| ABOUT US | ARCHIVES | LINKS | RSS FEED | MONDAYS | |

3quarksdaily

An Eclectic Digest of Science, Art and Literature

« Conscious Designs | Main | How We Learn »

November 26, 2010

The International Necronautical Society

Article_ins
5. The INS rejects the Enlightenment’s version of time: of time as progress, a line growing stronger and clearer as it runs from past to future. This version is tied into a narrative of transcendence: in the Hegelian system, of Aufhebung, in which thought and matter ascend to the realm of spirit as the projects of philosophy and art perfect themselves. Against this totalizing (we would say, totalitarian) idealist vision, we pit counter-Hegelians like Georges Bataille, who inverts this upward movement, miring spirit in the trough of base materialism. Or Joyce’s Stephen Dedalus, who, hearing the moronic poet Russel claim that “art has to reveal to us ideas, formless spiritual essences,” pictures Platonists crawling through Blake’s buttocks to eternity, and silently retorts: “Hold to the now, the here, through which all future plunges to the past.” 6. To phrase it in more directly political terms: the INS rejects the idea of the future, which is always the ultimate trump card of dominant socioeconomic narratives of progress. As our Chief Philosopher Simon Critchley has recently argued, the neoliberal versions of capitalism and democracy present themselves as an inevitability, a destiny to whom the future belongs. We resist this ideology of the future, in the name of the sheer radical potentiality of the past, and of the way the past can shape the creative impulses and imaginative landscape of the present. The future of thinking is its past, a thinking which turns its back on the future.
more from the INS at The Believer here.

Posted by Morgan Meis at 11:35 AM | Permalink

Comments

Uh, is the point that I'm not supposed to know whether this is satire or sincerity?

Posted by: Vesuvium | Nov 26, 2010 12:21:17 PM

Its too long. The manifestos of the twenties were better.
It is, of course, a suppository. A medicine meant to relieve certain kinds of pain. It is only partially effective. And too much will just clog up the system and cause colonic stasis. What Burroughs described as "fro-Zen Hydraulic". One may then have to use an apple peeler....

Posted by: omar | Nov 26, 2010 1:04:35 PM

So refreshing to be in agreement with everyone in a 3QD comment thread.

The ambiguity is built in to signal moral ambivalence; McCarthy could literally go either way; he doesn't much care. And perky gal Friday/Senior HR Assist. Jen Egan, on behalf of her employers at the Times, answered him via her “review” that they had no conflict with his stated beliefs, that they too could, and if necessary, would, go either way. Both sides acknowledging that there's potential room for gro$$wth in the relationship. Option 1) offer oneself up as an important writer with street cred that they can publicly “turn” and shatter everyone's hopes one more (last) time with the lofty but doable goal of facilitating a sharp turn to nihilism, or 2) (and I suspect this is Tom's preference and I can't help but agree it would be more amusing all around) they can all pretend that he's having an influence on them. They always work both sides of the street, Easy Street. Who's going to stop 'em?

Are you having fun yet?

Posted by: Frances Madeson | Nov 26, 2010 3:38:51 PM

This manifesto will read much better in the future.

Posted by: mcd | Nov 26, 2010 3:50:34 PM

Mcd and Madeson, both comments are really good.
About the future, I think people will find it derivative and long-winded. I still insist, the futurists/surrealists were better at this game (their position also makes more sense, if that is at all relevant here). "Boom you black sails of time" has a kind of poetic beauty that this pedestrian effort really lacks.

Posted by: omar | Nov 26, 2010 9:42:39 PM

I meant that in the future, people will find this manifesto derivative and long-winded..

Posted by: omar | Nov 26, 2010 9:46:21 PM

At a mere six pages, Sir Edmond Caldwell's "Bad Paper" manifesto is a stirring counterexample. http://radicalnotes.com/journal/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/Correspondence-2.pdf He ratchets the conversation up about a thousand notches. Will it one day be featured in a climate-controlled showcase next to the Gutenberg Bible in the Library of Congress? Very possibly. Or maybe next to Julia Child's six-burner gas range in the Smithsonian exhibit of her kitchen.

Posted by: Frances Madeson | Nov 27, 2010 7:43:06 AM

Post a comment






Subscribe to this blog's feed  

PayAnywhere with iphone credit card swiper

Android Tablet

Bluetooth Headset

2013 New Style Dresses

Compare Car Rental Prices

DHgate.com Wholesale

3QD on Facebook

3QD on Kindle

3QD by Daily Email

Receive all blogposts at the same time every day.

Enter your Email:


Preview 3QD Email

3QD on Twitter

Miscellany

Lijit Search

AddThis Social Bookmark Button

Add to Google

Recent Comments

SteveRR on Daniel Dennett's seven tools for thinking

jo smith on Mohsin Hamid: 'Islam is not a monolith'

Grace on Daniel Dennett's seven tools for thinking

Elatia Harris on Daniel Dennett's seven tools for thinking

Abbas Raza on Daniel Dennett's seven tools for thinking

Jonathan on Daniel Dennett's seven tools for thinking

Bill on Daniel Dennett's seven tools for thinking

Louise Gordon on The need for critical science journalism

omar on Mohsin Hamid: 'Islam is not a monolith'

Jonathan on Daniel Dennett's seven tools for thinking

Bill on Daniel Dennett's seven tools for thinking

jo smith on Mohsin Hamid: 'Islam is not a monolith'

carlos on Daniel Dennett's seven tools for thinking

freddie on Daniel Dennett's seven tools for thinking

Eli on "Everybody Hurts" by Sachal Studios, Lahore, Pakistan

Jalees Rehman on The need for critical science journalism

Dredd on Why Rational People Buy Into Conspiracy Theories

Dredd on Why Rational People Buy Into Conspiracy Theories

Scrutineer on Why race as a biological construct matters

prasad on the culture animal

Mitt Romney's Dog on Why race as a biological construct matters

Elatia Harris on The Moral Status of Rocks

prasad on The Moral Status of Rocks

Raza Husain on The Moral Status of Rocks

Fred on Unknown Mathematician Proves Elusive Property of Prime Numbers

Acclaim For 3QD


"I couldn't tear myself away from 3 Quarks Daily, to the point of neglecting my work. Congratulations on this superb site."—Steven Pinker, Johnstone Professor of Psychology, Harvard University.

"I have placed 3 Quarks Daily at the head of my list of web bookmarks."—Richard Dawkins, Charles Simonyi Professor of the Public Understanding of Science at Oxford University.

"Just wanted you to know I’m one of many who reads and enjoys 3 Quarks....almost daily."—David Byrne, musician, former lead-singer of the Talking Heads, artist, intellectual.

Read more here.

The 3QD Prizes

Subscribe to this blog's feed