening, an outside-of. The pun with “hors d’oeuvre” is too close to be avoided, but it doesn’t add anything. For one is not “hors d’oeuvre”: one is outside-of in the work [hors dans l’oeuvre].

The greater an oeuvre, the more gaping it is and the less we finish plunging into this gap... How is it possible to keep rereading Sophocles? To keep re-looking at Cézanne? To keep re-watching Eisenstein? To keep re-listening to Beethoven? They are always intruders anew, they work [opèrent] ever-new extrusions in us.

A: Jean-Luc Nancy, your philosophical oeuvre is known for being singularly dense, idiomatic, resistant. I would be tempted to say “somatic.” Jacques Derrida—whose presence is sorely missed today (the pancreas can’t be transplanted, as you remind us)—said of your book Corpus that it was the De anima of our time. It does not, however, treat the body as only an object of thought, nor is it either a prosthesis in Derrida’s sense, rather it penetrates into writing itself. By what necessity is your philosophical writing transformed and exposed to the body, this stranger to philosophy?

JLN: Your question certainly touches on many connected themes or motifs. On the one hand, it touches on the motif, precisely dear to Derrida, of the determinant character of “tone” in a “philosophy.” I wouldn’t be able on a moment’s notice, without special research, to cite a passage of his on the subject for you, but he loved to say that a thought, or a philosophy, is perhaps first of all a tone, a tonality, one could even say a voice (which is to say just as well a writing, to say it in passing and to re-mark this salute to Derrida). Perhaps one could add, since I said “a thought or a philosophy,” that it is in this accenting of tone, in this highlighting [mise en évidence] of mode, that the difference between “thought” and “philosophy” begins, if you would understand that the latter refers to a given order of conceptual discourse (whose privileged examples would be Kant or Husserl), while the former would not make reference to this order and would arise from a conceptual labor that makes it vibrate and resonate more than stringing it into “long chains of reasons.” The examples would then be Lucretius or Heidegger. But we know well that this distribution of examples will prove much too summary… Each thinker oscillates between discourse and timbre, or rather, as Bergson said, between the images he finds to arrange and the mute intuition that animates him—which I would reformulate by saying that the “muteness” of this intuition (unique for each, he says) is exactly what speaks in the voice, the tone. But that also means that ultimately all philosophies speak of some of the same “things,” truths or meanings. Perhaps of just one thing in the end: our presence/absence, our body/mind. One same and single thing, one same and single distance from ourselves that constitutes us and that thoughts indefinitely modulate.

On the other hand, your question touches on a motif of “our time.” What is a thought “of our time”? One that, at the same time, knows that it picks up at just the same starting point as every other — Aristotle’s, Descartes’s, or Heidegger’s—and that knows as well that this same starting point brings with it today its proper given: that there is no object. There are no longer objects of thought, there are no longer thoughts on or with respect to objects. There is a weight [pesée] (I like to connect pensée to pesée, according to etymology though without etymologism) that is the weight upon us of a world deprived of escape (of transcendence, of meaning, of sufficient reason, etc.). Our situation is that of a metaphysics to which the physical is not longer subordinate but on which, rather, the physical weighs. Physiques or rather the physical weighs: matter, the body, the being-there-given [être-là-donné] and without an outside of the universe. Without an outside, or rather revealing the outside as a real absolute outside—that is, an outside we never penetrate and thus never escape. An outside like that of a house whose doors and windows open on concrete walls or layers of earth stuck to the windows as normally air sticks to the exterior with images of the street or of the fields, of the sky and of birds… A house, then, that wouldn’t open but for which this un-opening would exercise exactly the weight of thought.

Thus “the body,” and thus “the body,” taken as the addressee rather than as the object of writing. When one day I was asked to speak about the body for the first time, I immediately recognized this demand: not to speak about it but to speak to it and to speak right up against it or to let it speak. At first “this is my body,” the old eucharistic formula of Christianty, appeared to me as the very speech of speech, the bearer of the address that opens all speech (or thought): first of all this, here, what opens and what speaks, what in speaking designates itself as the solid point of issue [émission]. Issue in the sense that is itself only a modality alongside others: pleasure [jouissance] or sorrow, the birth-cry or the dying breath. Issue, exposition: what, moreover, leaves before me and goes far ahead, further, so far that sense is lost, the voice ceases to resonate, the body remains vibrating and empty. Reveling [jouissant], suffering, speaking, holding its silence…

So you call it “foreign to philosophy” [étranger à la philosophie]? I would like to reflect more on that. Didn’t everything start with and as an exposed body: Socrates scratching his leg in his prison—and the lover of Phèdre whose desire furiously sets the quills on end ?… I mean: the exhibition [exposition] of the body, that is, exposure [exposition] tout court, being-exposed as being, absolutely, that is philosophy, that is, it is the departure of the gods, and with them the departure of being-placed or being-imposed, if you want to put it that way.

At bottom, the body is has never been diminished, repressed, or denied in philosophy except to the very degree of the account [exposition] that it has seemed to be ever since the gods ceased to inhabit the world. The body is the outside itself: the “inside” as outside. I said “a house that opens onto concrete,” I could say: the body, soul that opens onto matter, which is to say on the outside-of-what. Soul beside itself, and thus soul, yes! “Body” is the weight [pesée] of the soul upon us, today.

That is why I would say that the body is not so foreign [étranger] to philosophy as one would think: “body” is the strangeness that philosophy names because she discovers it, and philosophy discovers the body because the world effectively becomes a stranger to itself. That is what we call the “Occident”…That opens just as much upon the diminution and the rejection of the body as on the exaltation of the body’s power. In one way or in the other, it introduces a fundamental strangeness to ourselves, a strangeness of the world to itself. We have called it body/mind, matter/idea, exteriority/interiority…in reality, it is a matter of the distance between the same and the same, and thus sometimes rejection of one by the other, sometimes a burst [élan], escstatic from one towards the other…Strangeness is none other than this strangenes to ourselves, in ourselves. It is our torment, as tragic as it is erotic.

Questions: Emanuel Alloa
Translation: Peter Jaros

[1] Following the French (and English) idiom, I translate hors de soi throughout as “beside [one]self”; hors as “outside” or “outside-of” depending on context. “The outside” renders le dehors; “the outside-of” the more unusual le hors.
[2] Because Nancy differentiates here between œuvre [work, body of work] and ouvrage [work, piece of workmanship, labor], and puns with ouvrir [to open], I have translated ouvrage as “work” and left œuvre in the French, since its English calque shares some of the same resonance .

» Dudu on Fri 22 Dec, 2006 @ 11:20pm
Title:L'inutile dictionnaire essentiel des trucs inutilement utilisés par Dudu et ses copains!
Posted On:2006-12-22 23:20:52
Posted By:» Dudu
Z: N de côté (ou mieux connu sous le nom de N sur le Q). Première dernière lettre de l'alpha bet"rave". Ne s'utilise jamais sauf lorsque une exception confirme la règle des inventions. Ne jamais mettre un Z devant un Z sinon c'est le zozotage assuré.

Zèbra: Mot de 5 lettres commençant par un N sur le Q et finnissant par un soutien-gorge anglais. C'est un animal très gêné mais pas barré malgré le nombre calculable de mouton qui le considère comme le 2eme mot du dictionnaire. Notez que certain zèbra qui ont fait l'école des mimes sont souvent appelés zébrez muets ou par téléphone.

Zombie : Mot vivant sans R. Leur aspect dégoûtant ainsi que leurs aptitudes à ne rien faire leur donne la possibilité de réclamer le titre de chose la plus stupide ex aqueo avec le Bargeot Glouton.

Bargeot Glouton : Mot situé tout de suite après zombie dans le dictionnaire pour une référence ultérieure plus rapide lors de la lecture de ce dernier. Le Bargeot Glouton est un nom propre sale qui rime avec couillon mais qui n'a pas le même prestige. Sert seulement à faire disparaître les bouteilles vides qui traînent dans un appartement.

Rechampisser: Verbe indéfini. N'est jamais utilisé mais reste connu. Ex.: Voudrais-tu me passer l'extracteur à jus... Ha puis non.. de toutes façons, que voudrais-tu que je rechampisse avec ça?

Parépathéticienne: Nom long qui désigne une personne capable de se faire payer un voyage dans le sud grâce à son cul. La grosseur du voyage n'est pas nécessairement proportionnel à la grosseur du fessier mais bien à la profondeur du gosier.

Siboire: Expression expréssement expressive qui exprime un sentiment qui exprime une volonté d'avoir l'aire d'une surface au millimètre près. Sa traduction boîteuse en anglais par if et drink lui confère un sentiment de bilinguisme qu'il ne possède que dans ses raves imaginaires.

Drogue: Eugord à l'envers. Toute substance qui goûte mauvais et qui se laisse prendre malgré ce fait.

Drogué: Personne sur l'effet de substances qui goûte mauvais mais avec un accent à la fin. Se définit aussi par un ensemble de draps contours roses (mieux connus sous le nom de Drap Gay).

Cigarette: Nom toxique. Bâton qui se fume et qui ne goûte pas le bacon (voir définition de drogue). Se fume généralement pour empester son voisin ou faire accroire à un incendie dans une cheminée de nains. Est beaucoup utilisé pour sentir le Christ et ainsi se sentir plus près de Dieu. Fait à noter, le mot contient un autre mot: arrête.

to be continued

» Junglist_Soljah on Fri 22 Dec, 2006 @ 2:24pm
Title:Jungle is Massif
Posted On:2006-12-22 14:24:51
Posted By:» Junglist_Soljah
D n B is the shit, but listen to ``Shot in the Dark``. Jungle and Hardcore. Massifly Wickit!

» Junglist_Soljah on Fri 22 Dec, 2006 @ 9:15am
Title:Wick-it
Posted On:2006-12-22 09:15:09
Posted By:» Junglist_Soljah
Anxious for some reason.....meh.....I`m totally crushin`. Awwww, the jaded junglist has a crush.....pfft!

» BooTcHou3 on Thu 21 Dec, 2006 @ 3:23pm
Title:Paroles de sages
Posted On:2006-12-21 15:23:21
Posted By:» BooTcHou3
Comme il est simple de poser des questions compliquées.

Les erreurs sont les portes de la découverte.

Être en colère, c'est venger les fautes des autres sur soi-même.

Qui ne lit pas de bons livres n'a aucun avantage sur qui ne sait pas lire.

Penser est facile mais agir est difficile et mettre ses pensées en action est la chose la plus difficile au monde.

Trébucher peut nous éviter de tomber.

» BooTcHou3 on Thu 21 Dec, 2006 @ 3:21pm
Title:Conseils
Posted On:2006-12-21 15:21:13
Posted By:» BooTcHou3
Si vous vivez en vous attendant toujours au pire, vous ne serez jamais déçu, mais vous passerez à côté de beaucoup de plaisir.

Faites ce que vous avez toujours fait et vous serez toujours ce que vous avez toujours été.

Comptez les bienfaits que vous recevez, et non ceux des autres.

Faites de votre mieux : vous ne pouvez pas faire mieux.

Il faut vivre pour étudier et non étudier pour vivre.

Ne faites jamais vous-même ce que vous critiquez chez les autres.

Faites attention lorsque vous suivez les conseils des autres.

Soyez vous-même : personne ne peut être vous mieux que vous.

Les paroles peuvent blesser bien plus profondément que le fouet.

Si on vous dit qu'on vous hait pour ce que vous êtes, répondez que cela vaut mieux que d'être aimé pour ce qu'on est pas.

» BooTcHou3 on Thu 21 Dec, 2006 @ 3:15pm
Title:Perles de sagesse
Posted On:2006-12-21 15:15:35
Posted By:» BooTcHou3
Vous ne retirerez de la vie que ce que vous êtes prêt à y mettre.

Mieux vaut se taire et être pris pour un fou que de parler et d'ôter tous les doutes.

Reconnaissez toujours vos torts.

Si vous voulez gagner la course, courez plus vite que les autres.

Plus haute est l'ascension plus dur est la chute.

Il y aura toujours des gens contre vous, que vous ayez tort ou raison.

Attendez-vous à recevoir ce que vous méritez et non ce que vous voulez.

Le boxer ne craint pas d'être envoyé au tapis ; ce qu'il craint, c'est de ne pas pouvoir se relever.

Mieux vaut un vrai perdant qu'un faux succès.

Nous sommes les acteurs de notre vie... il n'y a pas de doublure.

N'abandonnez jamais d'anciens amis pour des nouveaux.

Ceux qui passent leur temps à s'inquiéter de ce que l'on pense d'eux s'inquièteraient moins s'ils savaient comme on pense rarement à eux.

Pour devenir meilleur que les autres, devenez d'abord meilleur que vous-même.

La vie est un jeu de cartes. L'important n'est pas les cartes que vous avez en main, mais la manière dont vous les jouez.

La personne la plus facile à tromper, c'est vous-même.

Souvent, il vaut mieux retarder que mal faire.

L'important n'est pas ce qu'on vous enlève, mais ce que vous faites de ce qu'il vous reste.

Dans toute situation, le plus terrifiant est le sentiment d'impuissance.

Qui a commis une erreur et ne la corrige pas, commet une autre erreur.

Rien n'est jamais terminé tant qui vous n'y avez pas mis le point final.

» BooTcHou3 on Thu 21 Dec, 2006 @ 3:07pm
Title:Paroles
Posted On:2006-12-21 15:07:21
Posted By:» BooTcHou3
Mieux vaut subir le mal que le faire, et mieux vaut être trompé que ne pas faire confiance.

Tout ce qui existe à commencé par être un rêve.

Rien de ce qui est bon ne prend jamais fin.

Certains chercheront à vous discréditer, à vous détruire. Laissez-les essayer : ils ne feront que vous rendre plus fort.

Les problèmes appellent des solutions. Les solutions apportent de nouveaux problèmes.

Certains construisent une maison pour y vivre, d'autres pour qu'on la regarde.

» Junglist_Soljah on Thu 21 Dec, 2006 @ 9:16am
Title:Out of the Jungle
Posted On:2006-12-21 09:16:22
Posted By:» Junglist_Soljah
Goin to a Hardcore party tomorrow. Man I`m going to stick out. Whoopti doo!

Listening To: Congo Natty

» Junglist_Soljah on Wed 20 Dec, 2006 @ 2:28pm
Title:Montreal
Posted On:2006-12-20 14:28:09
Posted By:» Junglist_Soljah
Just moved here recently. Havin a wicked time. Not much to say right now though. got to rest and maybe I`ll go to the D n B show tonight.

» Mezion on Wed 13 Dec, 2006 @ 10:30pm
Title:Assemblage 23 - I Am The Rain
Posted On:2006-12-13 22:30:21
Posted By:» Mezion
Too eager to appease
The cure is the disease
And it's only growing worse

Day by day it takes its hold
Divides its cells a thousandfold
And makes your blindness seem perverse

Out of sight and out of mind
Are deadly traits when they're combined
But it's easier that way

Sit and watch the world go by
While all the problems multiply
With nothing left to do but pray

I am the rain
Falling down to cover you
Wish me away
But I'm here for your own good
I am the storm
Sent to wake you from your dream
Show me your scorn
But you'll thank me in the end

These amenities are nice
But there is need for sacrifice
You must lose so you may gain

It's too easy to malign
The implements that steal our time
But it's we who are to blame

Fill your pockets while you can
And try to keep the upper hand
The voice of reason sounds so shrill

Surround yourself with all you own
Work your fingers to the bone
And happiness evades you still

I am the rain
Falling down to cover you
Wish me away
But I'm here for your own good
I am the storm
Sent to wake you from your dream
Show me your scorn
But you'll thank me in the end

Too eager to appease
You've lost the forest for the trees
And it really is a shame

It is such a sorry sight
When you evaluate your life
You've only got yourself to blame

I am the rain
Falling down to cover you
Wish me away
But I'm here for your own good
I am the storm
Sent to wake you from your dream
Show me your scorn
But you'll thank me in the end

- Assemblage 23



( <3! )

Listening To: duh...

» AlienZeD on Tue 12 Dec, 2006 @ 3:10pm
Title:Smile
Posted On:2006-12-12 15:10:28
Posted By:» AlienZeD
You will live and see and experience life until the day you die and the present will always be the only thing you truly have. Your actions now determine the absolute rest of your life. Smile at someone you love. Kiss someone you care about. Show yourself and someone else why you love living.

» AlienZeD on Mon 11 Dec, 2006 @ 2:33pm
Title:Attraction
Posted On:2006-12-11 14:33:47
Posted By:» AlienZeD
Human beings are as predictable as they are self destructive. Why is it that the best way to attract a girl is to basically ignore her until she demands your attention. You can't smile at someone anymore without them thinking you're plotting something against them. You can't like someone anymore without them thinking you're desperate or trying to manipulate you. You can't ask someone an honest question without them seeing six different insults in it. Questions become judgments and judgements become opinions that can't change. Apologies become forced and regular life becomes more important than that person. Well it is. Reality is something so few of us actually understand and can relate to. Congratulations if you see it, don't bother if you don't.
Everyone's just got to chill out and stop taking life so seriously. Agree to disagree and understand that you'll never completely understand.

Listening To: This

» ronnie1986 on Mon 11 Dec, 2006 @ 7:56am
Title:Hey
Posted On:2006-12-11 07:56:54
Posted By:» ronnie1986
Well i guess im the new guy here so whats up everyone? =]

» uglyposergirl on Fri 8 Dec, 2006 @ 2:11pm
Title:people
Posted On:2006-12-08 14:11:56
Posted By:» uglyposergirl
time changes people. but is it simply time or is it something more than that..?
people do things all the time that changes them. but rather than concentrate on the past and be enthralled in the present, i think i am enthralled in the thought of the future and what i can do now to become my alter ego. of what can be. of what i can be. of who i am and where i want to be. because i love myself too much to want to do anything else.

i am not lonely when i am alone.

i believe that each and every day you are put into situations that sort of test you. tests that allow you to learn things about yourself, about the person you are deep down inside. sometimes things are so obvious but are rarely understood or taken for what they are. it's really simple sometimes...

but words are cheap and can only do so much. the more they are repeated and stressed the more transparent they become. that's how i feel.

it's strange.

i wonder what he sees when he looks at me.

all the lonely people
where do they all come from?
all the lonely people
where do they all belong?
i look at all the lonely people
i look at all the lonely people

» AlienZeD on Fri 8 Dec, 2006 @ 12:09pm
Title:Caring
Posted On:2006-12-08 12:09:37
Posted By:» AlienZeD
Everyone I know is complaining that they always worried so much about other people and it's time for them to be selfish! Well my mom says the same thing and she's a bitter senile old bat. Fuck anyone who thinks they are RIGHTFULLY selfish and goes out of their way to let people know that. What the fuck happened to good human beings. What the fuck happened to morality and to respect and to treating other people with a little bit of fucking kindness. I'm having a fucking hard time finding anyone with any caring or intelligence anymore. The harder I look, the more despair fills me.
Treat others how YOU WANT TO BE TREATED!!!!!

Listening To: None of your fucking business

» lyls on Fri 8 Dec, 2006 @ 10:31am
Title:parole déja dite!!!
Posted On:2006-12-08 10:31:38
Posted By:» lyls
Que ton corps te serve
Que ton coeur te serve
Que ton âme te serve aussi!
Que tes fesses bougent!!
Et que tes joues rouges,
soient le signe que t'aimes la vie..!!!

» Chuck_B on Wed 6 Dec, 2006 @ 8:19pm
Title:...!
Posted On:2006-12-06 20:19:24
Posted By:» Chuck_B
ce message sera-t-il encore en ligne quand je serai mort? si oui, pour combien de temps?

» aLxzRed on Tue 5 Dec, 2006 @ 10:19pm
Title:The Santa Claws-The death of majik and trust
Posted On:2006-12-05 22:19:29
Posted By:» aLxzRed
So has anyone ever looked far enough behind the myth to see the reality of the modern christmas?
How bout this for a conspiracy theory - It's all about the killing of the majik, we teach the young children that majik exsists, elves, presents, flying slieghs, and when the child is old enough to be initiated into the adult reality, the parents tell the child the majik was a lie, that it doesn't exsist.

Now many will argue that this is just a little white lie, but it teaches ALL western children two things;-

1) Don't believe in majik
2) You can't trust anyone, your parents whom you trusted more than anyone-lied

What a brain fuck! A sublime piece of mental conditioning, for majik doesn't exist for those whom don't believe, and without trust we are locked away, behind walls of fear, seperated and alone.

» shin_star3 on Mon 4 Dec, 2006 @ 11:24pm
Title:***
Posted On:2006-12-04 23:24:56
Posted By:» shin_star3
Changer de fil

Pensées trouées
Comme mon foulard
Comprendre la vie
Peindre un ciel bleu
Encore plus clair
Laisser filer
Au vent léger
Le dernier fil
Encore accroché.
Envolé.

» oreade on Fri 1 Dec, 2006 @ 9:58am
Title:Ode au cinema: version feminine versus masculine!
Posted On:2006-12-01 09:58:57
Posted By:» oreade
** Version feminine --
Elles me les racontent
Sans aucun acompte
Inconnues à mes yeux
Tandis qu’a mes oreilles
le film est généreux
de milles merveilles.

Parfois c’est un drame
qui en est la trame
Un nouveau film d’auteur
Offert à l’ONF
La suite d’un Blockbuster
Avec des scènes de fesses.

Et pour rire un bon coup
Une comédie surtout
Le mieux pour écouter
Une romance banales
C’est bien en peloté
Dans les bras d’un vrai males.

Van Dam, Stalone, Segal
Nul autre n’a d’egal
Pour s’offrir une forte
Monte d’adrénaline
Que les bombes éclatent
qu’ils crient Adrienne!

** Version masculine d’une poésie féminine--
Je les pellotes
Sans aucun acompte
Inconnues à ses yeux
Tandis qu’a son gland
la fente est généreuse
de milles merveilles.

Parfois c’est une dame
qui en est la trame
On crée film d’amateur
Offert à l’ONF
La suite d’un Blockbuster
Avec des scènes de fesses.

Et pour donner un bon coup
On se déhanche surtout
Le mieux pour écouler
Un fluide ancestral
C’est bien écarté
Dans les bras d’un vrai males.

Van Dam, Stalone, Segal
Mon gode n’a d’egal
Pour s’offrir une forte
Monte d’adrénaline
Que les bombes éclatent
qu’ils crient Adrienne!