Control and Archaism
Konferencijski prilog (Objavljena verzija)
Metapodaci
Prikaz svih podataka o dokumentuApstrakt
The presentation will delve into the relationship between control society and archaism. Deleuze’s conceptualization of control implies the reconfiguration of
former spaces of discipline. While the Foucauldian model of discipline was characterized by enclosed spaces (such as prisons, armies, and churches),
Deleuze’s notion of control highlights a continuous network where individuals are no longer molded but modulated. This prompts us to ponder the shift in the
temporal structure that occurs during the transition from a disciplinary society to one governed by control. Specifically, this presentation aims to explore the
disparities in our historical perspectives when viewed from disciplinary and control paradigms. In this context, I will explore Deleuze and Guattari's concept of
‘archaism’. According to Deleuze and Guattari, archaism is an inherent aspect of capitalism, its continual endeavor to reconstruct territoriality and replicate
antiquated coding patterns. Capitalism necess...itates archaism due to its lack of inherent belief structures. In essence, the system, which the duo name the
‘age of cynicism’, requires the revival of old codes to sustain its systems of subjugation and dominance. As my presentation will demonstrate, one can
discern a transformation in the evolution of archaism as society shifts from discipline to control. By comparing the fascist archaism of the thirties in
Germany and the archaism of contemporary alt-right movements, I will show that a disciplinary society presupposes a more centralized form of archaism,
which is highly susceptible to state control and deeply ingrained in the institutional fabric of social life. Conversely, a control society implies a
diversification and creativity in archaic attitudes, hinting at its potential for emancipation—a viewpoint emphasized by Deleuze and Guattari themselves
in ’Anti-Oedipus’.
Ključne reči:
archaism / control / Deleuze and Guattari / Anti-OedipusIzvor:
15th International Deleuze and Guattari Studies Conference Book of Abstracts, 2023, 70-71Izdavač:
- Belgrade : Institute for Philosophy and Social Theory, University of Belgrade; Faculty of Media and Communications, University of Plymouth
Finansiranje / projekti:
- "info:eu-repo/grantAgreement/MESTD/inst-2020/200025/RS//" (RS-MESTD-inst-2020-200025)
Kolekcije
Institucija/grupa
IFDTTY - CONF AU - Hristov, Đorđe PY - 2023 UR - http://rifdt.instifdt.bg.ac.rs/123456789/3627 AB - The presentation will delve into the relationship between control society and archaism. Deleuze’s conceptualization of control implies the reconfiguration of former spaces of discipline. While the Foucauldian model of discipline was characterized by enclosed spaces (such as prisons, armies, and churches), Deleuze’s notion of control highlights a continuous network where individuals are no longer molded but modulated. This prompts us to ponder the shift in the temporal structure that occurs during the transition from a disciplinary society to one governed by control. Specifically, this presentation aims to explore the disparities in our historical perspectives when viewed from disciplinary and control paradigms. In this context, I will explore Deleuze and Guattari's concept of ‘archaism’. According to Deleuze and Guattari, archaism is an inherent aspect of capitalism, its continual endeavor to reconstruct territoriality and replicate antiquated coding patterns. Capitalism necessitates archaism due to its lack of inherent belief structures. In essence, the system, which the duo name the ‘age of cynicism’, requires the revival of old codes to sustain its systems of subjugation and dominance. As my presentation will demonstrate, one can discern a transformation in the evolution of archaism as society shifts from discipline to control. By comparing the fascist archaism of the thirties in Germany and the archaism of contemporary alt-right movements, I will show that a disciplinary society presupposes a more centralized form of archaism, which is highly susceptible to state control and deeply ingrained in the institutional fabric of social life. Conversely, a control society implies a diversification and creativity in archaic attitudes, hinting at its potential for emancipation—a viewpoint emphasized by Deleuze and Guattari themselves in ’Anti-Oedipus’. PB - Belgrade : Institute for Philosophy and Social Theory, University of Belgrade; Faculty of Media and Communications, University of Plymouth C3 - 15th International Deleuze and Guattari Studies Conference Book of Abstracts T1 - Control and Archaism SP - 70 EP - 71 UR - https://hdl.handle.net/21.15107/rcub_rifdt_3627 ER -
@conference{ author = "Hristov, Đorđe", year = "2023", abstract = "The presentation will delve into the relationship between control society and archaism. Deleuze’s conceptualization of control implies the reconfiguration of former spaces of discipline. While the Foucauldian model of discipline was characterized by enclosed spaces (such as prisons, armies, and churches), Deleuze’s notion of control highlights a continuous network where individuals are no longer molded but modulated. This prompts us to ponder the shift in the temporal structure that occurs during the transition from a disciplinary society to one governed by control. Specifically, this presentation aims to explore the disparities in our historical perspectives when viewed from disciplinary and control paradigms. In this context, I will explore Deleuze and Guattari's concept of ‘archaism’. According to Deleuze and Guattari, archaism is an inherent aspect of capitalism, its continual endeavor to reconstruct territoriality and replicate antiquated coding patterns. Capitalism necessitates archaism due to its lack of inherent belief structures. In essence, the system, which the duo name the ‘age of cynicism’, requires the revival of old codes to sustain its systems of subjugation and dominance. As my presentation will demonstrate, one can discern a transformation in the evolution of archaism as society shifts from discipline to control. By comparing the fascist archaism of the thirties in Germany and the archaism of contemporary alt-right movements, I will show that a disciplinary society presupposes a more centralized form of archaism, which is highly susceptible to state control and deeply ingrained in the institutional fabric of social life. Conversely, a control society implies a diversification and creativity in archaic attitudes, hinting at its potential for emancipation—a viewpoint emphasized by Deleuze and Guattari themselves in ’Anti-Oedipus’.", publisher = "Belgrade : Institute for Philosophy and Social Theory, University of Belgrade; Faculty of Media and Communications, University of Plymouth", journal = "15th International Deleuze and Guattari Studies Conference Book of Abstracts", title = "Control and Archaism", pages = "70-71", url = "https://hdl.handle.net/21.15107/rcub_rifdt_3627" }
Hristov, Đ.. (2023). Control and Archaism. in 15th International Deleuze and Guattari Studies Conference Book of Abstracts Belgrade : Institute for Philosophy and Social Theory, University of Belgrade; Faculty of Media and Communications, University of Plymouth., 70-71. https://hdl.handle.net/21.15107/rcub_rifdt_3627
Hristov Đ. Control and Archaism. in 15th International Deleuze and Guattari Studies Conference Book of Abstracts. 2023;:70-71. https://hdl.handle.net/21.15107/rcub_rifdt_3627 .
Hristov, Đorđe, "Control and Archaism" in 15th International Deleuze and Guattari Studies Conference Book of Abstracts (2023):70-71, https://hdl.handle.net/21.15107/rcub_rifdt_3627 .