Anti-Romantic

Let us take the risk of losing physical integrity to a new extreme. I do not mean a sensory extreme of pain or actual loss of organs, limbs or whatever parts of the touchable body. I mean a new extreme as regards the often downward drives of desire. Let us think the pleasure principle as an upward drive and the death drive as a downward one. In sadomasochism, capitalism, and any other rule system based on domination, death drive translates a structural possibility of the Unconscious into a necessary movement. Something that could stay asleep wakes up to disquiet the joys of pleasure, the principle of regulation or homeostasis. When we think in terms of phenomena, when we are immersed in thinking you and I as indicators of for two separated masses and two distinct instances of speech, we are not yet free from sexual difference. The deictic is a deism: it stems from the belief in architectural entities, that is to say, in instances of speech or subjects of enunciation that can be positioned, disposed, put in opposition, composed, removed. Biopolitics could not do without the deictic and its diabolic separation of life from death. If I am the other, if our bodies happen to be continuous not contiguous, then we can set ourselves free from the diabolic or separating boundary and learn to forget that original belief. Physical integrity does not only imply the ‘wholiness’ of my particular body from the moment I see its incompleteness. Without the other I am not. This is not a romantic love eulogy. Romantic love is precisely one of the most diabolic objects of belief since it entertains all sorts of fantasy, dependence, and alienation that proved fundamental to other systems of domination yet ancillary to the true path of desire, which is a path of wisdom not submission. My desire is yet outside. It is always on the some other side for I am the other – no matter who I is.

Advertisements