« Diologism in Art and Medicine | Main | To a Clinical Social Worker to Wealthy Families »

May 20, 2010


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


Interesting to watch the movement of GD's little essay over time. 15 years ago if you did the equivalent of googling "control societies" you got about one eText result in English (which had a superior translation to the official version in the book "Negotiations"), but now there's this and a million other links. Every once in a while I'm reading something about networked communications that makes me go "ah, that's what Deleuze meant" and then I mostly forget it.

We've got to hijack speech. Creating is something different than communicating."
Phil Cubeta

It grows on me too like that.


The second part of that video criticizes the 5 page postscript essay for not containing book-length caveats. There's a somewhat more sensible take on that here:



We now assume that everything we do or say on the net will be assessed out of context by current or future employers. Thus, we Twitter little bits of info that reveal little of the depths, if we have any such depth. Facebook properly used manages a public persona. We are under surveillance by each other, all keeping each other within the range of the normal. The normal is pegged to media supported by advertsing, to politics supported by lobbying. Civil society, business, investments are measured and managed within a business plan. The language of the arts, subversive to all this, is marginalized. When that language breaks through here, like hives upon the body politic, the reactions in the comment section are anonymous. You tell me about society of control? If it was not omnipresent, why am I the only Fool who signs his name to the insanity here? Now it is true that I blog from a padded cell now, and that I am not in my right mind, and that I am only joking, and that this is a literary performance and as such a fiction, and that I am a moral physician trying to cure myself and others, etc., but still.

Jimmy Huge and The Noble Goaled Dancers present Families of Infinity

We, like the rich... well, no, we don't particularly like the rich, but.. We, similar to the rich, prefer to interact confiancially, homme de homme.

C'est un crime?

The Happy Tutor

We see King Lear as the man beneath the ermine, and his regal dignity as madness. He goes mad and comes to agree with our insane assessment. Through that ordeal he and society are healed. As scapegoat/pharmakon his agony and death restore order. Confinancially, his loyal minions do as told, prosper, and destroy him. The Fool sleeps in the stable, and joins his client on the heath, both naked.

The homme de confiance, like the fool, are necessary players, either is the other's shadow.

Ernst & Ernest

We're all for Transparency and an Open Society, we mean, the idea is certainly appealing. It's just that, while the radical transparency movement is kind of helping us undress ourselves more and more, the naked emperors are still fully clothed.

We're sure it'll all turn out well, because, as usual, the people with the big picture are best qualifed to sort it out. But it still makes us feel a little bit nervous - and cold.

Phil Cubeta

The more your boss knows about you, the more helpful she can be in helping your fit in or f off.

The comments to this entry are closed.


Wealth Bondage Premium Content

  • Castle by the Sea
    Provided as a professional courtesy at no extra charge to those with net worth of $25 million or more and/or family income of $500,000 a year or more, and to their Serving Professionals of all genders.