A Field Guide to Getting the Lost Art of Unrecovery (part seven)

Filed under:A Field Guide to the Lost Art of Unrecovery — posted by Schizostroller on August 2, 2018 @ 10:32 am

The Unrecovery career path – Unrecovery low theory apophenic example #3

If unrecovery is anything it is this. Since Freud found his book in a bookshop, it has been discovered that President Schreber’s father was an incredibly abusive man, he was an inventor of child disciplinary instruments, almost suitable for a modern S&M dungeon, or worse the torture devices of the Inquisitions of the Middle Ages. These the father tested on his own child, the future Schreber and his solar anus. It is in the sense that mental health strategies are a way of living with trauma and it is here that Freud’s Beyond the Pleasure Principle and its discussion of the relation in childhood between trauma, play and repetition begins to make a lot of sense with regards the punk strategy of the UK Mad Pride collective of the 1990s where punk was used as a mad vehicle The fanzine Sniffin’ Glue’s famous statement “here’s three chords now form a band” (the editor of the fanzine, Mark Perry of Alternative TV, did indeed play a fair few Mad Pride fund raisers in order to then protest CTOs) then becomes here’s three practices now find a way to live with your mental health, repeat, repeat, repeat, and onwards to the improvised jazz method, here’s four to twenty standards, practice the hell out of them, learn to improvise riffs off of them and then signify the fuck out of your knots, anti-language as mad practice. This can’t be copyrighted as a ‘recovery tool’, this is the madness of the commons, the Lollards, Ranters and Ravers, the modern English Dissenters of psychosis. During Les Evènements in 1968 the graffiti proclaimed, “Beneath the Streets, The Beach”. And then there’s Morton Feldman crying to Alvin Curran not much later (over 20 years after Adorno declared no more poetry after Auschwitz,) “Can’t you hear them? They’re screaming! Still screaming out from under the pavements!” Which of these aphorisms today, 50 years later, holds more weight?”

Exegesis Exit

With regards Hegel I think it is worth noting that Deleuze mentions his anti-Hegelianism as a ‘silent conversation’ with Hegel , where he states especially morphogenesis, the idea that the genetic material contains potential information that then has broad diverse limits to its future form dependent on that relation with the environment versus the idea of Aristotle/ Platonic ideal forms and that ideological relation to Hegel’s concept of the world spirit. And I would suggest it is worth approaching my discussion of Hegelian/ Marxist theories and Deleuze & Guattari and the relation to the phenomenology of psychosis, that I have narrated here, with that in mind

Tyranny or phantasm?

“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience. They may be more likely to go to Heaven yet at the same time likelier to make a Hell of earth. This very kindness stings with intolerable insult. To be “cured” against one’s will and cured of states which we may not regard as disease is to be put on a level of those who have not yet reached the age of reason or those who never will; to be classed with infants, imbeciles, and domestic animals. ”

“Sometimes people hold a core belief that is very strong. When they are presented with evidence that works against that belief, the new evidence cannot be accepted. It would create a feeling that is extremely uncomfortable, called cognitive dissonance. And because it is so important to protect the core belief, they will rationalize, ignore and even deny anything that doesn’t fit in with the core belief ”

“As the child passes over from the passivity of the experience to the activity of the game, he hands on the disagreeable experience to one of his playmates and in this way revenges himself on a substitute ”

“The means to do this [effect a double-bind] are not direct injunctions but attributions. That is, the mother both in effect orders the daughter to remember, and in effect orders her not to remember… In effect, then, as soon as anything comes into her mind the mother attributes both badness and madness to the daughter in oscillation. If the daughter tries not to be bad she is defined as mad. If she tries to avoid being mad she is defined as bad. The only partial way for the daughter out of this untenable position might be for her to falsify her perceptions and her own memory to fit in with what her mother might want to perceive or to remember. ”

zero comments so far

Please won't you leave a comment, below? It'll put some text here!

Copy link for RSS feed for comments on this post

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

image: detail of installation by Bronwyn Lace