Friday, 25 April 2014

An autobiography that has been elicited by the question, ‘From which of our signs will you come to recognise the extremism of our literature?’


1. Our awareness of our own project is intermittent and incomplete, but in general it seems to be directed towards 'putting weapons beyond use.' It involves works of decommissioning, and more importantly, contributes to the necessary process of social decomposition. We arguments are made on the assumption that decomposition is for the best -  and we presume our involvement within it. Our activities are conducted in the world based on the assumption that we are a benign entity, even though we acknowledge what we do is painful.

2. There is an intrinsic resistance within projects which acts to prevent them.  Projects do not wish to be drawn towards their own realisation. Projects do wish to be drawn in any direction other than towards their own realisation. Projects desire to become something other than projects. Projects are fundamentally not projects. Projects expend most of the energy at their disposal seeking out paths by which they may fall back into undifferentiated and non-realised potentiality. The difficult second album syndrome. The groundbreaking journal which does not survive publication of its second issue.

3. Awareness is not given, and it is not aware. Awareness is not naturally indexed as awareness to its environment. Awareness does not present the possibilities lying latent in the world. Awareness does everything within its power to resist awareness - it is fundamentally unaware. That is to say, awareness is a type of project and as such, it ferociously resists both its awareness and its belonging to a project. Awareness expends most of the energy at its disposal on finding paths back into non-awareness. At the point of becoming aware, the world swallows back its ideas and chews off those about to be spoken lines.  

4. Even so, awareness and projects and the resistances inherent within them are the recurrent themes of our project. We have become aware, perhaps accidentally, perhaps by the means of our project, that just as awareness is a project so projects are inexorably aware. It seems the awareness of our project is defined above all by an unwillingness to adopt a single description for the positioning of our awareness, and its projects, in the world. 

5. It also seems we prefer to inhabit an intuitive and part-theorised life-world attuned to the nuanced ironies that result from the superimposition of multiple layerings of theory. In practice, this manner of inhabitation is conducted through persistent investment in differential diagnoses and minority readings.  It is a project that is returned to itself via a foundational paradox which states: this awareness is a formation that is wholly determined by its conditions but it is also determined as a formation which is set in opposition to its conditions. 

6. It is true that the awareness which thinks against the world also thereby affirms the world - but it takes the long way round. Our project seeks to nurture something from those awarenesses that seem most against the world, and yet which also hold out against contamination by known pathologies. 

7. The project consists of directing our awareness towards those awarenesses which are not reducible to single command sequences, but which have emerged via multiple regimes of constraint - being both responsive and non-responsive in numerous registers. Where superimposed mapping procedures have been productive of tiny anomalies, discrepancies and inconsistencies we record these 'loose' objects as the grains of sand within which worlds are seen. Every grain is a record of awareness in a borderline state, this condition of discrepancy occurs where materials which fall between (and which are not captured by) the clear descriptions of two or more mapping procedures precisely because two or more mapping procedures are actively denying each other around such grains.

8i. It seems we are drawn into procedures, rituals, performances that are directed towards the manifestation of what we interpret to be residues of what at stake. We sieve, winnow, scan for unfixed grains of awareness (as these appear attached to discrepant objects). We compulsively overlay our hastily drawn assumptions so as to make out the anomalies from which we derive, perhaps fictitious, sustenance. We hypothesise: awareness is more responsive to suggestion when caught between incongruous biosemiotic domains, or between incompatible commands.

8ii. Perhaps, the extremity of our literature lies in the pursuit of those states which are most generative of the tiny grains of what awareness is not supposed to be. It is true we are ‘readied’ or sensitised like Uexküll's tick, we cycle through our phases within this tick-temporality awaiting the appropriate stimulus. However, it is not quite accurate to say that we self-engineer or rig our project so that we may cultivate the decomposition of imaging/visualisation strategies. The discrepancy must arrive here by its own free will. And, Just as the llucilia sericata is able to locate a cadaver within minutes of death so we are sensitive to all unfixed and incongruous materials that are routinely carried within political discourse.

9. We denounce that of which we were just now aware. But we are indulgent of our deep history. There are moments in awareness, or more accurately, cyclical phases. At an early phase of our project, we wrote of the exhausted state of the shipwrecked mariner who is washed up on the shore of critical awareness - our perception of this state of exhaustion, was also an expression of our exhaustion. For the leftist, leftism suffices. For us, an awareness of leftism's sufficiency in itself, has sufficed. For the living flotsam and jetsam of leftist awareness, it is painful to give up the certainties of the shore, it is painful to navigate back out to sea. Having already separated from simple ideological conformity, it is painful for those subject formations derived from oppositional awareness to then separate once more from the initial separation. It is painful for those who have broken from their environment to then break again, and from themselves. This is painful for us too. We have been guided by the awareness that there is a seasonality to struggles, we have considered it is as well to wait out the snowstorm and for the opportune moment - but then we cannot deny that there are thresholds which we should have approached but before which we have hesitated. 

10. We are not an agency of decomposition. But then, we cannot justifiably claim the status of a disinterested witness. We do not simply look up from the sward, with that inscrutable gaze which herd herbivores look up, and look on, as one of their number is predated. We are not causing decomposition and we are not observing it, but rather we are one of its lesser phenomena. Its awareness, or some of its awareness, is disclosed through what we do.