A quick post to share a joke. Well not really a joke, more of an acid wit. French philosopher Alain Badiou has been called many things during his long and lustrous life, a lot of them bad. Some people seem to insist, for example, that the man is anti-Semite. Zizek lovingly repeats that he and Badiou are both Stalinists (Badiou, of course, is Maoist). I seem to remember that, not too long ago, a Danish journalist recounting French contemporary political thinking called him dangerous and mad. Ah, well… “A beloved child has many names” as we say in Denmark. But to call Badiou names is, I think, a most marvelous thing. Not that he deserves it, but because he tends to answer these preposterous accusations with such humorous force as to make any stand up comedian blush with envy.
I just now stumbled upon the following gem of an aggressive defense:
“J’aime les grandes mĂ©taphores venues de la religion : Miracle, Grâce, Salut, Corps Glorieux, Conversion… On a Ă©videmment conclu de ce goĂ»t que ma philosophie Ă©tait un christianisme dĂ©guisĂ©. Le livre sur saint Paul que j’ai publiĂ© en 1997 aux PUF n’a pas arrangĂ© les choses. Ă€ tout prendre, j’aime mieux ĂŞtre un athĂ©e rĂ©volutionnaire cachĂ© sous une langue religieuse qu’un “dĂ©mocrate” occidental persĂ©cuteur de musulman(e)s dĂ©guisĂ© en fĂ©ministe laĂŻque.” (Baidou: Second manifeste pour la philosophie note 4)
In case your French is a bit rusty, here is a rusty translation:
“I love the great religious metaphors: Miracle, Grace, Salvation, Glorious Body, Conversion… Obviously, someone concluded from this preference that my philosophy was disguised christianity. The book on Saint Paul, which I published in 1997 at PUF, didn’t help the matter. All considered, I would rather be a revolutionary atheist hidden behind a religious vernacular than an occidental “democrat” persecuting muslims disguised as a secular feminist.”
You almost want to high-five your buddy and chest bump your pal shouting “Snap! Them mo-fo’s got pwned!,” don’t you?
13
Mar 09
Rhetorical masturbation makes you blind
On the subject of this blog’s last defilement of a perfectly nice blank screen, The importance of being Elvis, a friend remarked that the title bore a bit of the Elvis odour itself. She claimed that this particular critique of intellectual commentary was in and by itself just another bit of pseudo-intellectual commentary. And of course she is right!
As has already been stated on this page – it’s remarkable how long a webpage really is – bloggery is fit for the more or less cultivated or casual considerations of the works of mice and men over digital drinks and dinner, but not for laborious elaborations on the subtle workings of all things theory. Blogs are the very sanctuaries of commentary, it is where commentary goes when it is no longer wanted in respectable company, which is why blogs are usually just havens for washed up intellectual waste and futile observations of abundant banality.
So why more or less consciously commit the sin you are condemning? Why throw all personal pride and integrity overboard and just plow right through the known courteous seas? Because it feels so good! Bloggery as well as commentary are generally examples of what we might call rhetorical masturbation and rhetorical masturbation, as we have all learnt in our early years, makes you blind. Well, maybe you don’t really loose your eyesight but you do tend to lean back a bit and close your eyes with the sheer pleasure of it.
Continue reading →