 | [W]e repeat this, we must repeat it, and it is all the more necessary to repeat it insofar as we do not really know what is being named in this way, as of to exorcise two times at one go: on the one hand, to conjure away, as if by magic, the “thing” itself, the fear ot the terror it inspires (for repetition always protects by neutralizing, deadening, distancing a traumatism, and this is true for the repetition of the televised images we will speak of later), and, on the other hand, to deny, as close as possible to this act of language and this enunciation, our powerlessness to name in an appropriate fashion, to characterize, to think the thing in question, to get beyond the mere deictic of the date: something terrible took place on September 11, and in the end we don’t know what. |
✖ Via aphelis: “Autoimmunity: Real and Symbolic Suicides (Derrida, 2001)” Quoted from DERRIDA, Jacques ([2001]2003). «Autoimmunity: Real and Symbolic Suicides» in BORRADORI, Giovanna (2003). Philosophy in a Time of Terror, Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, p. 87. Read more via Google books preview. |
↳Shareskandalon
Feb 07 link notes
Derrida
philosoohpy
terror
September 11
9/11
conjuration
denial
exorcise
magic
communication
lost
 |
The contrast in scale between between consumer products we use in the home and the industry that produces them is I think absurd – massive industrial activity devoted to making objects which enable us, the consumer, to toast bread more efficiently. These items betray no trace of their providence.
So are toasters ridiculous? It depends on the scale at which you look. Looking close up, a desire (for toast) and the fulfilment of that desire is totally reasonable. Perhaps the majority of human activity can be reduced to a desire to make life more comfortable for ourselves, and has thus far led to being able to buy a toaster for £3.99 [among other achievements]. But looking at toasters in relation to global industry, at a moment in time when the effects of our industry are no longer trivial compared to the insignificant when our, they seem unreasonable. I think our position is ambiguous - the scale of industry involved in making a toaster [etc.] is ridiculous but at the same time the chain of discoveries and small technological developments that occurred along the way make it entirely reasonable. |
✖ Via The Toaster Project by Thomas Thwaites. About the artist: “I’m in the final year of the MA Design Interactions at the Royal College of Art.” Check his other projects at his officiel website. |
↳Shareskandalon
Aug 18 link notes
technology
art
innovation
object
magic
fire
man
human
evolution
machine