I read Lady Chatterly's Lover in 2010 (it left an impression). I know it's scandalous but it was so much more than that to me. It was very timely for me. That book touched on so many parts of life that are completely neglected in today's world. Constance was in love with nature, and she was in love with Mellors. but not "in love". a deeper, share a mouth type of love. I digress...

anyway.

I had actually forgotten that it was written by DH Lawrence, and I went through a phase with him around that same time. 

sometimes I push parts of myself so far down, so far into the background, that I forget they exist. what a shame. when I'm an old lady I'll regret that more than anything. 



 

Comments

Jen said…
I'm watching it!
btw - vis Lady Chatterly, In the eternally Super-positioned state of Romantic Love, may your wave function collapse, and you thereby find eternal happiness in the result. ;)
Jen said…
Oh it has. :) I just don't want to get old before my time. ;-)
Pish-Posh. Age is a social construct. ;P
So are our "aesthetics". .. as an internal, less immediate and more memory driven appreciation vis. beauty/sublime takes precedence over an immediate external or more visually apparent one. ;)
nicrap said…
A very happy Christmas,my friend!
Jen said…
Happy Christmas, Nikhil! 🥰
...and HAPPY NEW YEARS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
nicrap said…
Happy new year, Jen!
Jen said…
Happy New Year y'all!
Thersites said…
Just think... All New Years will be Retro from now ON!
Jen said…
What the heck did I just watch?
This comment has been removed by the author.
I came across something today that you might enjoy reflecting upon:

Source @36:06

One of the chapters in your book opens up with a personal story. So you're describing how you hiked many hours into the grand canyon with your partner, and then when you reached your destination, some sort of scenic spot, another hiker showed up. But rather than enjoying the view, she only asked you to take a picture of her in front of the scenery, which is of course something that i guess every one of us is used to, and then she just immediately walked on. And then you relate her behavior to social media usage, and describe it as, and here i'm quoting, "escaping the pressure of the present rather than preserving experiences and memories." Um and they seem to be a little bit critical of the hiker, can you explain that?

No it doesn't want to be critical, because um i'm fascinated but what's going on what's going on in social media, and i know that oh you're the connection, world center, because that's why i read with a lot of fascination your work on profilicity. There's something going on about the way we build our identity on on social media which i think is not described, with our current categories and i was different to photographers the way people take photographs. i think i write this piece in the chapter people are not stupid they're not superficial, they do something different because they communicate the situation changed and people deal in a different way with with this uh technological accomplishments, and so photographs clearly are not, well the photo digital photographs have not the same purpose of analogic photographs
cont.

i'm i'm a digital migrant so i remember how we took photographs and photos of traditions were taken to preserve memories. To preserve memories and to deepen them later, to keep a moment of time and to be able to look at it later. And what's going on now seems to be something different. Well, think about snapchat photos, which are taken and put on snapchat are destroyed, so there's no preservation there. So the function might be something different. Not because people are stupid, not because superficial, because they're doing something different, right? Exactly, and i was thinking about something, it is not completely worked out, i just tried to put some hints there, but also in the way of dealing with images. With photographs, there were reflections, susan sontag or authorities, they say actually photographs are, in a sense, what the said "images can usurp realities". With images, with photographs, we sort of get away from the pressure of reality and try to do something different. But it was a certain analogical space. Now with that with digital, it seems to be something even more. That we use photographs when the pressure of reality is too heavy, which means "always today." Because in our society we also have the pressure the present, the only time we can accomplish something, and we have never attentive enough to do everything what should be done. We don't never have enough information to really work out,control what's going on, and uh so and, you are there in a present in such a important moment. For example, the Grand Canyon... you walk down for four hours, you walk up for six, is so heavy, and so overwhelming, and and then the moment is gone, and you don't process ever all the fullness of this experience. You know that, you're aware of that a lot of things are gone, and then you are not considering that you are gone or people in museums. You watch this amazing pictures and there's so much you lose in the moment, and that's the awareness that we have is a basic one for our society, and i thought pictures seems to be a way to deal with that. Because um in front of this pressure, you take a picture, and the picture releases from this pressure. In a sense, you share it with someone else, you refer to a later time, on which you probably will never see it. And so there's a new way to try to escape the pressure of the present. That was the idea not completely worked out but something different from what we are doing with photographs before.
It reminded me of Zizek and the experience of interpassivity and allowing a machine, a camera or VCR to take the pressure for me to "enjoy myself" off...

The other side of this interactivity is interpassivity. The obverse of interacting with the object (instead of just passively following the show) is the situation in which the object itself takes from me, deprives me of, my own passivity, so that it is the object itself which enjoys the show instead of me, relieving me of the duty to enjoy myself. Almost every VCR aficionado who compulsively records movies (myself among them), is well aware that the immediate effect of owning a VCR is that one effectively watches less films than in the good old days of a simple TV set. One never has time for TV, so, instead of losing a precious evening, one simply tapes the film and stores it for a future viewing (for which, of course, there is almost never time). Although I do not actually watch the films, the very awareness that the films I love are stored in my video library gives me a profound satisfaction and, occasionally, enables me to simply relax and indulge in the exquisite art of far’niente – as if the VCR is in a way watching them for me, in my place. VCR stands here for the big Other, the medium of symbolic registration. It seems that, today, even pornography functions more and more in an interpassive way: X-rated movies are no longer primarily the means destined to excite the user for his (or her) solitary masturbatory activity – just staring at the screen where “the action takes place” is sufficient, it is enough for me to observe how others enjoy in the place of me. -Zizek, "How to Read Lacan"
Jen said…
I completely agree that people tend to take pictures as a means to avoid being present. It seems like photos are proof of experience, rather than the experience itself. Nothing is weirder than going to a concert, being in the same room as your musical heros, and not being able to see the stage because of all the phones held up high to record the event. We're here. Now. Put the phone down and experience it.
I think people are now afraid to actually experience the event. I guess feelings and emotions are scary, even if they're positive.
Call me old fashioned, I'm all about the experience in the moment.
Jen said…
Absolutely. Unfiltered.
Exactly. Undistracted. Totally present.
With "G_d" as my "validating Witness"... not some secular "general peer" or "scientific peer". I don't require a human audience substitute for the Big Other that gives my experience its' "meaning".
Jen said…
The words you used might hold a clue as to why people now need validation. I wonder if the average person has any belief in God, or a higher power? If not, has social media become their god? Worshiping the number of followers and likes? No longer fulfilled by a personal spiritual experience (hiking in the grand canyon), but now craving validation from posting selfies at the grand canyon. That external validation can't compare to spiritual experiences.

I think people are terrified of solitude (always have been) but instead of strengthening that fearful part of themselves, they weaken it further with constant social media validation.

I remember posting photos of my camping trip on Facebook several years back, and I could tell immediately that was a bad road to go down. I was instantly removed from the actual experience and was only thinking of what to post next. For me it was as if the camping trip became a job, and the joy was suddenly gone. I have a few friends that tell me I should post about my kids and vacations on FB and my response is, you should call me more and I'll tell you all about it.
Jen said…
I don't mean to sound so judgmental. I think I'm a very private person, quite a bit more than most people I know. And that only adds to my disdain for over sharing on social media. And I do think that hiking in the woods or floating in the ocean is a sacred experience and shouldn't necessarily be posted online. If we can't hold sacred moments in the privacy of our own small circles, I think it waters them down.

No problem. For me, the camera was always an afterthought, never a hobby, or more- a profession. And if I wanted to look at a picture it was to reminisce about the experience. I was always happy to have them, but I ever needed the pictures to complete the feeling that I already had from the memory.

That's why I always loved the abstract things you did with photos... more "art" than "memory".
Jen said…
Thanks FJ. Using my camera to create a more symbolic image is so much more fun to me than straight photography.

Thersites said…
Okay... I think I'm starting to "get it"...

...we've been "conditioned" and now spend "emotional capital" as a form os "social capital".
Thersites said…
The merging/ blurring/ blending g of the "real" with the digital "hyper-real".
Jen said…
Exercising dignity, respect, humility, is a deposit in the account of ones "self". Over time, these deposits add up to contribute to a foundation of substance, wisdom, and trustworthiness. If one never makes these deposits, has no restraint in promoting themselves at the expense of personal dignity, they will have no foundation, no substance.



Everything you've said is true... and yet as a 'people' we seem to be making fewer and fewer deposits. And the people who have made them, and continue to make hem, are looked upon as sucker's who deserve to have their bank account's emptied and 'more equitably' redistributed. And recent history seems to be on the side of those who view these deposits as "futile" and/or "worthless". :(
Jen said…
Frighteningly true.
Guess whose giving a lecture in the UK the 30/31... Nietzsche Girl. Ali Jones is an Assistant Professor of Politics at CTPSR. Her PhD traced the cultural history of Hamburg’s Autonomous Rote Flora squat, and developed a political theory of ‘Spatial Sovereignty’. Her current BA funded research examines questions of terror, repression and violence in the work of Foucault, Deleuze and Guattari around 1977. She is also currently writing a transnational history of Antifa.
Becoming the Terror: Foucault on Ghostly Militanz
Ali Jones
This paper investigates the discursive infrastructures of contemporary German Antifa activism in light of the 1977 Red Army Faction attacks. The analysis relies on unpublished interviews about these attacks with Michel Foucault in 1977, wherein he explains that hidden state structural violence can only be called out by activists biopolitically ‘becoming the terror’ themselves. The paper uses this intellectual foreground to understand the changing nature of German Militanz (as opposed to violence - Jones 2018) in the Autonomous Antifa. The paper compares the biopolitics of ‘becoming the terror’ to a form of sovereignty claim by movements who reject the state monopoly on violence, and instead seek to reveal how the state has failed to uphold its end of the social contract. Furthermore, by claiming this monopoly, and in effect their own sovereignty, Antifa tend to root their societal frameworks on the understanding of Militanz as a limited “moralised violence” grounded in decades of published internal debate in what Fraser would call a radical counterpublic sphere.

The paper use the alleged actions of Antifa Ost to interrogate the nature of their Militanz as a form of (perhaps now lacking) political infrastructure, in contrast to the vigorous discursive structures of Antifa violence after 1977. Concluding that only the ‘ghost’ of these counterpublics remain, it ultimately queries whether Antifa Ost’s alleged use of violence can adhere to the standard of “the political” and thus the “sovereign” anymore.
Jen said…
Very cool! I was just thinking about her recently.
She's taught me so much about the Left... and I learn more and more with each paper she writes. :)
Jen said…
Does she know you're following her work? I hope she's doing well. I listened to her present her paper and found it interesting.
I follow her as Farmer John on Twitter... and she Tweeted out about today/tomorrow conference.
Jen said…
I haven't jumped into Twitter yet. Well I'm glad she seems to be thriving. I admire your willingness to learn more about the left, and I figure it would do me good to do the same.
Thersites said…
Yes, it's taken me decades to wrap my head around the Left.

Popular Posts