Betrayal

'A similar obscure ambiguity surrounds the role of Judas in Christ's death: since his betrayal was necessary to his mission (to redeem humanity through his death on the Cross), did not Christ need it? Are his ominous words during the Last Supper not s secret injuntion to Judas to betray him? "Judas, who betrayed him, said 'Surely not I, Rabbi?' He replied, 'You have said so'" (Matthew 26:25). The rhetorical figure of Christ's reply is, of course, that of disavowed injuntion: Judas is interpellated as the onw who will hand Christ over to the authorities - not directly ("You are the on who will betray me!"), but so that the responsibility is put onto the other. Is Judas not therefore the ultimate hero of the New Testament, the one who was ready to lose his soul and accept eternal damnation so that the divinie plan could be accomplished?'

Zizek - The Puppet and the Dwarf

When taught about the bible in my Catholic primary school I always had a bit of a soft spot for Judas, he who tends to be hated and abhorred by the fervent Christian. I always found it confusing that people hated him when Jesus had to be crucified in order for Christianity to be founded. Not only did he have to be crucified but it seemed pretty much predetermined that God would send down his only son to be killed at the hands of his own people so that our sins would be forgiven. I found it difficult to accept the religious dogma that Judas was the great betrayer, that he was somehow evil and that to be called Judas was definately a bad thing. What Judas did was, as Zizek points out, a heroic act. He laid down his soul for the man he loved. Is this not a greater sacrifice than that made by Jesus? Jesus was promised a seat at the right hand of the father, he was part of the holy trinity and his sacrifice was one only inflicted upon his earthly body while Judas would be subjected to eternal damnation. An eternity in hell must be worse than a few days of torture for one who believes in a soul. I think that it was not Judas who was the betrayer, but Jesus. It always upset me to see images of Judas hanging from a tree when I thought about what Jesus and his God had done to him.

I am reminded as well of an episode of South Park entitled 'The Passion of the Jew' (very funny episode, everyone should watch it), in which Kyle has a crisis of faith because he has watched the 'Passion of the Christ' and he believes that the Jewish people are evil for killing Jesus. He goes to see Father Mackie and asks him why the Jews would have done that. Father Mackie tells him that Jesus was sent to earth to die for our sins. This is obviously confusing for Kyle who wonders whether, if Jesus was meant to die, the Jewish people should be held responsible.

It's confusing for me too.... if Jesus was meant to die so that our souls could be saved and Christianity should be founded then why should the people who are made out to be evil in the story of the last days of Jesus' life be the most hated and feared figures? Should they not instead be thanked by the church? If it wasn't for people like Judas, Pilate et al then there would not be any Christian Church. Jesus would have gone on happily living his life, been percieved as some sort of prophet but nothing particularly special. It is those who are seen as betrayers who are the key to the founding of Christianity, and in their betrayal they where themselves betrayed.

|

Politicalboot

I recently did a search on Google for 'glueboot' and it turns out that you can not only search for (non-existant) encyclopedia articles about glueboot, but you can buy glueboot on e-bay and now you can even 'search for competitive quotes' on glueboot products. Not to mention the large number of search engines that say 'search for glueboot here!' and the strange companies who advertise their literal glue on google when you do a search for me.

More interesting than that though, is that I have been added to a list of political blogs that has been compiled for people interested in politics and political theory. Some of you blog hoarders may be interested in it.

Also in the realm of politics; I was accosted a few nights ago by a man who seemed certain that it was right that I should vote in various Student Union referendums (I was later informed that this guy was the head of the SU). I asked him why I should vote and he said that if I did then he wouldn't pester me again (not a particularly convincing argument) to which I replied that if he pestered me again I would just tell him to 'fuck off' as I was about to do. He asked me why I wouldn't want to vote and I told him that I had no faith in democracy and that (in drunken tones) it was shite. He called me a communist and stormed off, I turned away and my friend told me that he threw a flyer at my head. It seems even the most lowliest of 'politicians' are prone to temper tantrums.

In hindsight there is something that I should have voted on but it wasn't what he wanted me to vote for. The SU wants to pass a bill banning all 'facists and racists' from the Union. I find this extremely problematic as how exactly do you define facist and racist? Do they include so called 'communists' who won't vote in the union elections as she finds democracy to be a sham? Is anyone who isn't left-wing liberal democratic a fascist? Am I racist for being vocal about the 'fucking English' or drunkly singing Irish Nationalist songs? I find the nature of the bill facist in itself so maybe when they pass it all the idiots who see SU politics as the centre of the world will have to ban themselves from the union (obviously this hasn't been rationally thought through).I hope they don't pass it though.... I don't want to be banned from drinking cheap and nasty beer and calling Heidegger a bastard in my usual haunts.

|

When one arsehole phones another arsehole to congratulate him on being an arsehole.<

Bush intervenes in the homeland. No doubt the fundamentalist Christians had fun talking about the 'best' way to deal with those damned terrorists.

Glueboot Trivia: Used to live near Paisley's church; for those who want to be nauseated, go and stand outside on a Sunday morning to hear the eminent Reverend preach the word of the lord to his dutiful followers. Northern Ireland... what a farce.

|

Forsooth! I dost smell orcs 'pon the horizon

Stolen from the recovering Infinite Thought.

I am:

You're The Fellowship of the Ring!

by J.R.R. Tolkien

Facing great adversity, you have decided that your only choice is to
unite with your friends and neighbors. You have been subject to a ton of squabbling and
ultimately decided that someone humble is your best candidate for a dangerous mission.
You're quite good with languages and convinced that not all who wander are lost. If you
see anyone in black robes on horseback, just run. That's just common sense.


Take the Book Quiz
at the Blue Pyramid.

Excellent!!

|

'There is No Autonomy Show'

Much Noise terrorised the walls of Mdx on Saturday as DJ Rupture finished off the Noise conference with a mixture of distortions, dark beats and a few tranquil moments of Radiohead and Tracy Chapman. It was definately an experience to sit in what used to be a chapel (hints of a fled God here and there) and vibrating away. The conference itself was a success and thanks to Ray and Andy for organising it. I have learnt more about the various theories of Noise and the diversity of peoples and theories that are intereted in it.

The papers themselves varied from dubious, to interesting, to sinisterly cute. K-punk's is here so you can read it for yourself but simply reading it won't allow you to experience his excellent deliverance and passion behind it. Steve dyperklub spoke about sound viruses; a song stuck in your head is a cognitive itch!! Z'ev asked if there was immunisation but it doesn't seem that there is... dammit! The notion of sound viruses and sound warfare interests me greatly so that was a bonus. Z'ev himself had forgotten his notes so he sat like a wise old man and chatted about the sensory experience of hearing and informed us that we can hear with other parts of our body, most particularly our legs. With my immanent trip to see Valve Soundsystem I will be interested to see how much I do hear with my legs. The surprise was William Bennett of Whitehouse who had an almost angelic aura about him. He spoke about Romance novels and touching what seemed to be the soul/unconscious with huge amounts of charisma and presence. What was so unsettling was the distinction between the darkness and rupture of his music and the sweetness and gentleness of his persona.... I think I'm quite taken with him. For those of you who are interested Whitehouse are playing on the 7th December at Scala in London. Details are at the Whitehouse link above. If money permits I will probably be there.

The day ended in a somewhat apt though at times annoying way with a trip to a restraunt with 20 'noiseologists.' The food was excellent, the conversation was presumably witty and erudite but unfortunately not much was heard over the loud Turkish music and girls dancing on chairs. Having been dubbed 'carnality in person' but kaptain k-punk, I proceeded to eat until I felt ill and speaking was finally difficult. The feeling ill was a problem but the space for speaking was rarely there so I didn't feel too bad.

Mark Sinker (who's paper I was unfortunately unable to see) has also put a review of the conference up at Freaky Trigger so those of you interested might want to look there.

That's all about that.

gluebot / gleebok

|

Random News

Fans of the lovely Georges Bataille will be pleased to know that this is published tomorrow. It should be arriving in a few weeks for me along with a mountain of other Bataille texts so I can begin my first essay (Bataille and Hegel... lush).

Also for you that are interested in the loud, unsettling and noisy I advise that you come to NoiseTheoryNoise2 on Saturday at Middlesex. For the blogspotters among you you may be able to catch sight of glueboot, infinite thought, k-punk and perhaps others. No doubt there will be much shouting and arguing and inevitably some drinking.

|

I was rather upset with my new HSBC bank card as it looks like it should belong to a kid compared to my old RBS sleek silver card. However, after closer inspection I discovered that the picture on the card is the flows of capital moving over the body of the earth. Am now very pleased with it.

Also thanks to Charlotte Street for bringing my attention to a section in Zizek's Organs Without Bodies in which Levinas is asked about the relationship between Israel and Palestine. Will be bringing that up in my next Levinas seminar.

|

And in second place....

'You see: the feminine is in a fairly good position in this hierarchy of values, which reveals itself when choices become alternatives. It is in second place. It is not woman who is thus slighted. It is the relation based on sexual differences which is subordinated to the interhuman relation - irreducible to the drives and complexes of the libido - to which woman rises as elevation. From which a certain - provisional?- priority of man. Maybe the masculine is more directly linked to the universal, and maybe masculine civilization has prepared, above the sexual, a human order in which a woman enters, completely human.

('And God Created Woman,' Levinas (emphasis added by me) ).

I am having serious problems with writing objectively on Levinas in preparation for a presentation that I am giving next week. I find that he is an interesting critique of Heidegger and am interested in notions of Alterity but the more that I read of his work the more I am troubled. The primacy of the masculine in relation to the feminine puts his whole system of ethics into question. How can a system of ethics exist that discounts half the human race as being in second place and thereby destroying any notion of equality? Whether there is equality in the world or not is one matter but if one is trying to posit a system of ethics that prior to fundamental ontology how can one place the feminine in a secondary position? How can one even begin to think that universality was only created for men? That would mean that universality does not exist.

There is a point in 'Time and the Other' where he refers to the feminine as hiding, fleeing, modesty (I can't find my copy so that is from memory). While the masculine rises from the ilya to become an existent, the feminine is always shrinking back into the ilya, which makes it appear that the feminine can never really become an existent and subsequently cannot have an ego, become a subject or engage in the social. The feminine is only there as a 'salvation' for the masculine, always 'discreetly and absence.' Fecundity becomes the relationship between the masculine and the son where the masculine encounters yet another other and continues to involve himself in the social while the feminine simply shrinks back into the ilya.

I argued with a friend over whether Levinas really means women when he talks about the feminine and it appears that he does when in Totality and Infinity the woman is the hearth, the habitation and the dwelling while the man engages with the social. And the above passage from one of Levinas' Talmudic readings explicitly says that woman is secondary, that man creates the ethical and universal framework which woman simply slips into.

It seems that Levinas should have played with Dostoevsky's quote when he took it from The Brothers Karamazov. Perhaps it should instead read 'Each of us, if he is masculine, is reasponsible for the other; but I more than anyone else (provided that I am a man).'


Puzzles and Problems.... no doubt I will be very angry by the time I have finished this presentation.

|

Unsurprising news

I was not surprised... though greatly saddened to hear the 'results' of the US elections this morning. I had been watching the results for half the night on the BBC and talking about it with a friend in the US. I told him that I wanted Kerry to win, not because I liked him because I didn't want to be afraid of America anymore. My friend replied that he wanted Kerry to win because he no longer wanted to be ashamed to be American. Even as I watched I allowed myself the smallest glimmer of hope that Bush would be out but, inevitably, there wasn't any point in hoping. The saddest thing about the whole matter is that by re-electing Bush it is as if the American people approve of all the fuck-ups that have happened during his term. I know that this isn't true of the people who I know in America, but to the rest of the world it's how it appears.

But anyway, things will continue... Bush will continue to be an illiterate fool, Michael Moore will continue to make dubious documentaries, people will 'Praise the Lord' that the party blessed by God has one... and I will continue to be afraid of America.

To cheer myself I decided to buy Lyotard's Libidinal Economy. Here is the first paragraph, it should brighten up your day:

Open the so-called body and spread out all its surfaces: not only the skin with each of its folds, wrinkles, scars, with its great velvety planes, and continguous to that, the scalp and its mane of hair, the tender pubic fur, nipples, nails, hard transparent skin under the heel, the light frills of the eyelids, set with lashes - but open and spread, expose the labia majora, so also the labia minora with their blue network bathed in mucus, dilate the diaphragm of the anal sphincter, longitudinally cut and flatten out the black conduit of the rectum, then the colon, then the caecum, now a ribbon with its surface all striated and polluted with shit; as though your dress-maker's scissors were opening the leg of an old pair of trousers, go on, expose the small intestines' alleged interior, the jenjunum, the ileum, the duodenum, or else, at the other end, undo the mouth at its corners, pull out the tongue at its most distant roots and split it, spread out the bats' wings of the palate and its damp basements, open the trachea and make it the skeleton of a boat under construction; armed with scalpels and tweezers, dismantle and lay out the bundles and bodies of the encephalon; and then the whole network of veins and arteries, intact, on an immense mattress, and then the lymphatic network, and the fine bony pieces of the wrist, the ankle, take them apart and put them end to end with all the layers of nerve tissue which surround the aqueous humours and the cavernous body of the penis, and extract the great muscles, the great dorsal nets, spread them out like smooth sleeping dolphins. Work as the sun does when you're sunbathing or taking grass.

|

Stuff

New Blogs:

Loudbuzz Sounding Off (Philosophy, Poetry), Dem Wahren, Schönen, Guten (Can blog about Kant and Hegel... unlike me), Abreact (philosophy), Disenchantment (poetry, musings, disenchantment), Parallel Campaign (philosophy collective).

All very nice, should take a look.

Also this which looks like it should be a fun weekend for all.

Thought for the day:

Does Levinas' notion of the Il ya make anyone else think of Lovecraft?

|

A day spent with the lack

After a very pleasant morning at a Hegel lecture (shocking news: I'm loving Hegel... please don't disown me k-punk!) I found myself in the grip of an overwhelming lack about which all I could say to a friend was 'I want a thing... you know, a thing with some stuff on it.' Having taken up base in the Union I tried to satiate my lacking through consumption. Food was the obvious first choice but to no avail so I returned to the Union, bemoaning my lacking and feeling dissatisfied with the world. After some moments of agitation I vanished downstairs and returned with a new coat. Do I need a new coat? Probably not... but for a few moments the lack was gone and I could engage in conversation again. As the lack appeared again I went to the costcutter where I wandered the aisles, my eyes blankly staring at consumer goods, looking for that elusive something which I needed to own beyond anything else. It turned out to be a packet of wagon wheels....

My purchases have done nothing to get rid of the niggling desire for the thing with some stuff on it so I have decided to spend an evening with Levinas. Hopefully a few chapters of Totality and Infinity will destroy any pressing need to engage with capitalism. After all, what is a commodity when brought face to face with the Other? (hopefully....)

|