Comments for Christopher's Blog http://andywarhol.edublogs.org Únete a la cigüeña Mon, 28 Sep 2009 13:32:48 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 Comment on Top 10 Guitarists by andywarhol http://andywarhol.edublogs.org/2009/09/25/top-10-guitarists/comment-page-1/#comment-13 andywarhol Mon, 28 Sep 2009 13:32:48 +0000 http://andywarhol.edublogs.org/?p=31#comment-13 it's not who is the best, it's who is my favouirte. steve vai is better but he isn't my favourite it’s not who is the best, it’s who is my favouirte. steve vai is better but he isn’t my favourite

]]> Comment on Top 10 Guitarists by humanordancer http://andywarhol.edublogs.org/2009/09/25/top-10-guitarists/comment-page-1/#comment-12 humanordancer Mon, 28 Sep 2009 13:02:33 +0000 http://andywarhol.edublogs.org/?p=31#comment-12 also, i wouldnt put iommi in my top 10...no doubt he was influential, but there are better guitarists also, i wouldnt put iommi in my top 10…no doubt he was influential, but there are better guitarists

]]> Comment on Top 10 Guitarists by humanordancer http://andywarhol.edublogs.org/2009/09/25/top-10-guitarists/comment-page-1/#comment-10 humanordancer Mon, 28 Sep 2009 13:00:18 +0000 http://andywarhol.edublogs.org/?p=31#comment-10 The model is not saved more than the subject. He also seeks to fix its desire and it waits until one indicates something of desirable to him. It is well what the subject of our triangle does which, from this point of view, is well him also another. We know already that it is not the object which the model will see now, but an object transfigured by the desire of the subject, which gives him a completely unexpected “value”. The model does not have a passive role in this triangle. It is not satisfied to await a manifestation of the subject, it makes on the contrary very to give birth to this one. As an object that nobody would dispute to him would not have any interest, no value able to fix its own desire, all pushes it to expose taking into consideration the others its good fortune - which does not become advantage in term of being that if it is recognized like such by these same others. The desire of the model needs to feel other desires to be able to be consolidated. It thus tends always to cause itself competition, i.e. to cause the emergence of a rival that it will then rest with to him to supplant. In love one praising qualities with its partner near his friends seeks as much to affirm, vanity or pride, the superiority of its happiness that to confirm its own desire. The best answer would be than his/her friends, envieuses of this happiness, very put themselves to wish the aforementioned partner, other than all other claiming. This would do nothing but confirm in love one in its staggering certainty which it holds the good. The object is not already any more the small buddy - undoubtedly very unspecified - of Miss X., but he becomes little by little the almost single boy that all dispute, i.e. an illusion born of the competitor desires. Outside this competition, i.e. at a place of observation not gained by this illusion, all will raise the question: “But what they find to him?”. The infernal circularity of the mimetic desire is now in place. No recrudescence of the desire of the model for the object will escape the subject, which will see there the confirmation of its importance and which will redouble efforts to have it. Each one thus, subject or model, contributed to the emergence of the other as a rival. The model is not saved more than the subject. He also seeks to fix its desire and it waits until one indicates something of desirable to him. It is well what the subject of our triangle does which, from this point of view, is well him also another. We know already that it is not the object which the model will see now, but an object transfigured by the desire of the subject, which gives him a completely unexpected “value”.
The model does not have a passive role in this triangle. It is not satisfied to await a manifestation of the subject, it makes on the contrary very to give birth to this one. As an object that nobody would dispute to him would not have any interest, no value able to fix its own desire, all pushes it to expose taking into consideration the others its good fortune – which does not become advantage in term of being that if it is recognized like such by these same others. The desire of the model needs to feel other desires to be able to be consolidated. It thus tends always to cause itself competition, i.e. to cause the emergence of a rival that it will then rest with to him to supplant.
In love one praising qualities with its partner near his friends seeks as much to affirm, vanity or pride, the superiority of its happiness that to confirm its own desire. The best answer would be than his/her friends, envieuses of this happiness, very put themselves to wish the aforementioned partner, other than all other claiming. This would do nothing but confirm in love one in its staggering certainty which it holds the good. The object is not already any more the small buddy – undoubtedly very unspecified – of Miss X., but he becomes little by little the almost single boy that all dispute, i.e. an illusion born of the competitor desires. Outside this competition, i.e. at a place of observation not gained by this illusion, all will raise the question: “But what they find to him?”.
The infernal circularity of the mimetic desire is now in place. No recrudescence of the desire of the model for the object will escape the subject, which will see there the confirmation of its importance and which will redouble efforts to have it. Each one thus, subject or model, contributed to the emergence of the other as a rival.

]]> Comment on Top 10 Guitarists by humanordancer http://andywarhol.edublogs.org/2009/09/25/top-10-guitarists/comment-page-1/#comment-9 humanordancer Mon, 28 Sep 2009 12:59:44 +0000 http://andywarhol.edublogs.org/?p=31#comment-9 The subject wishes, but it does not know what. In its wander, it will cross a being equipped with something which is missing to him and which seems to give to this one a plenitude that does not have to him. This apparent plenitude, so near and so remote, properly will fascinate it. The famished desire of the subject always seems to raise the same question with the model: “That do you have moreover than me?” (to appear so happy, to have a so pretty woman, to be preferred direction, etc). To fix its admiring attention on a model, it is to already to recognize him or grant a prestige to him which one does not have, which amounts noting its own insufficiency to be. It is obviously not a position of most comfortable but the man who admires, and who across desire the Other, is initially somebody who mistakes deeply. But if the model is so perfect, it is that it must hold something whose subject is for the stripped moment: material object, attitude, statute, etc The variations are infinite for an always identical result: what differentiates it from the Other justifies, with the eyes of the desire of the subject, the success and prestige that it grants to him. The desire which the subject for the object has is anything else only the desire which it has of prestige that it lends to that which has the object (or which is on the point of wishing at the same time as him it object). Thus is instituted the mediation of the model and the first transfiguration of the object. For example, a car is more than this steel carcass making it possible to move of a place with another, if not any model would make the deal; it is the instrument which would allow about being, like its model, a “ladykiller”, a senior staff, a gang leader, etc What aims at the desire is of course not the possession of the object-car but what it believes that this possession will give him, as in the Other, in terms of female conquests or social identification. Like notes it Rene Girard, the subject will always ignore this anteriority of the model, because would be at the same time to reveal its insufficiency, its inferiority, the fact that its desire is, not spontaneous but imitated. It play then will denounce the presence of the Other in vain, mediator of its desire, like concerning the only desire of this last. The subject wishes, but it does not know what. In its wander, it will cross a being equipped with something which is missing to him and which seems to give to this one a plenitude that does not have to him. This apparent plenitude, so near and so remote, properly will fascinate it. The famished desire of the subject always seems to raise the same question with the model: “That do you have moreover than me?” (to appear so happy, to have a so pretty woman, to be preferred direction, etc).
To fix its admiring attention on a model, it is to already to recognize him or grant a prestige to him which one does not have, which amounts noting its own insufficiency to be. It is obviously not a position of most comfortable but the man who admires, and who across desire the Other, is initially somebody who mistakes deeply. But if the model is so perfect, it is that it must hold something whose subject is for the stripped moment: material object, attitude, statute, etc The variations are infinite for an always identical result: what differentiates it from the Other justifies, with the eyes of the desire of the subject, the success and prestige that it grants to him.
The desire which the subject for the object has is anything else only the desire which it has of prestige that it lends to that which has the object (or which is on the point of wishing at the same time as him it object). Thus is instituted the mediation of the model and the first transfiguration of the object. For example, a car is more than this steel carcass making it possible to move of a place with another, if not any model would make the deal; it is the instrument which would allow about being, like its model, a “ladykiller”, a senior staff, a gang leader, etc What aims at the desire is of course not the possession of the object-car but what it believes that this possession will give him, as in the Other, in terms of female conquests or social identification.
Like notes it Rene Girard, the subject will always ignore this anteriority of the model, because would be at the same time to reveal its insufficiency, its inferiority, the fact that its desire is, not spontaneous but imitated. It play then will denounce the presence of the Other in vain, mediator of its desire, like concerning the only desire of this last.

]]> Comment on Top 10 Guitarists by humanordancer http://andywarhol.edublogs.org/2009/09/25/top-10-guitarists/comment-page-1/#comment-8 humanordancer Mon, 28 Sep 2009 12:58:59 +0000 http://andywarhol.edublogs.org/?p=31#comment-8 The assumption girardienne thus rests on the existence of a third element, mediator of the desire, which is the Different one. It is because to be to it that I took as model wishes an object (conceived in a wide way as any thing with which the other seems provided and who is missing to me…) that I start to wish this one and the object has value only because it is wished by another. One could think that the introduction of this third “top” into the equation of the desire is a purely theoretical and arbitrary additional complexity on behalf of Rene Girard. The more so as the presence of this Other involves a total questioning of this individualism placed in the middle of the modernity, which shows the man like a free and autonomous entity and which finds its blooming literary in the type of the romantic hero. In MRVR, Girard does nothing but reveal the presence of the Other in the middle of the romantic genius (it is the omnipresence of the Other in the desire which makes the size of Stendhal or Dostoïevski against the romantic lie of the divine or superhuman hero, in all the self-sufficing cases, which would illustrate the linear trajectory of the desire to him) and the presence of the Other always proves to be a simplification - or rather a clarification - situations. The romantic lie that Rene Girard denounces is only the attempt at obliteration, of dissimulation of the model in the diagram of the desire… The assumption girardienne thus rests on the existence of a third element, mediator of the desire, which is the Different one. It is because to be to it that I took as model wishes an object (conceived in a wide way as any thing with which the other seems provided and who is missing to me…) that I start to wish this one and the object has value only because it is wished by another. One could think that the introduction of this third “top” into the equation of the desire is a purely theoretical and arbitrary additional complexity on behalf of Rene Girard. The more so as the presence of this Other involves a total questioning of this individualism placed in the middle of the modernity, which shows the man like a free and autonomous entity and which finds its blooming literary in the type of the romantic hero.
In MRVR, Girard does nothing but reveal the presence of the Other in the middle of the romantic genius (it is the omnipresence of the Other in the desire which makes the size of Stendhal or Dostoïevski against the romantic lie of the divine or superhuman hero, in all the self-sufficing cases, which would illustrate the linear trajectory of the desire to him) and the presence of the Other always proves to be a simplification – or rather a clarification – situations. The romantic lie that Rene Girard denounces is only the attempt at obliteration, of dissimulation of the model in the diagram of the desire…

]]> Comment on Top 10 Guitarists by humanordancer http://andywarhol.edublogs.org/2009/09/25/top-10-guitarists/comment-page-1/#comment-7 humanordancer Mon, 28 Sep 2009 12:58:33 +0000 http://andywarhol.edublogs.org/?p=31#comment-7 In 1961, Rene Girard publishes in the Editions romantic Grasset Mensonge, romantic truth (MRVR). Professor of comparative literature, born in Avignon but living and working in the United States, it carries out to it the analysis of literary philosopher's stones in which it perceives problems of the desire completely different from that hitherto having course. • Assumption • The triangle of the desire • Internal, external mediation • The loss of the differences • Mimetic competition (1) As with humour J. - P notes it. Dupuy in the Hell of the Things (Threshold): “it is because it shows that Jones have X that publicity gives to Smith the desire for acquiring it and, moreover, there does not need publicity for that, Smith are tortured enough by the desire which they test for Jones to discover all alone what the latter have.” The wind sinks Which do we know human desire? The dominant opinion, as well in social sciences than in the common direction, is as the man fixes in a completely autonomous way his desire on an object. This approach would devote the fact that each object has in him a value likely to polarize this desire. If we too are not looking at, it is well the feeling which our daily experiment gives us: the desire that I have for this woman, this ambition to succeed in my trade or this new car which I plan to buy seem well to proceed of my free choice. This linear vision of the desire has for it all its simplicity, but it obliges then with a certain number of distorsions when we try to also simply give an account of phenomena completely related to the desire, as the desire or jealousy. The reflexion (but rather seldom let us recognize we it), we envy to be it who has the object, this last not having whereas a very relative importance. And, in certain cases, we would draw more satisfaction with the fact that the Other rather does not have the object than in its possession itself. Moreover publicity, this anthem with the possession of objects, initially gives us to wish, not a product in what it has of objective, but people, Others which wish this product or which seems filled by its possession (1). By analyzing the romantic philosopher's stones (Cervantès, Stendhal, Proust and Dostoïevski), Rene Girard locates a mechanism of the completely different human desire. This one would not set in an autonomous way according to a linear trajectory: subject - object, but by imitation of the desire of another according to a triangular diagram: subject - model - object. Don Quichotte clearly indicates to devote its life to the imitation of Amadis of Gaulle, such as the knight with the Sad Figure imagines that it would be. The Eternal Husband can wish his future wife only through the desire, caused by him, of the lover of his first wife, whom it will be able to then imitate. And Mr. of Rênal wishes to take Julien Sorel as tutor only because it is convinced that it be what Valenod is on the point of doing, which is the other important character the Glass ones. In 1961, Rene Girard publishes in the Editions romantic Grasset Mensonge, romantic truth (MRVR). Professor of comparative literature, born in Avignon but living and working in the United States, it carries out to it the analysis of literary philosopher’s stones in which it perceives problems of the desire completely different from that hitherto having course.

• Assumption
• The triangle of the desire
• Internal, external mediation
• The loss of the differences
• Mimetic competition
(1) As with humour J. – P notes it. Dupuy in the Hell of the Things (Threshold): “it is because it shows that Jones have X that publicity gives to Smith the desire for acquiring it and, moreover, there does not need publicity for that, Smith are tortured enough by the desire which they test for Jones to discover all alone what the latter have.”
The wind sinks Which do we know human desire? The dominant opinion, as well in social sciences than in the common direction, is as the man fixes in a completely autonomous way his desire on an object. This approach would devote the fact that each object has in him a value likely to polarize this desire.
If we too are not looking at, it is well the feeling which our daily experiment gives us: the desire that I have for this woman, this ambition to succeed in my trade or this new car which I plan to buy seem well to proceed of my free choice. This linear vision of the desire has for it all its simplicity, but it obliges then with a certain number of distorsions when we try to also simply give an account of phenomena completely related to the desire, as the desire or jealousy.
The reflexion (but rather seldom let us recognize we it), we envy to be it who has the object, this last not having whereas a very relative importance. And, in certain cases, we would draw more satisfaction with the fact that the Other rather does not have the object than in its possession itself. Moreover publicity, this anthem with the possession of objects, initially gives us to wish, not a product in what it has of objective, but people, Others which wish this product or which seems filled by its possession (1).

By analyzing the romantic philosopher’s stones (Cervantès, Stendhal, Proust and Dostoïevski), Rene Girard locates a mechanism of the completely different human desire. This one would not set in an autonomous way according to a linear trajectory: subject – object, but by imitation of the desire of another according to a triangular diagram: subject – model – object.
Don Quichotte clearly indicates to devote its life to the imitation of Amadis of Gaulle, such as the knight with the Sad Figure imagines that it would be. The Eternal Husband can wish his future wife only through the desire, caused by him, of the lover of his first wife, whom it will be able to then imitate. And Mr. of Rênal wishes to take Julien Sorel as tutor only because it is convinced that it be what Valenod is on the point of doing, which is the other important character the Glass ones.

]]> Comment on Top 10 Guitarists by humanordancer http://andywarhol.edublogs.org/2009/09/25/top-10-guitarists/comment-page-1/#comment-6 humanordancer Mon, 28 Sep 2009 12:52:55 +0000 http://andywarhol.edublogs.org/?p=31#comment-6 The work of Rene Girard is extremely discussed. For some, it is nothing less than one the largest projections of the thought. For others, Girard is only a one exceeded author, heating an old soup augustinienne to try ultimate and desperate rehabilitation of Christianity. It is one of large through discussions around the work of Girard: to retain of it only the anthropological part, even the only tiny room of the néo-testamentary revelation. The attitude of the author is there of course for much, since it devoted these twenty last years to be practically spoken only about the specificity of the Christian message. In fact, the main part of the current contributions on the Web is summarized with polemic, rather uninteresting, on religious questions. Many readers quickly rejected Rene Girard, under pretext that this one would oblige them to believe. Others took refuge in the citadel girardienne and are propped up on thin but impregnable spoils, so much so that one can read, under an American feather, that “Rene Girard has been transformed into something off has sect in America, with disciples, translators, and proselytizers”. A friend sociologist described me a similar situation in France and it is true that it is rather easy, intellectually, to be absolutely for or completely against. Me which locates me between the two, like would have sung it Brassens, I estimate that all evacuate, at less expenses, the richness and the real difficulties of this thought. These pages thus try to make more accessible one work which has only the appearance of clearness and simplicity. The files of our newsgroup, which exchanged during nearly 18 months on these topics, constitute another approach of the theses girardiennes. You will be able to consult them under the corresponding bond. The work of Rene Girard is extremely discussed. For some, it is nothing less than one the largest projections of the thought. For others, Girard is only a one exceeded author, heating an old soup augustinienne to try ultimate and desperate rehabilitation of Christianity.
It is one of large through discussions around the work of Girard: to retain of it only the anthropological part, even the only tiny room of the néo-testamentary revelation. The attitude of the author is there of course for much, since it devoted these twenty last years to be practically spoken only about the specificity of the Christian message. In fact, the main part of the current contributions on the Web is summarized with polemic, rather uninteresting, on religious questions.
Many readers quickly rejected Rene Girard, under pretext that this one would oblige them to believe. Others took refuge in the citadel girardienne and are propped up on thin but impregnable spoils, so much so that one can read, under an American feather, that “Rene Girard has been transformed into something off has sect in America, with disciples, translators, and proselytizers”. A friend sociologist described me a similar situation in France and it is true that it is rather easy, intellectually, to be absolutely for or completely against.
Me which locates me between the two, like would have sung it Brassens, I estimate that all evacuate, at less expenses, the richness and the real difficulties of this thought. These pages thus try to make more accessible one work which has only the appearance of clearness and simplicity. The files of our newsgroup, which exchanged during nearly 18 months on these topics, constitute another approach of the theses girardiennes. You will be able to consult them under the corresponding bond.

]]> Comment on Top 10 Desert Island Albums by carteblanche http://andywarhol.edublogs.org/2009/09/24/top-10-desert-island-albums/comment-page-1/#comment-5 carteblanche Fri, 25 Sep 2009 20:01:54 +0000 http://andywarhol.edublogs.org/?p=25#comment-5 #3 would be useful for those rainy island days, where nothing can possibly look more melodramatic. Love the album, though: very deep and "slightly" depressing. #3 would be useful for those rainy island days, where nothing can possibly look more melodramatic. Love the album, though: very deep and “slightly” depressing.

]]> Comment on Dane Cook! by kumonoarashi http://andywarhol.edublogs.org/2009/09/21/dane-cook/comment-page-1/#comment-4 kumonoarashi Mon, 21 Sep 2009 18:20:52 +0000 http://andywarhol.edublogs.org/?p=23#comment-4 You are SO lucky! -cries- I wish that I could see Dane Cook live! I love him! He's like the funniest man alive! XD You are SO lucky! -cries- I wish that I could see Dane Cook live! I love him! He’s like the funniest man alive! XD

]]>