tick-tick Work

What it is that makes people ‘tick’, what makes people work, as in function, what drives a person to do what a person does? A rhetorical question with a cog and gear time metaphor. I follow lots of others who are drawn to wondering about the ‘tick’ that produces, invents or creates. Freud and his drives. Norbert Wiener for his invention of cybernetics as a functioning system, and too also for his [tick]  anxiety toward its affects. What is the ‘tick’, the jump, the leap or the force that drives creativity? How to harness that force? Towards these questions I have explored the forces and affects of disquiet, in the individual(s) toward the collective(s), toward the making of the world, and worlds, and in turn I have exposed (made exterior) a personal sense of anxiety and disquiet toward that making, a making that is eternally strange and (es)stranging even whilst it is familiar. (One of the offshoots of this approach is the beginning of a discussion (ongoing, without conclusion) about the civic role of courtesy, manners, and face in the electronic polis, world(s) of technicity.) 

 

tick tick tick

tock 

 

tick \ approval

tick \ pest

tick \ work

tock \ rythym

Shomei Tomatsu,  11:02 Nagasaki  (detail), 1961.    The photograph from which the series takes its name is a watch that was dug up 0.7km from the epicenter of the explosion and which stopped at 11:02 a.m on the 9th of August 1945. Tokyo Metropolitain Museum of Photography.

Shomei Tomatsu, 11:02 Nagasaki (detail), 1961.

The photograph from which the series takes its name is a watch that was dug up 0.7km from the epicenter of the explosion and which stopped at 11:02 a.m on the 9th of August 1945. Tokyo Metropolitain Museum of Photography.

Face diplomacy

The face is the prow, that which leads into to world

Face and threat. Between the white wall of the sign and the black hole of subjectification is face; the wall could be black and the hole could be white. What matters is the constitution of the assemblage called ‘face’.  

Deleuze and Guattari in their feast of a treatise, A Thousand Plateaus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia, have dedicated an entire section to the face.

Diplomacy and the face of things. It's so important not to lose face. Take for example Tony Ab's bullying manner, school boyish playground tactics of one used to getting what he wants, the leader of a pack. His threats by media to the Indonesian president are wince-inducing; in the face of a country so much larger, an immediate neighbour with a long and complex history he dares to say we gave you money after hundreds of thousands died in a catastrophe, so do what we want, and, if you don't look out. Lowest of the low, he uses his public office in a way that imagines the electorate are sheep who will now gather behind him in despising Indonesia as an uncivilised country that doesn't know how to say thank you. It's always conservative christian morality with TA. How ethical is it to offer aid to rebuild a devastated country in return for submission in perpetuity? That's Disaster capitalism. Politics is so murky, I feel dirty even writing this, the logic of politicians is always self-serving. 

faced with losing FACE

an ejection loop, drawn from a diagram by Rene Thoms in Virtual Catastrophes: Morphology and Metamorphosis; found image (though to compare Tony Abbott's face-to-the-world to that of an aggressive child is as unfair to children as his behaviour is to the role of Prime Minister.