will forgive which is trapped between the animal pornographic oral Marxism. The same discussion of weaving and this was installed in the first submissions of this blog: the question of what Pavez has called "concrete bodies" and "abstract bodies" or "moral." The argument is that the game either the question is, arguably, if I understand the formulation of Naranjo and pain. The act of porno-anthropologist in the late nineteen abstract and analytically dissects the colonial body to extract from there something like a truth and the act of torture-porn that specifically dissects the tortured body to extract from there something like a truth (in both cases, rather, something like a secret ) would, according to this argument, nature distintinta problems. Among them is the experience of pain. This specifies the act against the pornoantropologo pornotorturador. Or rather, it specifies the nature of the body under the regime pornic in question, so that were the same. This issue, my highly esteemed and Pavez Naranjo, is a series of problems. No need to be addressed here, but at least I would move here. Perhaps, to paraphrase Minar, the problem stems from too narrow a conception of pain. In the sense that the pain is already well thought located in the body. And the whole problem would be to the location or the location, or more generally the application pain. Ie the dimension of "productive" pain and its economy or rather the even and its geography. The body is affected by pieces of pain. No difference in the nature of both operations pornic but territorial. Would have argued the problem an "experience of pain" but that argument has nothing to do with the pain, would be in this banality quite useless to consider that between them there is a problem bodies experience. Anyway, tell me how to solve this jam-Pavez you so much and so loud passes between the concrete and abstract, it is difficult to follow you spell until they get out of this mess.
0 comments:
Post a Comment