A Century of Atmospheric Warfare: 1915-2015

Fri Apr 24 02:04:32 CDT 2015

Thanks as always!  Gotta get that gnosticism anthology (albeit in English).

On Fri, Apr 24, 2015 at 2:01 AM, Kai Frederik Lorentzen
<lorentzen at hotmail.de> wrote:
>
> There are three important books by Sloterdijk which haven't been translated
> into English yet:
>
> * Eurotaoismus. Zur Kritik der politischen Kinetik, 1989.
> * Weltfremdheit, 1993.
> * Nicht gerettet. Versuche nach Heidegger, 2001.
>
> And then he edited, together with Thomas Macho, an excellent reader on
> Gnostic thinking in antiquity and the modern world. It contains religion,
> philosophy, and the arts. This wonderful book is called "Weltrevolution der
> Seele" (World Revolution of the Soul).
>
> http://petersloterdijk.net/werk/weltrevolution-der-seele/
>
>
> On 24.04.2015 05:25, Dave Monroe wrote:
>>
>> Sorry, didn't mean to cause any hassle here (never have, but ...).  I
>> haven't yet been able to afford (money, time) Bubbles et al., but do
>> have/did read this, @ least (also, Critique of Cynical Reason, way
>> back when it was 1st translated here, + that [uncharacteristically]
>> slim Nietzsche book [still circling around the Derrida one]).  Still
>> trying to get to (which I've name dropped here, @ least; do have copy,
>> @ least)http://www.polity.co.uk/book.asp?ref=9780745647685  ...
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 10:28 AM, Kai Frederik Lorentzen
>> <lorentzen at hotmail.de>  wrote:
>>>
>>> No, I meant your German.
>>> And the middle name I gave you refers to the small quantity of your
>>> Sloterdijk reading.
>>> So what's this about?
>>>
>>> Certainly not about the content of Sloterdijk's thinking in which you
>>> never
>>> showed any interest.
>>>
>>> There are parts of his work - the idea of replacing taxes by charity on a
>>> larger scale, or his Nietzschean glimpses at the biotechnological
>>> breeding
>>> of humans ("Regeln für den Menschenpark") - which make me frown, but
>>> Sloterdijk's overall project - to add something like Being and Space to
>>> Heidegger's Being and Time (and thereby to reconcile Heidegger's thinking
>>> with modern urbanity) - is important and exiting. Reading Sloterdijk
>>> makes
>>> you smarter. And it's fun!
>>>
>>> To question Sloterdijk's competence for language makes no sense to me.
>>> You
>>> don't have to enjoy each and every neologism he creates, but the enormous
>>> creativity of the language is one of the reasons that Sloterdijk is also
>>> read among architects and artists. And - in contrary to someone like
>>> Habermas - he is heavily debated in France. In  the year 2005, Sloterdijk
>>> got honored with the Sigmund Freud Prize for Scientific Prose. It's the
>>> most
>>> important prize for scientific prose in the language we call Deutsch.
>>>
>>>
>>> http://www.deutscheakademie.de/de/auszeichnungen/sigmund-freud-preis/peter-sloterdijk/urkundentext
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>
>>> On 23.04.2015 15:33, jochen stremmel wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Sorry. "Sloterdijk's German is ten times better than Stremmel's." Make
>>>> that: ... Stremmel's English.
>>>
>>> The English of Sloterdijk's translators is better than Sloterdijk's
>>> German:
>>> "as few words as possible": simple and elegant; "einem Minimum an
>>> Ausdrücken": would you write that, Kai? I don't think so. A-and for the
>>> record, that middle name Kai gives me, is no quote of mine. <
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 23.04.2015 12:18, jochen "I read two or three sentences by Sloterdijk
>>> in
>>> 1983"  stremmel wrote:
>>>
>>> "If asked to say in a single sentence and as few words as possible what,
>>> apart from its incommensurable achievements in the arts, the 20th century
>>> introduced into the history of civilization by way of singular and
>>> incomparable features, the response would emerge with three criteria."
>>>
>>> That single sentence is representative for most if not all of
>>> Sloterdijk's
>>> writing. He simply can't do it. But that he does well.
>>>
>>>
>>> Huh? The quoted sentence is to introduce the one immediately to follow:
>>> "Anybody wanting to grasp the originality of the era has to consider: the
>>> practice of terrorism, the concept of product design, and environmental
>>> thinking." I don't know what your problem is. Except for the resentment
>>> ...
>>>
>>> In original: "Sollte man mit einem Satz und einem Minimum an Ausdrücken
>>> sagen, was das 20. Jahrhundert, neben seinen inkommensurablen Leistungen
>>> in
>>> den Künsten, an unverwechselbar eigentümlichen Merkmalen in die
>>> Geschichte
>>> der Zivilisation eingebracht hat, so könnte die Antwort wohl mit drei
>>> Kriterien auskommen. Wer die Originalität dieser Epoche verstehen will,
>>> muss
>>> in Betracht ziehen: die Praxis des Terrorismus, das Konzept des
>>> Produktdesigns und den Umweltgedanken."
>>>
>>> Sloterdijk's German is ten times better than Stremmel's.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 2015-04-23 11:27 GMT+02:00 Dave Monroe<against.the.dave at gmail.com>:
>>>>
>>>> Terror from the Air
>>>> By Peter Sloterdijk
>>>> Translated by  Amy Patton and Steve Corcoran
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> According to Peter Sloterdijk, the twentieth century started on a
>>>> specific day and place: April 22, 1915, at Ypres in Northern France.
>>>> That day, the German army used a chlorine gas meant to exterminate
>>>> indiscriminately. Until then, war, as described by Clausewitz and
>>>> practiced by Napoleon, involved attacking the adversary's vital
>>>> function first. Using poison gas signaled the passage from classical
>>>> war to terrorism. This terror from the air inaugurated an era in which
>>>> the main idea was no longer to target the enemy's body, but their
>>>> environment. From then on, what would be attacked in wartime as well
>>>> as in peacetime would be the very conditions necessary for life.
>>>>
>>>> This kind of terrorism became the matrix of modern and postmodern war,
>>>> from World War I's toxic gas to the Nazi Zyklon B used in Auschwitz,
>>>> from the bombing of Dresden to the attack on the World Trade Center.
>>>> Sloterdijk goes on to describe the offensive of modern aesthetics,
>>>> aesthetic terrorism from Surrealism to Malevich—an "atmo-terrorism" in
>>>> the arts that parallels the assault on environment that had originated
>>>> in warfare.
>>>>
>>>> http://mitpress.mit.edu/books/terror-air
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 2:27 AM, Kai Frederik Lorentzen
>>>> <lorentzen at hotmail.de>  wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://aphelis.net/century-atmospheric-warfare-1915-2015/
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>>>> http://waste.org/mail/?list=pynchon-l&month=0210&msg=71071&sort=date
>>>>> http://waste.org/mail/?list=pynchon-l&month=0210&msg=71069&sort=date
>>>>>
>>>>> -
>>>>> Pynchon-l /http://www.waste.org/mail/?list=pynchon-l
>>>>
>>>> -
>>>> Pynchon-l /http://www.waste.org/mail/?listpynchon-l
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
> -
> Pynchon-l / http://www.waste.org/mail/?listpynchon-l
-
Pynchon-l / http://www.waste.org/mail/?list=pynchon-l