_____ Lazaarato is continuing , the work of Guattari and taking it further applying to the condition ofthe prsesent moment...

' What is the Pass ...'

  And at Corrry Shore's blog   this wonderful phrase  Negated Partial Past
 ___________________________________ which suggests to me many things one
                                                                                them body without organs, the escaping past
                                                                  , the past which was not, the fictional past of might have,
                                                 the possibility could have, of what did not happen but was imagined as not happened, and then, Lo! it did not! ill add  more variations, at another blog,
                      Poof! the imaginary scene of sense, the
                         quick sand of sense and time,

And here,

                 a poet throws time in the air,
                                                                       blogs are the future time of the Regated Partial Future~.

   Interesting work being done (see below on the notion  of the Pass which connects over to Guattari's idea of the password which was he predicted to become prevalent everywhere in daily life.

  But more of that another time: Ah, but what is your password Sir? Madame votre mot de passe s.v.plait

                    Bear in mind that Felix Guattari was
                                     a protege of Lacan,

                                    who resisted the father
                                  figure the figure of the Father
                           in the name of the Father

,                        having said,let us enter our password and see what these latter day Lacanians have to say  in this excerpt below:

  Nota Bene   I need to write an interlineated commentary on these texts herein quoted, cited, .
What is the ‘Pass’?
The Pass is a mechanism by which someone can give a testimony of what has happened in  their psychoanalysis when they feel it has reached its end.
       (As in Pass out when you realize the b.s. has been perpetrated? that no actual therapy
           has taken place, that you are the same as you were before, with perhaps the purely fantastical notion you are different from others, what b.s.)

     (End since when does an analysis  of this school Lacanian Freudian end? More Lacanian fantasy) 

It was also a way for someone to transition from the role of psychoanalysand to psychoanalyst and be recognised as such by the School.  (How unorginal! how paltry! to go from ANd to Yst! hahahahah this is cheap,a ny dadaist ritual was more forthcoming and poetic)
But when we hear the term ‘Pass’ we shouldn’t think of the opposition pass/fail, but instead of a relay. As in, ‘to pass something across’, or ‘to allow the passage of something’ from one place or person to another.   (More grandiose grand standing Unreal! I am going to pass out! where is my tape recorder?)
As Roudinesco notes, a passeur, in French, is a ferryman, someone who guides another across difficult terrain (Jacques Lacan, p.338). As a device for training and authorising psychoanalysts at the end point of their analyses, we might also think of the phrase ‘rites of passage’ as carrying a similar meaning. One makes a Pass rather than achieves a Pass.
The Pass works like this:
  • When someone feels their analysis is coming to an end, they get in touch with two other people at roughly the same point in their own analyses.
  • These people are the ‘Passers’. The candidate for the Pass tells them the story of their psychoanalysis, their testimony. They say why they think it is over, and why they want to become a psychoanalyst.
  • The Passers then relay this to a jury of the School’s analysts, who in turn decide whether what they have heard is enough to grant the position of AE, or Analyst of the School, to the candidate.
The core idea here is that of the double-relay, the process of entrusting your testimony to outsiders, and entrusting them in turn to represent it to a committee on your behalf.
This, Lacan thought, would bring out what is most essential in someone’s psychoanalysis and avoid the caprice, favouritism, and prejudices that characterised an institutionalised psychoanalytic training. Lacan said he was attempting to prise apart a hierarchy from what he called the ‘gradus’: a simple classification of analysts from non-analysts, or analysts from analysands.
Lacan’s rationale for this was rooted in two things he believes happened at the end of a psychoanalysis:

  1. Subjective destitution – in the simplest sense, this is the feeling of being alien to yourself, of your very thoughts and desires being foreign. It is the effect of bringing forth unconscious material. “Subjective destitution is written on the entry ticket”, Lacan says about a psychoanalysis. So, what does it matter that someone else, the ‘Passers’, bear witness to your story instead of you?

  1. Traversal of the fantasy – not just any old fantasy but the fantasy of becoming a psychoanalyst. Rather than identifying with your psychoanalyst as a ‘subject-supposed-to-know’, Lacan argued that the end of an analysis entails a falling apart of this position. Part of the job of the ‘passers’ as semi-anonymous figures with no stake in the analysis, and no authority to make you a psychoanalyst, is to help identify what’s leftover.
ILl be adding more commentaries on this later. Most of it reads like pretentious inner circle jargon easily said in other words.
The Pass – the Controversies
When Lacan’s students of the time looked back on the introduction of the Pass in the years that followed their opinions were very much mixed.
“The institution of the pass caused more conflict and violence than anything except Lacan’s invention of the short session”, wrote Stuart Schneiderman, one of the few Americans to travel to Paris in the 1970s to train with Lacan (Schneiderman, Jacques Lacan: Death of an Intellectual Hero, p.66).
excepted from Amuse-Bouche II  

                           Rich room here for word play thinking of Satre's idea of    Depasse and depassment,

                                             and to note, that Guattari was familiar with in Satre's work
                 referring to it in detail in his essays and in Antioedipus and Mille Plateaux

                                         an example comes to mind that  of the group in fusion
                                                      contrasted to the group trapped in the practico-inert

G'/s work picks up on terms and notions set by S in the dialectical materialist tradition he invented against the dogmatic Marxist one then dominant , the dominant dogma of class interpretation originating in the post Stalinist dialectics and the various Marxist groups following those lines
 of thought and literally imposing them on organization, people and the daily life of the left,


Guattari knew all about that __ he had been a member of the Cp when a youth,

          and so his own line of flight through the practico inert of Sartre

                                           to develop his own notions of desire machine
                                                                                                                    which he combined
with Deleuze,

                               along with the later idea of 'agencement' translated as arrangement and more popularly as assemblage   ,

                                                              all these Lacanian notions could be compared tit for tat with the contrasting and equally exciting ones of schizoanalysis, transversality, planes of consistency, etc.


 ONce upon a time over the planes of transversality and the regated future,
        I coined the expression Experimental Existential Agnostic,
                        & Simultaneous futures, instantaneous pasts and futures,


   As always more to return,
                                           to come back to learning, and finding

                                 and do end with a comma,





Throwback... in,


__ Guattari repudiated Lacan yet some of his followers  think he was a poet, but he was no more that. no.   He smoked cigars!
I prefer cigarettes. and roses, an velvet. and eyes, yours i saw, as the comfort of softness
there is a tale . finding between the spaces  of country, ocean, book, continent. How
indigent we are to live our lives!
what smoke of harps.
sending thoughts of protection   ~
 Plateau12/3/12_________________________ _____________________________________________________________________

One of the beautiful things about Guattari is his diction machine, his invention which surpases often from one sentence, even to the next

it's production creation!

it  takes one's breath away reading ............... this is one of the things which enamoured Deleuze of  him,



So Saith Alain Badiou: Désintéressons-nous, une fois pour toutes, des élections!


Désintéressons-nous, une fois pour toutes, des élections!

Dans un texte confié à Mediapart, le philosophe Alain Badiou invite à se désintéresser des élections, terrain de prédilection des adversaires de l'émancipation. « Hystériser, de façon à la fois dépressive et déclamatoire, des résultats électoraux, est non seulement inutile, mais nuisible », écrit-il, en appelant à « un véritable labeur politique » contre la servitude actuelle.

  • Je comprends l'amertume des protestataires, notamment les déçus du Mélenchonisme, à l'issue du premier tour des élections. Ceci dit, ils ont beau faire et beau dire : il n'y a dans ce vote aucune escroquerie, aucune aberration particulière. 
    Il n'y a eu, en fait, que deux anomalies partidaires, qui ont malheureusement (pour les pouvoirs réels) décomposé le bloc parlementaire central. Ce bloc est composé de la droite et de la gauche classiques. Il soutient depuis quarante ans, voire deux siècles, le déploiement du capitalisme local. Or, le sortant local de la prétendue gauche, Hollande, ne se représentait pas, ce qui a décomposé son parti. D’autre part, la droite classique, à cause des funestes primaires, n’a pas choisi son meilleur vieux cheval : Juppé, mais un bourgeois de province à la triste figure, trop éloigné des délices « sociétaux » du capital moderne.
    Le deuxième tour "normal" aurait dû être Hollande/Juppé, ou au pire Le Pen/Juppé, avec dans les deux cas, une élection facile de Juppé. En l’absence des deux partis de gouvernement décomposés, nos vrais maîtres depuis deux siècles, à savoir les propriétaires et gestionnaires des capitaux, étaient quelque peu à la peine. Heureusement (pour eux), avec leur personnel politique habituel, les vieux briscards de la réaction ; avec aussi, bien entendu, l’aide de résidus sociaux-démocrates (Valls, Le Drian, Ségolène Royal et consorts), ils ont bricolé un substitut présentable du bloc parlementaire central en déshérence. Ce fut Macron. Ils ont aussi, chose très utile, et de grande portée à venir, rallié Bayrou, le vieux sage centriste expérimenté, l’homme de toutes les guerres électorales, y compris les plus difficiles. Tout cela fut fait avec brio, en un temps record. Le succès final est pratiquement assuré.
    Dans ces conditions, tout à fait explicables, le vote entérine, de façon plus claire que d’habitude, que la subjectivité pro-capitaliste et droitière, y compris sous ses formes quelque peu fascistoïdes, est absolument majoritaire dans ce pays.
    Une partie des intellectuels et une partie de la jeunesse refusent de le voir, ou le regrettent amèrement. Mais quoi ? Veulent-ils, ces amateurs d'élections démocratiques, qu'on leur change le peuple des votants, comme on fait d'une chemise sale ? Qui vote doit consentir au vœu de la majorité, tout de même ! En vérité, ces deux groupes mesurent le monde à l'aune de leur propre situation et de leurs propres rêves, sans en tirer la conclusion qui s'impose : il n'y a absolument rien à attendre du vote "démocratique".
    Déjà Napoléon III, en 1850, avait vu que le suffrage universel était, non pas l'horreur que la bourgeoisie bien-pensante imaginait qu'il était, mais une véritable bénédiction, une légitimation inattendue et précieuse des pouvoirs réactionnaires. C'est encore vrai aujourd'hui, partout dans le monde. Napoléon le petit avait découvert que dans des conditions historiques à peu près normales, à peu près stables, la majorité numérique est toujours fondamentalement conservatrice.
    Concluons calmement. Hystériser les résultats d’une élection ne mène à rien qu’à une dépression vaine. Habituons-nous à ceci : il n'y aura jamais de mise à mort de notre servitude actuelle sans, au plus loin des rituels électoraux, la liaison historique de quatre facteurs :
    1 : une situation historique instable, qui bouscule fortement les subjectivités conservatrices. Très probablement, hélas, une guerre, comme pour la Commune de Paris en 1871, la révolution russe en 1917 et la révolution chinoise entre 1937 et 1947.
    2 : une division idéologique fortement établie, naturellement d'abord chez les intellectuels, mais finalement dans les larges masses elles-mêmes, sur le fait qu'il y a deux voies et non une seule, que tout l'espace de la pensée politique doit se structurer autour de la contradiction antagonique capitalisme/communisme, ou de tel ou tel de ses équivalents. Je rappelle au passage les principes de la deuxième voie : Etablissement, contre la propriété privée, de formes collectives de la gestion des moyens de production, du crédit et des échanges ; polymorphie du travail, notamment mise à mal de l'opposition manuel/intellectuel ; internationalisme conséquent ; formes de gestion populaire travaillant à la fin de l'Etat séparé
    3 : une levée populaire, certainement comme toujours minoritaire, mais qui met au moins en suspens le pouvoir d'Etat, levée souvent liée au point 1.
    4 : une organisation solide apte à proposer une synthèse active des trois premiers points en direction d'un effondrement des ennemis et de la mise en place aussi rapide que possible des éléments constitutifs de la deuxième voie, la communiste, ceux que j’ai rappelés ci-dessus.
    Deux de ces 4 points, le 1 et le 3, dépendent de la conjoncture. Mais nous pouvons dès maintenant travailler activement au point 2, tout à fait crucial. Et nous pouvons également travailler au point 4, notamment en soutenant, à la lumière partagée du point 2, des réunions et actions communes entre une fraction des intellectuels d'une part, et d'autre part le prolétariat sous trois de ses formes : les ouvriers et petits employés actifs, les familles ouvrières frappées et démoralisées par la désindustrialisation frénétique de la France depuis 30 ans, le prolétariat nomade, de provenance africaine, moyen-orientale ou asiatique.
    Hystériser, de façon à la fois dépressive et déclamatoire, des résultats électoraux, est non seulement inutile, mais nuisible. C'est se situer sans aucun recours sur le terrain des adversaires. Nous devons devenir indifférents aux élections, qui relèvent tout au plus du choix purement tactique entre : s'abstenir de jouer dans cette fiction « démocratique », ou soutenir tel ou tel compétiteur pour des raisons de conjoncture par nous précisément définies, dans le cadre, par ailleurs étranger aux rituels du pouvoir d’Etat, de la politique communiste.  Nous devons consacrer notre temps, toujours précieux, au véritable labeur politique qui ne peut s'inscrire que dans les quatre points ci-dessus.
    Alain Badiou
    Le Club est l'espace de libre expression des abonnés de Mediapart. Ses contenus n'engagent pas la rédaction.


    reading this biography

    reading this biography of guattari & del turns out former was very preoccupied by Ulysses
    and on table in his room "Sur le table de chevet: Les Chiens d'éros de....Lawrence et
    Ulysses de Joyce, en anglais. ... "(F.Dosse 585)

    truly he was also turns out much preoccupied with Finnegans Wake. what I find fascinating is the absence of interest either on his and his friend Deleuze, in the poetry of Tzara. But that is not surprising... one cannot read everything. and love all writing. For me, life would not be the same without the work of Tristan Tzara, esp. L'Homme Approximatif and L' antitete

    truly its a spooky place that Ireland ~
    Indeed it is M courier




     Is poetry a machine  http? https?

      proverbial electronic chains of singingfiers  ...

      you have to keep  asking these questions,
                           the research, such as it is,  always   ,  lies at the edge,

                        the screen book, the   living moving thing of the blog's not identical to the

      and what's a  book?

    don't the questions get addressed in Rhizme chapter/plateau one of AtP? and is the book then the signigfier  of its own demise?


                       spelling mistakes included

    _____________________    end page text
                                        imagine http
                                                         picture url


    inventing a truly permanent web a web permanently true inventing


    inventing a truly permanent web a web true inventing invented web 

    build a true try try a web true permanent web a  web that's that true try true and tried a true web 

    invented permanent permanent web invented true trying a web a try  a true trying true web invented




    bowing down to power_ molar machine ... mashing

    __________the really bad poem that is politics 

    particularly the american variety ___________________________

    'Bernie endorses Hillary. '

    'How disgusting is that?

    Not surprising. Predictable in fact. But disgusting nonetheless.

    Not proud to admit that, over the past couple of months, I have preyed on naive liberal friends who actually believed that Bernie was going to act independently, take it to the convention, wreak havoc on the corrupt Democratic Party.

    I bet that he wouldn’t, that he was not an Independent, he was Democrat as they come, that he would endorse Hillary before the convention.

    Again, not proud.

    Bernie is cut from the same cloth as Dennis Kucinich — wedded to the corrupt party.

     Bowing down to power. Kucinich got a ride with Obama on Air Force One. Bernie got a hug from Hillary.

    That’s what they do.

    Build a “movement.”
    Then burn it down.
    During the battle over Obamacare on the Hill, I asked Sanders why he was supporting Obamacare when he stood for single payer.

    I pointed out what he already knew — that they are two different systems — Obamacare controlled by

    the health insurance companies and written by their lobbyists — single payer a public system that cuts

    the health insurance companies out of the game.

    Sanders snarled at me, told me not to lecture him and walked away in a huff.

    Into the arms of the corrupt Democratic Party.

    Russell Mokhiber will be reporting from the GOP Convention in Cleveland at DumpsterFireElection2016.

    Russell Mokhiber edits the Corporate Crime Reporter.

    More articles by:

    'Srebrenica Genocide Kingpin Becomes Literary Villain '


    "Beara, who was the chief of security of Bosnian Serb Army’s main staff during wartime, was “the central villain of the Srebrenica genocide” because he approached the planning and execution of the killings as a “serious and responsible job”, Djikic said.

    “The genocide largely rested on Beara’s organisational skills and the power of his authority, and therefore he was not a mere executor, but co-creator and chief operational organiser of the genocide,” he explained.

    “It was him who… conceived and took key actions in the organisation and execution of the genocide, and that means that he sought out those who would kill, determined the location used for the killing; coordinated the mobilisation of hundreds of buses and trucks for the transport of prisoners to camps and execution sites, and found the machinery and people to dig mass graves,” he added. -

    Djikic, 39, worked as a journalist from 1997 onwards for Croatian anti-establishment weekly Feral Tribune and until recently was the editor-in-chief at the weekly newspaper Novosti, where he currently works as a journalist again.

    His interest in Srebrenica began over a decade ago; since then he has read over 100,000 court documents on the case.

    By talking to people who had personal or business contacts with Beara, Djikic’s book tries to explore the colonel’s life before the wars started in 1991.


    'Belgrade Activists Light Candles for Srebrenica Victims'

    Human rights activists gathered in front of the Serbian parliament to light candles and place tributes to the Bosniak victims of the Srebrenica genocide to mark its 21st anniversary.

    Marija Ristic

    Photo: BETA

    Carrying banners with slogans like “We will never forget the genocide in Srebrenica” and

    “To young to remember, determined not to forget”, around 100 Belgraders joined the commemoration of the 21st anniversary of the 1995 massacres organised by the Youth Initiative for Human Rights NGO on Monday evening.

    They placed sheets of paper with printed numbers on the pavement to symbolise 8,327 Bosniak men and boys from Srebrenica who were killed by Bosnian Serb forces.
    Anita Mitic, the director of Youth Initiative for Human Rights, said that they decided to stage the commemoration in front of parliament because the legislature continues to ignore

    requests to adopt a resolution calling the Srebrenica massacres genocide.
    “We wanted to mark the 21st anniversary of the genocide in Srebrenica as we were prevented from doing it last year and our event was banned. We are however marking it

    now, at a specific moment when we have various political parties in parliament which directly supported or took part in the war or openly deny the genocide,” Mitic said.
    The Serbian government does not accept that the Srebrenica massacres constituted

    genocide, despite the rulings of international and Bosnian courts, and has never organised any event commemorating the victims.
    Last year on the 20th anniversary, all Srebrenica commemoration events were banned in Belgrade, with police citing “security reasons” after right-wingers threatened counter-


    In March 2010, the Serbian parliament adopted a resolution condemning the massacres, but failed to call them genocide. In the past, parliament has also issued statements of condolence to the victims in Bosnia and Herzegovina.
    Two minority factions in parliament, one composed of the Liberal Democratic Party and the Party of Democratic Action of Sandzak, the other made up of the League of Social Democrats of Vojvodina and The Green Party, submitted a proposal last month for the urgent adoption of a resolution on the genocide, but they failed to gather enough support from MPs for it to pass.

    This year’s commemoration in Srebrenica was marked by a bitter row between Serbian and Bosnian officials, after the organising committee refused to invite anyone who denied that the massacres were genocide.

    Marko Djuric, the head of the Serbian government’s office for Kosovo, responded angrily that Belgrade’s “hand of reconcilation” had been rejected, and accused Bosniaks of staging a “chauvinist rampage”.

    As a result, no officials from Serbia or Bosnia’s Serb-dominated entity Republika Srpska attended the memorial event in Srebrenica on Monday, although the leader of the opposition Liberal Democratic Party, Cedomir Jovanovic, did take part.

    “That is why it is more important now than ever before to have this commemoration in Belgrade in this atmosphere,” said Mitic.

    “Today in Serbia we don’t speak about the victims nor about the responsibility for the genocide, which lies in Belgrade. And 20 years after, we have made virtually no progress,” she added.

    Last year in Srebrenica, the 20th anniversary commemorations were marred when Serbian Prime Minister Aleksandar Vucic was pelted with bottles and stones by angry mourners.
    Serbian courts prosecute Srebrenica killings as war crimes, not genocide, citing “insufficient evidence and legal issues” as the reason.

    In Serbia’s first Srebrenica-related case, Bosnian Serb ex-soldier Brano Gojkovic was jailed for ten years in February this year after making a plea bargain with the prosecution, admitting he took part in executing 800 Bosniaks from Srebrenica in 1995.

    Another Srebrenica case is still ongoing before a Serbian court, in which the offence is also condemned as a war crime.