Talk:Exe0.1 Marie Louise Søndergaard

Hi Marie,

This was a very nice paper to read. As we chatted about earlier, de Sade seems like a somehow natural referent for thinking about computation. But beyond de Sade and Batailles’ take on pleasure and pain, it might be helpful to consider other positions as a way of contrasting or further opening up their thoughts. I think the reference to Berlant in relation to her idea of cruel optimism makes sense in relation to the ideas you are discussing, especially as a way of opening up the sense of such pleasures and pains as related to other vectors of the contemporary such as economic ones, which Chun and Berardi are also getting at. I think here it’s also worth noting a potential critique, namely that anyone’s ability to experience pleasure in any such system potentially is informed at least somewhat by the position of privilege that one is able occupy in the system. Here, the fact that Savičić’s work is searching for encrypted networks is maybe helpful, in pointing towards just such privileges.

I guess this also points to how one needs to maybe tread carefully in potentially universalising any sense of desire in relation to the "universal machine". Clearly de Sade is one person, at a particular time, with a particular economic background, etc. Again, bringing in other writers or artists working in this terrain might be of help in opening up the discussion in a helpful way. So maybe seeking out some other touch points… I haven’t read it, but I think Luciana Parisi’s book, Abstract Sex: Philosophy, Biotechnology and the Mutations of Desire, could be be quite relevant. Then you have a vibrant strand of writers and groups like VNS Matrix and Sadie Plant who might also be interesting. You refer to Howse and he also references JG Ballard’s novel Crash, which is another interesting possible point of reference.

Another thing - which I’m not necessarily sure is what you want to cover but maybe at least worth mentioning - is that there is something about the pleasure/pain tension that you seem to be getting at which maybe relates to the ongoing discussion of a tension between potentials of domination and becoming in (ab)uses of technology. I think your paper is quite interesting in this respect, as notions of pleasure and pain open up in both directions, rather than simply falling down into one camp or the other. And the artistic examples can really explore this in interesting ways that other attempts to deal with the discussion don’t.

-Eric

Comments from Molly:

"algorithmic living has become subject to compulsive repetition without realisation." -- the concept of compulsive repetition has nice links to Wendy Chun's habitual media

I think you make an interesting statement that execution exists in between software, death, and sex, but is this statement supposed to be an absolute (all execution exists here) or one interpretation of a specific uses of code (which you describe below)?

Would you say that repetition dilutes or diminishes reality? Could there be a counter-argument that repetition enhances and augments reality? Could be a nice counter-point.

Quick spell check: "software is inherent violent" should be "software is inherently violent"

The statement that we do not have freedom of choice is a strong one, but I think linking it to violence as you do gives a justification for it. Do you think our freedom of choice always ultimately curbed by violence? Is this the only way to curb freedom of choice?

This is really interesting but I'm not sure that I understand: "This form of “pure violence” that appears to come from nowhere is embedded in culture. It comes from beyond the law and is an expression of the undeadness and therefore sacred life. The pure violence is exactly the form of violence, which exists in the belief of the good life, and therefore a totally different form of violence than the one de Sade is advocating for. For de Sade, and Bataille, violence is necessary to exploit the inherent violence and domestication of evil in human being." What is pure violence? Is it violence that is implicit / collective / invisible / transcendent / innate? Is the "belief in the good life" also a belief that we have freedom of choice? What does it mean to exploit the inherent violence of humans? Is this a positive thing?

I think it would be helpful if you briefly explain or give one example of what an invisible encrypted network is.

I really enjoy your critique and comparison of "Constraint City" and pornographic coding. It is clear and well-argued. I am wondering, however, if by "overcoming rationality and instinct" you mean "overcoming the divide between" or "reconciling" rationality and instinct? I think you can expand upon, maybe in a format where you have more space, the relationship between code as symbols that are reconstructed by an imagining individual and individuals as blindly, compulsively consuming repetitious code to no end.

Thanks very much for your work!