Libidinal economy in Sade and Klossowski

Lyotard, Jean-François; Grant, Iain Hamilton

doi:10.1017/cbo9780511519413.004

Cited by 16 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The common thread to all three is that theatre introduces a distinction between things as they are and their representation on stage: a threshold or a dividing line that is required for the function of theatrical fiction to come into being. As Jean-François Lyotard (2004) has shown, the threshold is a pre-requisite for theatre’s ability to represent reality. There is no theatre without a clear and unambiguous distinction between the representation and the thing represented.…”

Section: Theatricality and Its Discontentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Failure to Engage: Art Criticism in the Age of Simulacrum

Rubinstein¹

2017

Journal of Visual Culture

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Theatricality and Its Discontentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Failure to Engage: Art Criticism in the Age of Simulacrum

Rubinstein¹

2017

Journal of Visual Culture

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For, although an affect is excessive, acentral and posthuman, it is regularly manipulated or at least smoothed in an institutionalised direction. In Libidinal Economy, Jean-Franc¸ois Lyotard describes affects as the libidinal intensities that allow a system to direct desire (Lyotard, 1993). In that sense, affects are regularly exploited and channelled to serve consumerist needs, capitalist abstractions, legal obedience and political placation.…”

Section: Institutionalising Affectsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Withdrawing from atmosphere: An ontology of air partitioning and affective engineering

Philippopoulos‐Mihalopoulos

2015

Environ Plan D

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The main objective of this text is to warn against atmospherics. However comfortable it might appear, an atmosphere is politically suspicious because it numbs a body into an affective embrace of stability and permanence. It becomes doubly suspicious because a body desires to be part of the atmosphere. For this reason, I rethink both affect and atmosphere ontologically rather than phenomenologically. I argue that an atmosphere is engineered by subsuming individual affects to what I call, following Sloterdijk, an atmospheric glasshouse. I suggest that this happens in four steps: a distinction between inside and outside through partitioning; inclusion of the outside inside; illusion of synthesis; and dissimulation. In order to do this, I begin with air as the elemental paradox of ontological continuum and rupture. I carry on with the passage from air to atmosphere while retaining the discourse around continuum and rupture. Finally, I indicate a way of rupturing the atmospheric continuum through the ontological movement of withdrawal from the atmosphere. The ultimate goal of the article is to sketch a problematic of atmospherics that puts together without synthesising an elemental ontology of continuum and rupture.

show abstract

“…20 With his concept of dissimulation, Lyotard brings into play simultaneously the senses of dissimulate and dissimilate, to conceal and to alter. 21 Thus, on the one hand, the significant side of the event conceals the side of the event that resists signification and that is experienced as a felt singularity.…”

Section: A Different Differencementioning

confidence: 99%

The Event of Sense in Lyotard'sDiscours, Figure

Lueck

2010

Journal of the British Society for Phenomenology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Libidinal economy in Sade and Klossowski

Cited by 16 publications

References 0 publications

Failure to Engage: Art Criticism in the Age of Simulacrum

Failure to Engage: Art Criticism in the Age of Simulacrum

Withdrawing from atmosphere: An ontology of air partitioning and affective engineering

The Event of Sense in Lyotard'sDiscours, Figure

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About