domenica 14 febbraio 2016

E.3.2. The universal delirium and the parody - Pt. XVI - Excerpt from the essay «Money, Revolution and Acceleration in Deleuze and Guattari's Anti-Oedipus», Obsolete Capitalism Free Press/Rizosphere, 2016

The universal delirium and the parody

The issue about the relevance of revolutionary actions appears in Cerisy- la-Salle conference in July 1972 and gives Klossowski the opportunity to talk about “parody” in Nietzsche’s philosophy as
previously highlighted in his Nietzsche, Polytheism and Parody (1957). Reading Nietzsche vs. Marx as a key to interpret the riots of the turbulent 1972 enables Klossowski to sustain that: under the sign of the vicious circle, anti-Darwinian conspiracy entails the coming to autonomy of productions that are primarily pathological as the very condition of monumental upheaval in the relation between the social forces present. (CV, 39) Nietzsche’s proposed insubordination has therefore a double delirant outcome: 1) if the thought of the eternal return is nothing other than a parody of a doctrine, even its result, the revolt of the strong of the future, will be the amanifestationofsomecollectivedelirium, 2) in a nihilist historical moment occurring a hundred years after Nietzsche’s idea of plot, the blossoming of a delusion [délire] when confronted with reality, can become in any way efficacious, or, more generally, any deranged comportment might be said to constitute an efficient resistance in the face of a determined adverse force. (CV, 38). During the debate Klossowski asks Deleuze: the insubordination of the delusory ones can be read as an expression of a universal behaviour or is it simply linked to the capital? And again: does delirium transcend any historical time or is it strictly related to the schizophrenic behaviour generated by the capital? Is the appreciation of delirium generated only by the same subverting process reproducing itself? Klossowski’s questions suggest that the same valorisation of delirium outlines an empty subject which frees itself from its identity and constantly moves into a metamorphosis of singularities to reach a final acceptance of the doctrine of Eternal Return. Klossowski also indicates the strategies and the new ways of fighting that we may infer from Nietzsche’s accelerationist fragments: Nietzsche’s position draws us away, in any case, from all that which I have up to the present called “political action”; it requires the creation of a new comportment with regards to conflict and strategising. It seems to me more and more - and here I allude to Gilles Deleuze - that we move towards a kind of anti-psychiatric insurrection (...), that is to say, the discovery of a species of pleasure (...), on the part of psychiatrists or doctors in becoming the“object of investigation”- and moreover the pathological case will feel more and more comfortable if he lives, and imposes himself, by subverting the institutional investigations which brand him pathological. (CV, 42). Derrida asks explanations about the aforementioned declaration and the discussion becomes very interesting to be able to sketch the Nietzschean Rhizosphere with Klossowski, Deleuze, Lyotard on one side and a very concrete and alert Derrida on the other:
Derrida: “You suggested that parody could become political, and that it was, ultimately, subversive....”
Klossowski: “To the extent that «politics» is taken to entail «strategy» or «comportment»”.
Derrida: “But how, in any case, does parody
operate? Should one distinguish between two kinds of parody: between the one, which, on the pretext of being subversive, takes the risk of establishing a political order (which very much likes a certain type of parody and finds its own confirmation there) and, on the other hand, a parody which can really deconstruct the political order? Is there a form of parody which actually marks the body politic, in contrast to a parody which would be a parody of a parody, which would play upon the surface of the political order, playfully teasing, rather than destroying it?”
Klossowski: “I think that «in the long run» nothing can resist such a parody.”
Derrida: “But someone who wants to transform the political order - can he really trust in the long run?”
Klossowski: “The time that is needed is a function of exercised pressure, and pressure depends, as a consequence, upon contagion.
Lyotard: “For Nietzsche the «parody of a parody» consists in a kind of «ressentiment» against power, it goes no further, it is a condition of mediocrity or weakness in intensity. To differentiate it from the other kind, I think the fundamental criterion is that of intensity. However, it is impossible to determine beforehand what the effectiveness of a parody will be, that’s why Nietzsche says it is necessary to be experimenters and artists, not people who have a plan and try to realise it - that’s old politics. Nietzsche says it’s necessary to try things out and discover which intensities produce which effects.” (CV, 43)
Here are two different revolutionary positions: Derrida’s more traditional one - inclined on Socialism - and the more heterodox interpretation outlined by Nietzschean Rhizosphere members who support a free-from-ideologies and non- top-down insurrectional action, conceiving revolution as headless, aimless, meaningless emissions of energy. Klossowski reminds us in his Nietzsche and the Vicious Circle that Nietzsche sought from the experience of the return of all things - namely, to lead intention back to intensity” (NVC,112). The theme of intensity is the real challenge, Deleuze and Guattari write: “And then, above all, we are not looking for a way out when we say that schizoanalysis as such has strictly no political program to propose. If it did have one, it would be grotesque and disquieting at the same time. It does not take itself for a party or even a group, and does not claim to be speaking for the masses. No political program will be elaborated within the framework of schizoanalysis. (AO, 380) They mean that the next revolutionary ones may have to face up the effort «to occupy and consequently free» the Anti- Œdipus «space» so that its mechanic and energy may be of help for the future fights. Chlebnikov docket. 


Nessun commento:

Posta un commento