sloter111

Peter Sloterdijk – "Spheres Theory"

At være betyder : nogen (1) som er sammen med andre (2) og med noget andet (3) i noget (4) … Et hus er et tre- dimensionelt svar på spørgsmålet om, hvordan nogen kan være sammen med nogen og noget i noget. “

En af de hotte [og mest krøllede] filosoffer pt er med sikkerhed tyskeren Peter Sloterdijk. Desværre er hans triologi: Sphären, aldrig blevet oversat til hverken dansk eller engelsk og derfor er han lidt svær at komme ind på livet af (hvis ikke det lige er for videnseksplosionen Steen Nepper Larsen – underviser på Karch – der siger Sloterdijk i hver anden sætning. Læs fx en af hans korte artikler i afd 6’s tidskrift GRID) .

Jeg faldt dog forleden over en artikel i Harvard Design Magazine fra feb. 2009, med en artikel skrevet af netop Sloterdijk: “Spheres Theory – Talking to Myself About the Poetics of Space”. Artiklen er egentlig et produkt af en forelæsning og diskussion mellem Sloterdijk og Bruno Latour på Harvard University, under titlen: “Networks and Spheres: Two Ways to Reinterpret Globalization.” Du kan se filmen ovenfor.

En cowboy-oversættelse af nogle af hans overvejelser om boligen:

– “Jeg tolker boligens konstruktion som skabelsen af en verdens-ø for en enkelt person. For at forstå dette, er du nødt til at indrømme, at ordet Verden ikke kun betyder, det store hele som Gud og andre joviale observatører har, før dem. Som udgangspunkt tager verdener sin form i flertal og har en ø-struktur. Øerne er miniaturer af verdener, der kan være beboet som verdensmodeller. Af denne grund, skal man vide, hvad der udgør den helstøbte ø – hvad der gør dem i stand til at være en verden. “

– “Du må forstå, at huse primært er maskiner til at dræbe tid … Med andre ord, mennesker bor egentligt kun i huse, fordi de forfalder til en overbevisning om at det betaler sig at vente på at en begivenhed skal ske uden for huset.”

– “Jeg hævder at boligen (sammen med sportsstadion) er det ultimative arkitektoniske ikon for det 20. århundrede. Man har idag behov for en monadelogi [jf. Leibniz] for at tænke det indvendige. En mand – en lejlighed. En monade – en verdenscelle … ”

– “Den moderne boligs konstruktion hviler på en cølibatbaseret ontologi…arkitekten bag én-person lejligheden har muliggjort en version til den historisk singulære form for menneske – i bedste fald var det ellers bebudet af de kristne hermit munke.”

– Tegneserie af netop denne forelæsning på Harvard

Flere spændende uddrag fra teksten (dog ikke oversat, haha!):

– “Humans are pets that have domesticated themselves in the incubators of early cultures. (…)
Everything successful is operational, while revolutionary phases achieve nothing as long as they do not contain real potential abilities. Which is why no one today asks what programs are being announced but rather what programs are being written. Writing is an archetype of ability: The invention of script marks the beginning of the operational subversion of the world as it exists. (…)
– “Women’s bodies are apartments! Now behind this rather shocking thesis we find a fairly dramatic perspective on natural history. Among insects, reptiles, fish, and birds—that is, among the vast majority of species—the fertilized egg, the carrier of genetic information, gets laid in an outside setting that must vaguely possess the properties of an external uterus or nest. Now something quite incredible happens in the evolutionary line that leads to mammals: The body of the female members of the species is defined as an ecological niche for her progeny. This leads to a dramatic turn inwards in evolution. What we see is a dual use of the female members of a species, as it were: Henceforth they are no longer only egg-laying systems (in a metabiological sense, femininity means the successful phase of an ovulation system), but they lay the eggs within them-selves and make their own body available as an eco-logical niche for their progeny. In this way, they become integrated mother animals. The result is a type of event that had not existed in the world before: birth. It is the proto-drama that shapes the departure from the primary total setting to arrival as an individual. Thus, birth is a biologically late type of event and has ontological consequences. (…)
– “Explication is a matter not just of the conceptual instruments that we deploy to illuminate the phenomena of life—such as dwelling, working, and loving—it is not just a cognitive process. Rather, it has to do with real elaboration. That can only be achieved using an expressive logic or a logic of production. (…)
– “What we call technology rests on the attempt to replace implicit biological and social immune systems with explicit social immune systems. You need to understand what you want to replace better than a mere user understands it. If you wish to build a prosthetic, you have to be able to define the function of the organ to be replaced more precisely than if you use the original. (…)

– “Humans are pets that have domesticated themselves in the incubators of early cultures. (…)

– “Everything successful is operational, while revolutionary phases achieve nothing as long as they do not contain real potential abilities. Which is why no one today asks what programs are being announced but rather what programs are being written. Writing is an archetype of ability: The invention of script marks the beginning of the operational subversion of the world as it exists. (…)

– “Women’s bodies are apartments! Now behind this rather shocking thesis we find a fairly dramatic perspective on natural history. Among insects, reptiles, fish, and birds—that is, among the vast majority of species—the fertilized egg, the carrier of genetic information, gets laid in an outside setting that must vaguely possess the properties of an external uterus or nest. Now something quite incredible happens in the evolutionary line that leads to mammals: The body of the female members of the species is defined as an ecological niche for her progeny. This leads to a dramatic turn inwards in evolution. What we see is a dual use of the female members of a species, as it were: Henceforth they are no longer only egg-laying systems (in a metabiological sense, femininity means the successful phase of an ovulation system), but they lay the eggs within them-selves and make their own body available as an eco-logical niche for their progeny. In this way, they become integrated mother animals. The result is a type of event that had not existed in the world before: birth. It is the proto-drama that shapes the departure from the primary total setting to arrival as an individual. Thus, birth is a biologically late type of event and has ontological consequences. (…)

– “Explication is a matter not just of the conceptual instruments that we deploy to illuminate the phenomena of life—such as dwelling, working, and loving—it is not just a cognitive process. Rather, it has to do with real elaboration. That can only be achieved using an expressive logic or a logic of production. (…)

– “What we call technology rests on the attempt to replace implicit biological and social immune systems with explicit social immune systems. You need to understand what you want to replace better than a mere user understands it. If you wish to build a prosthetic, you have to be able to define the function of the organ to be replaced more precisely than if you use the original. (…) 

Reply