Date: Fri, 28 Nov 1997 23:03:56 -0800
Subject: Re: [Fwd: The scandal of obligation]


EricMurph-AT-aol.com wrote: 
-AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT--AT-
REPLY:  Thanks, I will check references of Le Differend and get back.

Hugh



> Dear Hugh:
> 
> Re: Time
> 
> Thanks for your post on #From owner-lyotard-AT-jefferson.village.Virginia.EDU  Sat Nov 29 22:20:33 1997
Received: (from domo-AT-localhost) by jefferson.village.Virginia.EDU (8.8.5/8.6.6) id WAA34624 for lyotard-outgoing; Sat, 29 Nov 1997 22:20:30 -0500
X-Authentication-Warning: jefferson.village.Virginia.EDU: domo set sender to owner-lyotard-AT-localhost using -f
Received: from dfw-ix2.ix.netcom.com (dfw-ix2.ix.netcom.com [206.214.98.2]) by jefferson.village.Virginia.EDU (8.8.5/8.6.6) with ESMTP id WAA34363 for <lyotard-AT-jefferson.village.Virginia.EDU>; Sat, 29 Nov 1997 22:20:24 -0500
Received: (from smap-AT-localhost)
          by dfw-ix2.ix.netcom.com (8.8.4/8.8.4)
	  id VAA23399 for <lyotard-AT-jefferson.village.Virginia.EDU>; Sat, 29 Nov 1997 21:19:51 -0600 (CST)
Received: from nyc-ny23-07.ix.netcom.com(206.214.136.71) by dfw-ix2.ix.netcom.com via smap (V1.3)
	id rma023387; Sat Nov 29 21:19:36 1997
Message-ID: <3480DBEC.1E95-AT-ix.netcom.com>
Date: Sat, 29 Nov 1997 22:22:22 -0500
From: Arturo Cherbowski <artche-AT-ix.netcom.com>
X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Macintosh; I; PPC)
To: lyotard-AT-jefferson.village.Virginia.EDU
Subject: Re: [Fwd: The scandal of obligation]
References: <971128180315_-462914698-AT-mrin46.mail.aol.com>
Sender: owner-lyotard-AT-jefferson.village.Virginia.EDU
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: lyotard-AT-jefferson.village.Virginia.EDU

Eric

What can I say. . . this is the problematic I was trying to raise and
get at in all of my previous posts. . . the relation of Capital to time
and the consequences of these for politics and not only for the
"thinking of politics" or the "political". . .that Lyotard understands
the events, phenomena, and social structures and logics you talk about
here (fri. 28, 18:03) I do not doubt (again for me it is "Libidinal
Economy" which is crucial here. . .).  But I find his responses based on
turns towards Kant and Freud (and yes Levinas, et al) disappointing,
problematic, unsatisfying, angering. . .whatever!  How is all of this
stuff about "witnessing" etc. really a politics or a political response
to all of this. . . to call it a "politics" seems to me an act of bad
faith. . . As I said before it seems to me to be a desperate attempt to
imagine one as having clean hands even after one recognizes that the
dominant social logic makes that impossible. . . I rather hear an
admission to the effect that given the relation of Capital to time, its
implications for dissent and resistance (whichever way you want to
define these), its effects on the tendency to spatial figurations which
plague philosophy, etc. etc., politics might be impossible or dead,
giving way only to endless ethical lamentations, than lame attempts to
decieve oneself and one's fans. . . I once heard Lyotard say that he
believed in "pessimism of the head but optimism of the heart". . . I
find this optimism (at least if it is this which things like "politics
of witnessing" express) at best dangerous and at worst sickening as
just  ways to further one's career, prestige, etc within the structures
of academic production. . . 

Arturo