.. as to signal identifications, which are processing from multipicity, construction, mobility, .. whilst searching for some background material to remember the quote, which has been on my mind in collecting sparks for a general interpretation of the cultural effect of digitation I came across this and to the decision to make it short and link further:
…
The Other is not outside, but also inside the Self, the identity. So identity is a process, identity is split. Identity is not a fixed point but an ambivalent point, Identity is also the relationship of the Other to oneself
….from this collection of S.Hall excerpts
The Other is not outside, but also inside the Self, the identity. So identity is a process, identity is split. Identity is not a fixed point but an ambivalent point, Identity is also the relationship of the Other to oneself
….from this collection of S.Hall excerpts
Widely discussed in the 90s it still seems to be one of the more difficult tasks to accept the notion of ambivalence in re-thinking contemporary concepts. The general idea evolves through the process and not in cutting it off, thus the inherent ambivalence is a necessary part of processing in order to realize the various possibilities… mulitiplicities … and states of fragmentation …
–> it’s even more complex than that. ‘Cause the subject’s processes are heavily debated. Take your pick: Lacan’s post-Cartesian split subject; Abraham and Torok’s incorporated crypt; Kristeva’s feminist rewriting of Lacan; Derrida’s deconstructed textuality and feedback loop; Heidegger’s emergence or Clearing; hell, rewind back to Plato’s epistemological nothingness and the desire for the Ideal.. zip it up with Nietzsche’s master of the absent Self .. and so it goes: the subject has always been split .. then there’s Deleuze and Guattari, who produce a rather stable subject for all of their fragmentation: the BwO (Body without Organs) of a Masoch, Artaud and Spinoza all in one.. |
thanks for the remark … and some hints I had not in mind .. I agree on the split as an exsisting concept, I was trying to go back and emphasis on the ambivalent .. (not too successful obviously)… |