Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

[deleted] wrote

Reply to comment by ruin in by !deleted32344


ruin wrote (edited )

Got it.

I should probably stay away from the word liminal in general when addressing dualisms because it’s not precise, and commonly used in @ space.

I like the idea of TAZ, but to describe TAZ is to recuperate it, to contextualize it out of existence.

I might change my mind tomorrow, but yes, I see that type of dualism as a trap. We are where, when we are (using a basic conception of linear time) and will never exist anywhere else. I feel that to delineate is to move towards idealism and on to ideology.

I don’t have answers but I’m interested in destroying value and rationality to create possibilities. I actually love Hakim Bey (PLW) for just this reason. He’s very idiosyncratic and self-contradictory, which aren’t bad things. On the contrary, fear of contradiction is just a lack of imagination, a closed mind longing so much for unity and harmony that it finds it everywhere and recoils from difference.

Apologies for rambling. Not sure that makes sense.


[deleted] wrote


ruin wrote

I’m with you. Definitely think more poetic writing, more open writing in general, is more conducive towards anarchic thinking.

I’ve been really scattered lately in my reading. Cioran, Bataille, Barthes, Junger, Serres, Deleuze, and more all while keeping up with reading group(s). Mind’s a bit scattered but in a good way. Like I can pull out my own meaning and process the texts from a less literal and more personal angle. I’ve been spending a lot of time thinking of Laura riding and approaching all of my reading as poetry/fiction.