There are two interesting things going on here: One is meknowing what the hell this repost is saying, and Two, that when it makes sense, the attempt to apply it to real life, to reality, makes you undetstand that it is utterly theoretical. In other words, when im going about my daily activity, the sense it makes is at once nonsensical and extraneous. (Sp?).
In as much as he might posit it as a sort of understanding of reality, he has set aside that when he goes and orders a beer at the bar, the theory is gone, unused, empty, non-existent, set aside like the dollar for a commodity. He has merely asserted that reality is thus segrgational despite what the theory says it might or might not be. That is contradiction incarnate.
This is why when we find the actual meaning of the material, either we have faith in the potential of the thought to reconcile the theory to itself, or we have to admit that the theoretical reconciliation is not real.
See and understand:
WHY KEEP INTENSIFYING? Brassier on LandOriginally posted on rediposture: Land’s work is a “mad black Deleuzianism”. What is really interesting in these texts is the way in which there is an extraordinary re-elaboration of negativity, a kind of non-conceptual negativity, and these texts bristle with this kind of sublimated fury, and that’s what makes them really powerful. (part one) Dyrek…
WHY KEEP INTENSIFYING? Brassier on Land