May 04, 2004
Inspecting Gargett
Who is Adrian Gargett?
What does he want from us, this Lautreamont of modern letters?
Sphaleotas, in association with robin undercurrent and mark k-punk, presents an unflinching portrait of the brooding genius at war with abstract identity.
The truth will shock you ... it certainly shocked us.
INTIMACY (VIRTUAL SEX) (http://www.ibiblio.org/nmediac/summer2003/intamacy/)
|
Gargett: Cybernetic sex and all that it entails is about as protected and controlled as the virtual war of which it is already a manifest consequence. Cybersex heralds the disappearance of the human-machine interface, a merging which throws the one-time individual into a pulsing network of switches which is neither climatic, clean, nor secure. Any belief that computer screens melt down to produce a safe environment rapidly disintegrates. "That's all there was, just the wires," Travis said. "Connecting them directly to each other. Wires, and blood, and piss, and shit. Just the way the hotel maid found them"" (Cadigan, 1991, p.275). |
Plant: Cybersex heralds the disappearance of the human-machine interface, a merging which throws the one-time individual into a pulsing network of switches which is neither climactic, clean, nor secure. Anyone who believes that computer screens melt down to produce a safe environment should read their cyberpunk one more time: “‘That’s all there was, just the wires,’ Travis said. ‘Connecting them directly to each other. Wires, and blood, and piss, and shit. Just the way the hotel maid found them’” (Cadigan 1991: 275). |
| [...]
Cybernetics exposes an organism cross-cut by inorganic life - bacterial communication, viral infection, and entire ecologies of replicating patterns which destabilize and challenge even the most perverse notions of what it is to be "having sex". Reproduction liquefies into replication and loses its control of the Pleasuredrome. |
|
| Even in the absence of complete
simulated-stimulation, technical cybersex is well advanced: the
hardware is fetishized, the software is porn, and extensive proportions
of the telecommunications system are consumed by erotica. However,
these are simply the most evident - and perhaps least interesting -
examples of a widespread degeneration of "natural" sex. As hard and
wetwares breakdown onto soft, fresh mutations are manifested across the
sexual scene. The simulation of sex coalesces with the deregulation of
the whole sexual economy, the corrosion of its relations with
reproduction, and the collapse of its specificity: sex dissolves into
drugs, trance, and dance possession; androgyny, hermaphroditism, and
transexualism become increasingly visible; paraphilia, body
engineering, queer sex, and what Foucault calls "the slow motions of
pleasure and pain" of SM - already "high-technology sex" (Califia,
1993, p.175) - multiply.
Climax distributes itself across the plane and the peak experience becomes a plateau. The future of sex never comes all at once. Now it is feeding back into a past which sex itself was supposed to reproduce. Relations were already circuits in disguise; immersion was always leading reproduction on. Sex was never uncommercialized, and pleasure was only ever one part of an equation with pain which finds its solution with intensity. |
Even in the absence of complete simstim,
technical cybersex is well advanced: the hardware is fetishized, the
software is porn, and vast proportions of the telecommunications system
are consumed by erotica. But these are simply the most overt – and
perhaps the least interesting – examples of a generalized degeneration
of “natural” sex. As hard and wetwares collapse onto soft, far stranger
mutations wrack the sexual scene. The simulation of sex converges with
the deregulation of the entire sexual economy, the corrosion of its
links with reproduction, and the collapse of its specificity: sex
disperses into drugs, trance, and dance possession; androgyny,
hermaphroditism, and transexualism become increasingly perceptible;
paraphilia, body engineering, queer sex, and what Foucault calls “the
slow motions of pleasure and pain” of SM – already “high-technology
sex” (Califia 1993: 175) – proliferate. Cybernetics reveals an organism
cross-cut by inorganic life – bacterial communication, viral infection,
and entire ecologies of replicating patterns which subvert even the
most perverse notions of what it is to be “having sex”. Reproduction
melts into replication and loses its hold on the pleasuredrome. Climax
distributes itself across the plane and the peak experience becomes a
plateau.
The future of sex never comes all at once. Now it is feeding back into a past which sex itself was supposed to reproduce. Relations were already circuits in disguise; immersion was always leading reproduction on. Sex was never uncommercialized, and pleasure was only ever one part of an equation with pain which finds its solution with intensity. — Sadie Plant, ‘Coming Across The Future’, in Virtual Futures: Cyberotics, Technology and Post-Human Pragmatism, ed. by Joan Broadhurst Dixon and Eric J. Cassidy (London and New York: Routledge, 1998), pp. 30-36 (p. 30). |
| This happens in a world whose
constancy is reliant upon its capacity... — Ibid., p. 30. |
|
| This immaculate conception of the world has always been
subject... — Ibid., p. 31. |
|
| "Stop confusing servitude with
dependence" writes Jean-Francois Lyotard... — Ibid., p. 33. |
|
| Immense tactility, contact, the
possibility of communication... — Ibid. |
|
| "Use me," writes Lyotard... — Ibid. |
|
| It is Foucault's "something
unnameable"... — Ibid. |
|
| "He wanted.everything... — Ibid., p. 34. |
|
| Foucault describes S&M as the
invention of... — Ibid. |
|
| We don't yet know what a body
can do... — Ibid. |
|
| That there are also other
ways... — Ibid. |
|
| The dominant tendencies in
philosophy... — Nick Land, The Thirst For Annihilation (London and New York: Routledge, 1992), p. 124. |
|
| Spawned by unilateral
difference... — Ibid. |
|
| Even primitive VR corrodes both objectivity and
personality... — Nick Land, ‘Cybergothic’, in Virtual Futures: Cyberotics, Technology and Post-Human Pragmatism, ed. by Joan Broadhurst Dixon and Eric J. Cassidy (London and New York: Routledge, 1998), pp. 79-87 (p. 81). |
|
| Foucault jacks into virtual
sex... — ‘Coming Across The Future’, p. 35. |
|
| Incandescence is not
enlightening... — The Thirst For Annihilation, p. 29. |
|
Essay (http://www.muse-apprentice-guild.com/spring_2003/adriangargett-essay/literary_magazine.html)
|
Gargett: It is 4: 48 in the morning. Let us say one is "intoxicated"-an impoverished cipher for all those terrible things one does to one's nervous system in the depths of the night-and writing is "impossible"-although one still thinks, even to the point of terror and psychosis. What does this mean as an episode in the real history of the spirit, to die without trace? Where has it strayed to? Imprisoned memories prowl through the dark. Fuck it. They scatter like rats in the echo. Ashes drift in the back of the skull. |
Land: It is 03.30 in the morning. Let us say one is ‘drunk’ – an
impoverished cipher for all those terrible things one does to one’s
nervous-system in the depths of the night – and philosophy is
‘impossible’ (although one still thinks, even to the point of terror
and disgust). What does it mean for this episode in the real history of
spirit to die without trace? Where has it strayed to? ‘I thought of
death, which I imagined to be similar to that walk without an object
(but the walk, in death, takes this path without reason – “forever”)’
[III 286]. |
|
Gargett: An extraordinary lucidity, frosty and crisp in the blackness, but paralyzed; lodged in some recess of the universe that clutches it like a trap. A wave of nausea is accompanied by a peculiarly insinuating headache, as if thought itself were copulating unreservedly with suffering. Panic. I blink. Everything vanishes into the shadows, hint of predatory cat's eyes. The dust settles thick. The metallic hardness of intellect seems like a cutting instrument in my hand; the detached fragment from a machine, or an abattoir, seeking out the terminal sense it was always refused. |
Land: An extraordinary lucidity, frosty and crisp in the blackness,
but paralysed; lodged in some recess of the universe that clutches it
like a snare. A wave of nausea is accompanied by a peculiarly
insinuating headache, as if thought itself were copulating unreservedly
with suffering. A damp coldness, close to fog, creeps through the open
window. I laugh, delighted at the fate that has turned me into a
reptile. The metallic hardness of intellect seems like a cutting
instrument in my hand; the detached fragment from a machine tool, or an
abattoir, seeking out the terminal sense it was always refused. |
|
Gargett: Literature is like love in that both are crushing diseases. The way literature willfully desecrates the resources of base physiology is like love, as is the way it associates itself with hunger, insomnia, anxiety and bizarre fevers, shattering lives and wrecking the most logical plans. Love institutes the essence of abjection and the gutter into the most sheltered of existences, violating interiorities, until it finally beats its abject sacrifices down onto the floor, from where they are thrown into the void of supplication without potential reaction, asphyxiating on a sulfurous combination of elation and pain. There is no significant literature that is not concurrently an absurdity and a blazing inanity. It is no accident that literature has been a eternal agonizing erotic stuttering, whose aesthetic force emanates from the belief that beauty single-handedly renders endurable the obligation for chaos, violence, and ignominy that is the source of love. |
Land: Literature is like love in that both are catastrophic
diseases. The way literature wantonly exploits the resources of base
physiology is like love, as is the way it allies itself with hunger,
sleeplessness, malaise, and strange fevers; derailing lives, and
undoing the most methodical projects. Love introduces the taste of
abjection and the gutter into the most secure of existences, breaking
open interiorities, until it finally gets its wretched sacrifices down
onto the floor, from where they are pitched into the abyss of
supplication without possible response, choking on a sulphurous mixture
of ecstasy and despair. There is no great literature that is not
simultaneously a degradation and a burning futility. It is no
coincidence that literature has been a perpetual tortured erotic
stammering, whose aesthetic momentum flows from the fact that ‘beauty
alone ... renders tolerable the need for disorder, violence, and
indignity that is the root of love.’ [III 13] |
| Every invention and coherent word... — Ibid., p. 189. |
|
| That the source of love is a thirst for danger... — Ibid. |
|
| ... Sickness is an experience I comprehend... — Ibid., p. 190. |
|
| The only truthful words?... — Ibid. |
|
| To express an image of eroticism... — Ibid. |
|
| I walk around... — Ibid. |
|
| To become corrupted to the condition of a writer... — Ibid., p. 200. |
|
| When contrasted to the dark core of writing... — Ibid., p. 201/p. 203. |
|
| Life disintegrates into ash... — Ibid., p. 204. |
|
| Reason itself, in the form of scientific enquiry... — Ibid., p. 166. |
|
| Chaotic "arithmetic"... — Ibid., p. 167. |
|
| Space itself is unfathomable and distorted... — Ibid. |
|
| Particles decay, molecules disintegrate... — Ibid., p. 205. |
|
| If there is any termination, it is zero... — Ibid. |
|
|
Here in the blank space of the internal border... — Ibid. |
|
| They want us to fear death so much... — Ibid., p. 132. |
|
| "I am not a philosopher... — Ibid., p. 80. |
|
| Life is a scream which one cannot
implore a termination... — Ibid., p. 175. |
|
| Bataille's obsession is with "the unity of
death... — Ibid., p. 191. |
|
| "My rage to love opens onto death... — Ibid. |
|
| ... Death is the authenticity of
the impossible... — Ibid., p. 199. |
|
| Death is no longer an imprecise
problem... — Ibid., p. 206. |
|
| I now perceive that my tellurian
ur-mother was savaged... — Ibid. |
|
| Humanism-Capitalist Patriarchy-is the same thing as our
imprisonment... — Ibid., p.209. |
|
Nothing Natural///Black Planet (http://www.newworlddisorder.ca/issuetwo/articles/gargett.html)
|
Gargett: However serious the nausea that can be felt in the relation to
a single corpse, especially one in a latter stages of decomposition, or
crossed with the marks of a shocking extremity of pain, torture in
particular, this is extraordinarily amplified - and not only
quantitatively - when one is challenged by piles or masses of corpses;
the stacked remnants of a vault, the human waste from an extermination
camp, piles of skulls, unknown clusters of bodies in the snow of Kosova
or Cambodian killing fields. The corpse not as a lost individual, but
as a decaying mass in the unspecified debris of death. It is only at
the edge of such macabre experiences, when bodies are ejected as
nameless masses of Herakleitean waste, that one partially views the
sordid and empty death one strives to reject. The Final Solution is a
symbol and a reality; each of its vestiges being endowed with
sophisticated libidinal forces. That there is nothing to shield us from
the lure of such things - that the mire and ash-residue in a
drainage-gutter outside Birkenau might be the remnants of our own
fleshy tissue - is a malignancy of probability which it is crucial to
accentuate if we are to connect. |
Land: However great the revulsion that can be felt in contact with a
single corpse, especially when it is in an advanced state of
decomposition, or marked with the traces of an ignoble extremity of
agony (torture in particular), this is massively augmented – and not
merely quantitatively – when one is confronted by heaps or mounds
of corpses; the stacked remnants of an ossuary, the human remnants from
an extermination camp, piles of skulls, anonymous tangles of bodies in
the Ugandan bush or at the edge of a Kampuchean paddy field. The corpse
not as a lost person, but as a disintegrating clot in the
depersonalized refuse of death. Sade’s writings are not without such
images, but nor are the mass media of twentieth-century societies. It
is only at the lip of such abysmal indignities, when bodies are vomited
as faceless masses of Herakleitean dung, that one glimpses the filthy
and senseless death one craves. |
| |
|
|
Gargett: Whatever the horror of de Sade, he does not direct us into
Auschwitz; it is perhaps more correct to propose that he indicates the
way out of it. In spite of the frantic anxiety of our efforts to give a
moral explanation for the somatic trauma provoked by vestiges of the
Nazi exterminations, our intellectual principles remain insulted by the
self-righteous inanities that result. We consider Hitler as a
believable Satan, an entity that the church was incapable of
concocting, in whom we vicariously sink our evil. In the accumulation,
our miserable division from the fatalities shatters its decayed
conceit. Our grasping for virtue blocks us from communion, and we are
disgusted and deflected from the site where their destiny intersects
with ours, as if death itself had been lessened by their suffering.
That we are an unambiguously destructible species of animal scarcely
troubles us. We manufacture a separation from the dead. To a degree
this is since we have a prevalent fear of corpses and paraphernalia of
death. All of which elements are condemned by morality to the same
scream-stifled prison as desire, wildness, and intuitive connection to
the real. Our ethical disposition would accomplish the perfect
decontamination of the 1940s pogroms, involving the complete
eradication of expansive waste-lands of the deceased, and the complex
affects they trigger. |
Land: Whatever the monstrosity of Sade, he does not point into
Auschwitz; it is more true to suggest that he points out of it. Despite
the peculiar desperation in our attempts to give a moral interpretation
to the somatic shock induced by traces of the Nazi exterminations, our
intellectual conscience remains offended by the sanctimonious inanities
that ensue. We treat Hitler as a persuasive Satan, a figure that the
church was unable to invent, in whom we vicariously live our evil (as
if we were masturbating over a magazine). In the aggregate, our squalid
separation from the victims gapes its stale complacency. Our lurch for
innocence seals us against communion, and we are repulsed from the
place where their destiny is also ours, as if death itself had been
soiled by their torments. That we are an ineliminably massacreable
species of animal scarcely marks us. We engineer an apartheid of the
dead. Partly this is due to the widespread dread of corpses, Jews,
Gypsies, and homosexuals prevalent in our societies. All of which
elements are consigned by morality to the same howl-choked dungeon as
desire, irresponsibility, and profound contact with the real. Our moral
natures would complete the sanitization of the 1940s’ pogroms,
contributing to the elimination of sprawling bodies, and the
problematic affects they provoke. |
| Bataille describes "the
catastrophe of time" because certainty cannot be recognized... — Ibid., p. 94. |
|
| Time is the suicidal jealousy of
God... — Ibid., p. 95 |
|
|
That jealous time eradicates all things... — Ibid. |
|
|
There are plain grounds to oppose such folly... — Ibid, p. 96. |
|
| This is the progress of
synchronization... — Ibid, p. 97. |
|
|
Shamanism defies the transcendence of death... — Nick Land, ‘Shamanic Nietzsche’, in Nietzsche: A Critical Reader, ed. by Peter R. Sedgwick (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1995), pp. 158-170 (p. 161). |
|
|
The inferior race... — Ibid., p. 168. |
|
| In a passage that immediately precedes... — The Thirst For Annihilation, p. 24. |
|
| The narrative sketched-out by "How the true world at last
became a fable... — Ibid, p. 25. |
|
| Where cumulative reason has introduced "truth"... — Ibid. |
|
|
Nietzsche's economy of the artistic process... — Ibid. |
|
| A Dionysian economy is the
volatility of impersonal desire... — Ibid., p. 26. |
|
|
The three primary dialogues of modernity... — Ibid., p. 149. |
|
| War is not conceptualised here in Clausewitz's sense... — Ibid., p. 150. |
|
| The word "war" takes all the vital currents... — Ibid. |
|
|
War is not an evil, but evil itself... — Ibid., p. 151. |
|
|
In opposition to the ineffective unity of Kantian
industrialism... — Ibid., p. 157. |
|
|
The will to chance is the surrender of the will... — Ibid. |
|
|
Chance is not a pre-ontological arch-accumulation of
potential... — Ibid. |
|
|
Chance is far less a fundament than an infidelity... — Ibid., p. 158. |
|
|
With Nietzsche chance disconnects from the incarceration of
probability... — Ibid. |
|
Digital Abyss (http://www.azimute.org/literature/digital_abyss.html)
|
- You got the access codes?... — Iain Hamilton Grant, ‘Burning Autopoiedipus’ (http://www.ccru.net/swarm2/2_auto.htm). |
|
Dimensionality requires a... — Cybernetic Culture Research Unit, ‘Flatlines’, Pli: Warwick Journal of Philosophy, 7 (1998), 173-191 (p. 173). |
|
Extensive ((or) ordered)... — Ibid., p. 174. |
|
Robot-history (7) seizes the "as yet" non-actualized
virtual invasion... — ‘Burning Autopoiedipus’. |
|
Why consciousness, why memory?... — Ibid. |
|
Plateau-tectonics. Pure Capitalism... — ‘Flatlines’, p. 174. |
|
The screen-plane undergoes... — Ibid. |
|
Pure Capitalism's numbers. Epistrata (Add-Ons) are
indices... — Ibid. |
|
Start at the end... — Ibid. |
|
Apparent revolution around a supplementary dimension... — Ibid. |
|
Pure Capitalism progressively actualizes the
hyperspace-idea... — Ibid. |
|
You descend to inspect it. — Ibid., p. 175. |
|
The project for the ultimate diagram/plan... — Ibid. |
|
Immersion Amnesia. — Ibid. |
|
Time-Fault. Chronos cannot include its own overcoding... — Ibid. |
|
The occasion of robotic history... — ‘Burning Autopoiedipus’. |
|
You forget when it started... — ‘Flatlines’, p. 175. |
|
(Central Data Archive... — Ibid., p. 176. |
|
The Pure Capital program (K-P) promises to reveal
everything... — Ibid. |
|
Hyper-mythos of the 3-faced God... — Ibid. |
|
If time-travel ever happens it always has... — Ibid. |
|
What AxSys can't remember it hasn't forgotten... — Ibid. |
|
As the K-P program evolves it remembers more about itself... — Ibid. |
| (Gargett continues to make use of ‘Flatlines’ throughout ‘Digital Abyss’ [cf. footnotes 1, 4, 5, 6, 10, 12, 14, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 24, 25, 26, 27 and 28].) |
|
With the machinic voodoo... — ‘Burning Autopoiedipus’. |
|
Life is not captured from the future... — Ibid. |
|
You twitch on the table... — David Cole, ‘Post-Cybernetic Judicial War’ (http://www.ccru.net/swarm2/2_postcyber.htm). |
|
Auto-Oedipus emerges onto the teleoplane... — ‘Burning Autopoiedipus’ |
|
Fictiowar-machines... — Ibid. |
Deprogramming the Body (http://www.ctheory.net/text_file.asp?pick=347)
|
Nietzsche in the second essay of The Genealogy of Morals
speaks of... — Alphonso Lingis, ‘The Society of Dismembered Body Parts’, Pli: Warwick Journal of Philosophy, 4 (1992), 1-19 (p. 9). |
|
The schizophrenic apocalypse Gilles Deleuze and Felix
Guattari envision... — Ibid., p. 17. |
|
Deleuze and Guattari in Anti-Oedipus offer a new mapping... — Ibid., p. 2. |
|
The infant contented... — Ibid., p. 3. |
|
The Deleuze-Guattarian analysis distinguishes... — Ibid., p. 4. |
|
The broad strokes of Nietzsche’s philosophy are well known... — The Thirst For Annihilation, p. 144. |
|
It is the devaluation of the highest values... — Ibid., p. 145. |
|
Having polarized the high and low in extension... — Ibid. |
|
As a creature of zero... — Ibid. |
|
The zero is the transmission element... — Ibid. |
|
Against the sterile consolidation of Kantian industrialism... — Ibid., p. 157. |
|
The will to chance is the sacrifice of the will... — Ibid. |
|
Chance is not a pre-ontological arche-reserve... — Ibid. |
|
Being derives only a vanishing speck... — Ibid., p. 158. |
|
That being is a chance means that... — Ibid. |
|
It is not that Nietzsche pronounces upon chance... — Ibid. |
|
The labyrinth is not an intervention into being... — Ibid., p. 161. |
|
The labyrinth is a complexity... — Ibid. |
|
Chaotic "geometries"... — Ibid., p. 167. |
|
Space itself is deep and twisted... — Ibid. |
|
What is crucial to the labyrinth... — Ibid., p. 172. |
|
Death is the reality of the impossible... — Ibid., p. 199. |
|
You’re losing perception... — Nick Land, ‘No Future’ (http://www.k-punk.net/k-punk.net/no%20future.html). |
|
Modernity marks itself out as hot culture... — Nick Land, ‘Meltdown’ (http://www.ccru.net/swarm1/1_melt.htm). |
|
Fuck Tomorrow scrawled across the wall... — ‘No Future’. |
|
Cut...poor quality late 50’s recording... — Ibid. |
|
Humanism - Capitalist Patriarchy... — The Thirst For Annihilation, p. 209. |
|
Complexity is not difficulty, but mess... — ‘No Future’. |
|
Supraterrestrial - "solar"/"general" - economics... — Ibid. |
|
Torching through the frozen security codes... — Ibid. |
|
Savage societies are transformed or incorporated... — ‘The Society of Dismembered Body Parts’, p. 11. |
|
Wandering high in the Andes... — Ibid., p. 13. |
|
Drink - a potion - coca tea and whisky... — Ibid. |
|
The variably scaled instant of innovation... — ‘No Future’. |
|
Theo-political false memory syndrome... — Ibid. |
|
Engagement and conflict... — ‘Meltdown’. |
|
Western orgasmic defusion... — ‘No Future’. |
|
Power - an eternal chameleon... — Ibid. |
|
Accelerating industrial simulation... — Ibid. |
|
Beyond the Judgement of God... — ‘Meltdown’. |
|
Monetarization indexes... — ‘No Future’. |
|
Anonymous excess... — Ibid. |
|
Body-count running... — Ibid. |
|
De-socialization waves... — Ibid. |
|
Cyber-spiders crawl... — Ibid. |
|
Zero or time in-itself... — Ibid. |
|
Now... bodily travelling-in-place... — Ibid. |
|
The fermented... — Ibid. |
|
The Bataille reconstruct... — Ibid. |
|
Particles decay... — The Thirst For Annihilation, p. 205. |
|
If there is a conclusion it is zero... — Ibid. |
|
Although the adventure of inexistence... — Ibid., p. 206. |
|
The toxic effect of eroticism is crisp... — Ibid. |
|
Such abysses of disease... — Ibid., p. 208. |
You can find further discussion of Gargett’s textual strategies here and here.
Posted by sphaleotas at May 4, 2004 06:42 PMTop quality scholarship, sphal....
Posted by: mark k-punk at May 5, 2004 04:40 PMso the guy plagarized?...big deal...what's accomplished by ratting the guy out is what im wondering?...so, they revoke his phd---who cares either way?
maybe it's the anarcho-class warrior in me, but i cant help but thinking there is a certain wisdom in minding your own business sometimes...or as they say in the projects; nobody likes a rat
i mean, if this is your job, or you have a stake in this, my comments are out of line and i apologize...but, if you just happned to notice that they guy plagarized some fairly well-known texts (in certain circles, anyway), what is accomplished by ratting him out
i hope im not out of line here...i cld be totally off on this, i admit...but, personally, id have better things to do/worry about...know what i mean?
Posted by: Rob at May 8, 2004 07:34 PM>i hope im not out of line here...i cld be >totally off on this, i admit...but, personally, >id have better things to do/worry about...
Like learning how to spell perhaps?
I never knew that being an anarcho-class warrior meant 'keep your head down, keep your mouth shut'.
Posted by: Savoy at May 8, 2004 10:57 PMah, so you focus on a minor spelling error and pick on that...seems ive hit a nerve...well, if you want to be rancorous, that is your call...i'm just questioning the intent behind this post is all...it was suggested at one point in the post that maybe he should be reported to the college that granted him his doctorate...why?...the entire notion of originality and what not is a load of crap, anyway...so, he didnt bother to cover his tracks...the plagiarisms seem so blatant and obvious that i think it was totally intentional, actually...so, let's say somebody reading this decides to report him, they bring him under review, and then revoke his doctorate...are you going to feel good about yourself if a few years from now you see the guy sweating it out behind a deep frier or something?...or would just destroying the young man's personal reputation suffice?...do you see my point, or do you just want to focus on another petty spelling error or something similarly trivial??
and, being an anarcho-class warrior can mean a lot of things, none of which include reporting somebody to the authorities for breaking some trivial rules of academia
anyway, it's good to see you putting your scholarly skills to such good use...the only shocking thing about this post is its complete silliness...printing a picture of the guy only makes me think this is about a personal vendetta or a hoax...or are things really THAT competitive in academia these days?
Posted by: Rob at May 8, 2004 11:19 PMHe hasn't got a PhD you twat! The whole point is he's a sad fantasist, rather like people who call themselves anarcho-class warriors.
Posted by: Savoy at May 8, 2004 11:30 PMLadies, ladies.
> what is accomplished by ratting him out
If Gargett were actually doing this out of conviction, he’d either have renounced copyright or released the essays under the Open Publication License, Free Documentation License or something similar (if only as a political gesture).
Instead, as with ‘Trash Palace’, ‘Sekret Suicide’ and ‘Digital Abyss’, he chose to arrogate exclusive rights.
Besides, in generally avoiding copying verbatim (he must have his reasons), Gargett’s crude paraphrase has a habit of mangling his sources’ arguments.
> breaking some trivial rules of academia
Isn’t it more a case of Gargett deliberately making career capital out of the work of other cultural producers?
> He hasn't got a PhD you twat!
He does, scarily enough.
oh my...nasty names...must say ive been called worse than a twat, though :)
do you know for certain he is a fantasist?...seen some refernces to schizophrenia over on undercurrent...or is he having a blast at everybody's expense? i still see hoax all over this, not fantasy...i think he knows what he is doing..certainly knows who to rip-off
and by the way, i skimmed the part about him having his credentials reviewed...thought he was a phd and that somebody was seriously suggesting he be reviewed...my mistake and i apologize...im trying to ascertain what is going on by skimming too many sites simultaneously
this is actually interesting stuff...i hope he scams his way to a doctorate somewhere :)
Posted by: Rob at May 8, 2004 11:52 PMto be honest, im only here because a friend emailed me about the post because he thought that perhaps Shlomo or Michael from Get Underground may want to know what is going on...but, i dont think this guy is making career capital out of the work of other cultural producers, at least not in this case...why not?...GU doesnt pay anything...tis all free and voluntary...it is a free online bi-weekly that encourages stories from everybody, whether you are a doctor of cultural studies or a waitress...and they dont pay diddlysquat...if anything, he may have seen it as a publishing forum, but there are plenty enough of those online, anyway
so, this guy is actually a phd?...laffs!...to be honest, when i read earlier i was at work while sleep-deprived, but at least i know my skimming skills havent deteriorated too badly...well, then i still think ratting him out to the authorities would be something i personally wldnt be comfortable with...if youre concerned about it, maybe send him an email letting him know in pvt. that you know what he is up to...that may stop it and force him to be more academically rigorous, for whatever that is worth
so, this guy managed to get himself a doctorate?...well, good on him!...now the story actually is a little more shocking and controversial...but, getting published on GU, an online forum whose editor is too busy and overwhelmed with something resembling a life, isnt all that newsworthy...now, if he managed to pull the wool over the eyes of the folks over at C-Theory........hmmmmmmmmmm
Posted by: Rob at May 9, 2004 05:51 AMi dont think this guy is making career capital out of the work of other cultural producers...
why not?... GU doesnt pay anything
Payment’s not the issue. Rather, Gargett’s citing these works to bolster his reputation as an arts journalist clued-up to ‘Continental Philosophy’. Have a look, for instance, at the biographical notes attached to Nothing Natural, Reading War with Nietzsche and Reading Nietzsche with Kant, Rimbaud, and Bataille, ‘Going Down’: The Art of Tracey Emin, Sekret Suicide, and articles published in The Film Journal, The Bright Lights Film Journal and Talking Pictures.
Posted by: sphaleotas at May 9, 2004 03:20 PMfor sure, i hear ya on that...the only problem is that i dont see it as being particularly heinous...appropriating immaterial capital/cultural product of others is something the dadaists and surrealists were doing 60-70 years ago..as for it being career capital, well...we may have to more clearly define capital here...he's scammed his way into a career as an arts journalist, no doubt...capital may be more open to argument...basically he has scammed his way into a JOB...and, the people who REALLY appropriate capital (material and immaterial) have us ALL jumping through hoops to make our way in this world...ill reserve my rancour and scorn for them...but, when we turn on each other for such "crimes" (thumbing the old nose at intellectual property rights, basically) as this Adrian chap has committed, i cant help but wonder if we arent making their jobs a little easier?...see what im saying here a bit?...sure, he may be need to be brought down a peg because he has made himself out to be a high falutin' arts and cultural commentator by openly plagiarizing the works of others...if he were to lose his job over this--or find himself behind a deep frier and have to struggle to feed himself and his own because of it--that would be something i personally would feel badly about if i "broke the story"...i just feel it is more important to save my vitriol for the REAL appropriators of capital...my radical cultural analysis/critique doesnt blind me to who my real enemies are...and i doubt Adrian is one..he's harmless...all im saying in a nutshell is that if he were to lose his job over something like this, i dont feel the punishment would fit the crime
Posted by: Rob at May 9, 2004 10:27 PM>or find
>himself behind a deep frier and have to struggle
>to feed himself and his own because of it
-snif!- Oh, the pathos! Don't worry yourself with all this guilt-by-proxy; personally, I don't have any sympathy whatever for the idiot, and simply think that the inherent comedy value is the primary reason for bringing it into the 'public' domain. None of us has any stake in defending intellectual policing systems we all know to be bankrupt (as any fule know any industrious dope can get a phd so long as they pay the fees and meet the wordcount).
Anyhow, this apocalyptic vision of blogdom as a universal trade-union tribunal that can get people sacked and consign them to destitution is attractive but perhaps a little unrealistic...?
Face facts, he couldn't have been asking for inevitable embarassing exposure more directly and brazenly than he was, for all the reasons already cited (witless MO, sheer number of 'products', choice of online medium) - to treat it satirically is to do the man a kindness....
I don't see why I should shed any tears over Gargett working behind a deep fat frier --- no more than for any thief who falls on hard times as a result of his actions, really.
As Michael says, if AG wanted to 'attack intellectual property rights' fine, but at least 2 things militate against this:
(1) putting the texts out in his own name (with the breathtaking gall of claiming copyright for them) and
(2) Chopping them up and interpolating his own bizzare substitutions every 15 words or so, rendering them senseless....
It's especically galling when his primary source is no longer in the academy....
Attacking 'intellectual property rights' is all very fine and dandy, but how would Rob feel if someone took his day's work and claimed credit for it? I don't see what's egalitarian or anarchistic about that....
Posted by: mark k-punk at May 9, 2004 11:59 PMI don't think we've really got any right to get angry about it on "the real" author's behalf, especially when, apparently wanting no stake in this particular game anymore, and being a generous sort, he probably isn't that bothered. But Mark's right, regardless of any supposed hegemonic injustice in the system, pragmatically speaking you don't do that stuff without realising there could be consequences later(unless you're stupid).
If I was to really make an effort to be sympathetic, then I could say that it seems from his other writings (on film, etc.) that he actually can think, and write, well enough - which makes this stuff all the more mystifying except as sheer cynicism and laziness. (Of course, one should reserve judgment in case they turn out to be paste-ups of someone else's work too.)
I'll have fries with that please Ade.
Posted by: undercurrent at May 10, 2004 12:23 AMmark, if somebody wanted to claim credit for my day's work, that wld be fine by me...just give me the money...that's the only reason i work, anyway...in this situation, i dont think (though i cant say for certain) that he is actually stealing anything besides the words of others...im pretty sure Sadie Plant (as an example) has already been paid for the words she wrote and Adrian copied
and im not saying you should feel anymore sorry for Adrain than you do any other thief who has fallen on hard times as a result of their actions...im just saying that I DO...that's just the way i feel and see the world...petty thieves fall on hard times, go to prison; real thieves drive Beamers and build those prisons
but yeah, i can see where my idea that he was attacking intellectual property rights explicitly is bunk...claiming copyright for the words he appropriated from others puts the drop on that idea...thanks for pointing it out Undercurrent...didnt notice that...and i hope you are right that the blog doesnt function as labour board tribunal or whatever you wrote up there and that all this cat gets is ridicule
Posted by: Rob at May 10, 2004 12:40 AMRob, think Michael's right that money isn't the issue here; most academic writing is not paid, it's undertaken solely for garnering reputation. It really is about credit where it's due...Thing is those of us who spend most of our time writing for nothing can at least expect to have work attributed to us, right?
OK, I take yr point about petty thieves versus mega-thieves; fair play... But putting Ade alongside ppl from less than affluent backgrounds etc is a little presumptuous; what do any of us know about his social background? I'm betting it's not especially deprived, somehow....
Think the LEAST Ade can expect is some online ridicule. Which seems to me a fair and appropriate response to his uh misappropriation.
Michael, are you SURE he has a PhD? What is the evidence for this?
Posted by: mark k-punk at May 10, 2004 12:59 AM>Michael, are you SURE he has a PhD? What is the
>evidence for this?
I first came across his stuff after asking a Warwick lecturer (...who shall remain anonymous cos I don't want to implicate him/her in all this...) a question about previous PhD topics.
He definitely was there, and, it was implied, finished the PhD.
Posted by: undercurrent at May 10, 2004 02:21 AMAccording to the Warwick online catalogue, *somebody* called Adrian Gargett finished a PhD called _Sextant in Dogtown_ in 1997. It could be him I suppose ;)
Hey Rob, the reason people frown upon plagiarism isn't so much because of the money issue; it's more like having someone come round your house and smearing shit all over the walls.
Posted by: johneffay at May 10, 2004 08:29 AMIn that case, it sounds like there is an abstract for Gargett's phd here: http://www.theses.com/idx/048/it048007635.htm (see link at http://www.davidlynch.de/BB1diss.html). But you need a theses password to get access to this regargettation
Posted by: rb at May 10, 2004 06:15 PMRegargettation - genius!
Posted by: mark k-p at May 11, 2004 08:52 AMwhere does he claim copyright? of course the e-zines do claim it for their writers, but adrain?
Posted by: bob at May 25, 2004 02:50 AMno copyright claims for:
INTIMACY (VIRTUAL SEX)
the muse apprentice guild
nor for
Nothing Natural///Black Planet
nor
swarm2
4. David Cole-Post-Cybernetic Judicial War
or
Deprogramming the Body
or the rest - vengeful old schoomates or what?
Consult an ophthalmologist.
Gargett expressly claims copyright on ‘Digital Abyss’ (‘Copyright © 2002 Adrian Gargett. All rights reserved’), ‘Sekret Suicide’ (‘© 2004 Adrian Gargett’), ‘Trash Palace’ (‘Copyright © 2003 All Rights Reserved’) and ‘Vampire’ (‘Copyright © Adrian Gargett 2002.’)
This is of course irrelevant to the fact Gargett’s content to fool readers of his arts journalism – cf. The Film Journal, The Bright Lights Film Journal and Talking Pictures – into believing ‘Rimbaud: Poetic Annihilation’, ‘Vampire’, ‘Digital Abyss’, ‘Reading War with Nietzsche...’ or ‘Trash Palace’ are somehow original works.
That he claims credit for non-existent books is something else we could look into.
vengeful old schoomates or what?
Never met him, ‘bob’...
Posted by: sphaleotas at May 25, 2004 12:53 PMIn any case, simply claiming authorship is already to implicitly claim copyright.
I can't believe people think there's no issue here. You don't have to be a 'vengeful ex-schoolmate' - as Michael said, none of us have ever met the guy - nor have some spiteful or resentful agenda to be appalled at this kind of practice. It's simply unacceptable, even if pathetically hilarious.
Posted by: mark k-p at June 6, 2004 07:19 PM