Next chapter done and away to supervisors. Sweet.
It is on ‘know how’ as a practical knowledge, basically the basic mode of operaation of enthusiasts. I don’t define it in relation to abstract structures of knowledge or the social structure (ala Bourdieu), but the processual capacity to reconfigure the possibilities for action through the differential repetition of events. snap!
To understand this properly means highlighting something that Deleuze discusses obliquely in The Logic of Sense without actually ever stating it. The differential repetition of events is problematically contiguous, rather than spatially or temporally contiguous. The events of a series are related via a problem and not some space or time-based container. ‘Know how’ is of course the capacity to engage with certain kinds of problems. I argue that the differential repetition of the event of enthusiasm is evidenced through the performative dimension of ‘know how’ in translating contigencies from ‘problems’ into ‘challenges’. snap!
Except for the last chapter, the rest of the chapters should take only one or two days each.
Just sent off my review of Galloway’s Protocol to David Silver at the RCCS (previous review of mine here). Assuming it is published, I shall post a link to it.
The level of detail of the critiques in my review is probably the best indication I thought highly of the book even though it has some flaws. The RCCS format allows for author feedback so I look forward to any comments from Galloway.
Other work done, back to diss now! Pheeeeeew!
My blog stats are not very interesting reading except to indicate that the total number of visitors has been increasing to this blog since I shifted here from blogspot in late July 2006.
What is weird is the difference between the figures from statcounter.com and the stats through the host server (cpanel, awstats).
According to statcounter I get around 290 visitors a day.
The story for the raw host server stats are different. Even accounting for search engine and feeder crawlers, and error pages, which are removed from visitor stats, I had been getting around 10,000 visitors a month, from about 7,000 August last year, and now in August 2007 so far it is around 12,000 unique visitors (20,000 total visits, 1.57 per person). So at around 740 visits a day.
I am not sure why there is such a massive difference. Statcounter works by leaving a cookie, but the server stats just count every visit (pages and hits are different stats to visits, 1300 pages and 3200 hits per day). Maybe statcounter is not counting visitors properly? I am not sure.
And 773 visits for the month came from playstation portable! lol!
August averages, per day.
264 new visitors
16 return visitors
Reason is always a region cut out of the irrational — not sheltered from the irrational at all, but a region traveresed by the irrational and defined only by a certain type of relation between irrational factors. Underneath all reason lies delirium, drift. Deleuze
Something I am beginning to understand about the paranoic subjectivity is that its capacity for objectivity is legitimated by the affective state of its relation to the world. This is not simply the subtle ontological point of Deleuze’s transcendental empiricism, and the emergent relation from affect to sensation to thought, rather it is more akin to Zizek’s limits of enjoyment where others “rob us of the specificity of our fantasy”.
It is a question of legitimation because the pain and sadness experienced within a given situation is used as a resource to frame the interpretation of the situation. A paranoic can not be wrong about his or her own feelings; about the affects manifest within particular events. Reason and objectivity do not legitmate themselves, rather they are assembled from the feelings. Such is the case in reactionary responses to 9/11 and terrorism as it is in the response in people who have lived through abusive relationships as it is in the reactionary nationalism of disaffected workers in globalisation.
For those who understand Deleuze’s point or maybe just intuit it on their own, it is always a question of pursuing the affective lines of force across a series of events; no event is separate, they are always serial. Responsibility is not simply the burden of those who make you feel bad, but also of one’s self to interrogate what affects across which series feed into one’s capacity for objectivity. To trace the distribution of ‘badness’ across the series to understand how it is contracted in the present.
Currently writing my application for yet another extension. I feel so tired of these administrative tasks, not in an arrogant sort of way of ‘why should I have to fill them out’, but because of the absolute stress that the administrative tasks themselves produce. This stress is separate to the stress and anxiety of the actual scholarly work, or is at least another dimension of it.
Over the last few days I have received the dissertation chapter feedback I have wanted for about the last two years from my supervisors (paraphrasing): “Yes, this is good work. Only needs minor revisions.” I am on track after finally finding a balance between the massive amount of empircal work and the theatrics of the conceptual drama. Now I tend to think of my empirical work as providing the basis for developing my own tools (ie Enthusiasm), extracted from certain examples, and then used to analyse another situation (ie cultural industry).
Yet, I am currently stressed out of my brain about getting another extension. The administrative tasks are the clearest example yet that the university is there to reproduce itself in certain ways. The cycle of administrative tasks allow the university to function in a certain way, a functioning which is not related to the actual practices of learning, teaching, or researching.
Isolating the intellectual or scholarly work dimensions of a PhD or any reseach project from the administrative dimensions is clearly a false move; they are inseparable. The administrative dimension is basically a form of governance however, so why not shift to the neo-liberal paradigm of governance, and govern by way of enabling certain behaviour (high quality research), instead of crippling it?
I am also working on another version of my abstract to be sent to potential examiners.