Architexturez > E-Mail Lists > [ Deleuze-Guattari-L ]
(mirror) Archive of Deleuze-Guattari-L, 1994 -- cont'd...
 

RE: feminism


List Information Page (subscribe to this list here) + RSS Feed
switch to: Subject Directory | Date Directory | Author Directory -

 
<< Thread Prev < Date Prev ^ date index+… ^ thread index+… Date Next > Thread Next >>
message ## 14962…

 
+  From: "LORD, Robert" <ROBERT.LORD@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
+  Date: Tue, 11 Aug 1998 08:04 +0930 (CST)

Since my views seem to have been inadvertantly snagged onto a side of an
emergent -speedy- dialogue to which their intention was not really meant
for, I feel compelled to clarify... Deleuze and Guattari are not
anti-feminists, indeed their thought appears (to me) as highly relevant to
contributing to feminist thought working in and unlocking issues such as
subjectivity, ontology, sexuality... and I can only encourage feminists to
take and use what they like. But of the different feminisms, it does seem
that Deleuze and Guattari's project of the machinic and revolutionary
development of a non-oeipdal woman, is more specifically attuned to an
outside feminist thought, that is, a line of flight, a becoming within molar
feminist thought, a molecular feminism of subject groups, of destratifying
groups which are on the edges, detaching themselves from the molar feminism,
setting things in motion. Kathy Acker, and her regard for their works, is
of cause exemplary in this regard. One also thinks of the rock-poetry of
Patti Smith. Subject groups breaking away from the subjugated groups,
proliferating the heterogeneities, breaking the stratas to make more smooth
fluid spaces, a rupturing to reanimate all the lines of flight.

Burroughs statement, "America is a matriarchy and it always has been..." is
actually very characteristic of his very perceptive and intuitive inquiry.
Why must patriarchy and matriarchy always be considered a dichotomy, where
one always implies the exclusion or repression of the other. Burroughs goes
straight down inbetween the binarism, so that it's no longer a blockage or
even a binarism to him, he tears open the inbetween. Doesn't patriarchy not
always invest a certain matriarchy within its schema? Are these things
really always inseparable opposites? Don't little matriarchies run all
through patriarchy? America is but a gigantic patriarchal phallus, overrun
with little micro matriarchies.

In a radio interview Kathy Acker remarks on Burrough's "sexism" She says
"... I can't really blame [Burroughs] for his, um, distaste for women,
because I often have a distaste for men, so [laugh] everyone to their own
really!" In Kathy Acker we suddenly witness something uncharacteristic,
something of the outside, a destratified molecular milieu, that elicits a
disjunction from any regime of judgement, an absence of punitiveness.

But still, Solanis doesn't make me laugh, and I'd rather be an feverish
outsider, but everyone to their own really!

The song "French Tickler" on the new Sonic Youth CD, "A Thousand Leaves" is,
according to the band, inspired by Gilles Deleuze, but then again, you might
hear it and sigh a "huh?"

Robert

"nur sie wird das Licht als erste sehen" (only she will see the light first)

Einsturzende Neubauten


 
Previous by Thread: Re: feminism
Next by Thread: RE: feminism
 
Partial thread listing: