What do you think Haraway et al. would make of this: http://www.communistrobot.com/viewblog.php?id=591?

While reading Salon.com's piece on Kayne West as one of the sexiest men alive, I came accross a hyperlink to this performance:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q9ygY17VsXg

Forgive me if this is offensively self-indulgent, but earlier this semester I fashioned a "thesis rhizome" to map out the conceptual network of my thesis work, and I wanted to share it with you all:
http://claremont.facebook.com/photo.php?pid=31843598&id=13307083

Morefuntocompute and I are presenting on Monday, and we were hoping to start an online discussion about these readings that can be carried over to class. It may very well fail. (Read more.)

I thought you all might be interested in this spectacular development: http://machinist.salon.com/blog/2007/10/01/radiohead/

I was interested in Anderson's discussion of Lyotard's pre-Postmodern Condition turn away from structural Marxism toward an analysis of systemic manipulations of libidinal drives and erotic enjoyment.

That Grand Text Auto exhibit (KF passed around the brochure in class today) looks fascinating and directly germane to my thesis work. If anyone else is interested in going, it would be cool if we could coordinate....
I have no specific date in mind.

Jameson submits two critiques of knowledge in the context of postmodernity. First, he claims that "[postmodern] theory seems necessarily imperfect or impure," since "no [self-coherent theories of the postmodern] have yet appeared"; indeed, this would require "an antifoundationalism that really eschews all foundations altogether, a nonessentialism without the last shred of an essence in it" (Introduction, xi-xii). In other words, slogans such as "no more meta-narratives" or "it's all about context" end up reinscribing the very metaphysical claims they set out to admonish.

I think Guattari Hero's question about the convergences, or lack thereof, between Derrida and Lyotard gets at the heart of a meta-level tension that runs through much postmodern/poststructural theory. Namely, are the developments that characterize postmodernity representative of a rupture unique to that (this?) period, or, rather, have such "developments" always "been the case," and we are just now coming to realize their validity/utility? There is probably a techinical name for this distinction; in fact, it might be postmodernism v. poststructuralism. We should ask Professor Fitzpatrick.

I'm curious to hear peoples' thoughts about an interesting passage from the first section of The Postmodern Condition, in which Lyotard argues, apropos of the shift in informational circulation and economic decision-making "beyond the control of the nation-states," that the questions defining our postmodern era will be along the lines of: "Who will have access to [communications satellites and data banks]? Who will determine which channels or data are forbidden? The State? Or will the State simply be one user among others?" (6).