7/ 2. So, this is hardly about you, since you, alas, are all divided. This is hardly about Nietzsche: the same brown and red thread passes within and without Nietzsche.
-
Show this thread
-
8/ This is about you or Nietzsche: as political subject, whom you have to become, split by the cause, Revolution or Fascism. What is a revolutionary in her relation to Revolution when she is affected by it as if by the fracture [coupure] of truth that *breaks her in two*.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likesShow this thread -
9/ This is about your relation to Nietzsche and about what divides it twice: a first time according to the means and techniques that effectuate it,
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likesShow this thread -
10/ a second time according to the political tendency that it supposes or the fascistic or revolutionary pole whose *primacy* it indicates. Complex relation in four terms, something like a “quadripartition.”
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likesShow this thread -
11/ At the start, a scene that is both single and split, a scene of reading on your side, a scene of writing on Nietzsche's side, two scenes which together make but one.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likesShow this thread -
12/ But these terms are too ineffective, the relation slides away elsewhere: recto scene of expression, verso scene of signifying practice. Still too idealist: scene of signifying practice or textual Domination on the one hand and, on the other,
1 reply 0 retweets 1 likeShow this thread -
13/ atextual forces, forces of Resistance against textual mastery which are intrinsically political. The terms, as we see, seem to matter little. If not the second, which openly acknowledges its political meaning and will function as a pivot of the quadripartition,
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likesShow this thread -
14/ such that Nietzschean practice will imply both an intervention or a detachment of atextual forces, of anti-signifying powers *in* the signifying scene, and a *primacy* of the relation of the terms over the terms themselves.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likesShow this thread -
15/ This first relation is divided in turn according to an expressly political split that overdetermines it, but in an internal way, as if it were the relation, not its terms, that is divided:
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likesShow this thread -
16/ reading, writing, signifiying practice, or atextual forces can receive a fascistic usage (subordination of the revolutionary pole to the fascistic pole) or a revolutionary pole (inverse subordination).
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likesShow this thread
This should read: “or a revolutionary usage”.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.