Academic literature on the topic 'Deleuze, Postscript on the Societies of Control'
Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles
Consult the lists of relevant articles, books, theses, conference reports, and other scholarly sources on the topic 'Deleuze, Postscript on the Societies of Control.'
Next to every source in the list of references, there is an 'Add to bibliography' button. Press on it, and we will generate automatically the bibliographic reference to the chosen work in the citation style you need: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.
You can also download the full text of the academic publication as pdf and read online its abstract whenever available in the metadata.
Journal articles on the topic "Deleuze, Postscript on the Societies of Control"
1
Galloway, Alexander R. "Computers and the Superfold." Deleuze Studies 6, no. 4 (November 2012): 513–28. http://dx.doi.org/10.3366/dls.2012.0080.
Full textAbstract:
Could it be that Deleuze's most lasting legacy will lie in his ‘Postscript on Control Societies’, a mere 2,300-word essay from 1990? While he discussed computers and new media infrequently, Deleuze admittedly made contributions to the contemporary discourse on computing, cybernetics and networks, particularly in his late work. From the concepts of the rhizome and the virtual, to his occasional interjections on the digital versus the analogue, there is a case to be made that the late Deleuze has not only influenced today's discourse on new media but also proposes an original set of arguments about society and politics at the turn of the new millennium. Focusing on the ‘Postscript on Control Societies’ and a handful of texts that surround it, we will reconstruct an image of what it means to live in the information age. This will have consequences for how we define the digital and the analogue, what the computer means, and ultimately provide some insight into one of the more elusive terms in all of Deleuze, the superfold.
2
Bolt, Mikkel. "KONTROLSAMFUND OG KANONBÅDSDIPLOMATI - ET FORSØG PÅ AT ADRESSERE SPØRGSMÅLET OM KOMBINATIONEN AF DECENTRALE NETVÆRK OG SUVERÆNITET EFTER 9/11 MED UDGANGSPUNKT I DELEUZES “POSTSCRIPTUM OM KONTROLSAMFUNDET”." K&K - Kultur og Klasse 38, no. 110 (December 29, 2010): 115–28. http://dx.doi.org/10.7146/kok.v38i110.15777.
Full textAbstract:
CONTROL SOCIETY AND GUN BOAT DIPLOMACYAn attempt to address the question of the relationship between decentred networks and sovereignty after 9/11 starting from Deleuze’s “Postscript on the Societies of Control”.In 1990 Gilles Deleuze published his short text “Postscript on the Societies of Control” in which he presented an almost intuitive analysis of contemporary capitalist society explaining how we were going from the separate spheres of disciplinary society to a flexible network-based society where the traditional discourses and institutions were being broken down in favour of a continual control where the individual was always in school, in prison or at work. Deleuze’s brief text was highly influential but since 9/11 and the declaration of the so-called ‘war on terror’ it has seemed necessary to supplement the analysis of the complex functioning of the control society with analysis that either stress the return of sovereignty (like Giorgio Agamben) or map the workings of capitalist economy (like David Harvey). This paper looks at this development and discusses the relationship between networks and sovereignty today.
3
O’Sullivan, Simon. "Deleuze Against Control: Fictioning to Myth-Science." Theory, Culture & Society 33, no. 7-8 (July 9, 2016): 205–20. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0263276416645154.
Full textAbstract:
Through recourse to Gilles Deleuze’s short polemical essay ‘Postscript on Control Societies’ and the accompanying interview (in Negotiations) on ‘Control and Becoming’, this article attempts to map out the conceptual contours of an artistic war machine (Deleuze’s ‘new weapons’) that might be pitched against control and also play a role in the more ethico-political function of the constitution of a people (or, what Deleuze calls subjectification). Along the way a series of other Deleuzian concepts are introduced and outlined – with an eye to their pertinence for art practice and, indeed, for any more general ‘thought’ against control. At stake here is the development of a concept of fictioning – the production of alternative narratives and image-worlds – and also the idea of art practice as a form of myth-science, exemplified by Burroughs’ cut-up method. It is argued that these aesthetic strategies might offer alternative models for a subjectivity that is increasingly standardized and hemmed in by neoliberalism.
4
Brusseau, James. "Deleuze’s Postscript on the Societies of Control Updated for Big Data and Predictive Analytics." Theoria 67, no. 164 (September 1, 2020): 1–25. http://dx.doi.org/10.3167/th.2020.6716401.
Full textAbstract:
In 1990, Gilles Deleuze published Postscript on the Societies of Control, an introduction to the potentially suffocating reality of the nascent control society. This thirty-year update details how Deleuze’s conception has developed from a broad speculative vision into specific economic mechanisms clustering around personal information, big data, predictive analytics, and marketing. The central claim is that today’s advancing control society coerces without prohibitions, and through incentives that are not grim but enjoyable, even euphoric because they compel individuals to obey their own personal information. The article concludes by delineating two strategies for living that are as unexplored as control society itself because they are revealed and then enabled by the particular method of oppression that is control.
5
Roberts, Phillip. "Control and Cinema: Intolerable Poverty and the Films of Béla Tarr." Deleuze Studies 11, no. 1 (February 2017): 68–94. http://dx.doi.org/10.3366/dls.2017.0252.
Full textAbstract:
In Cinema 2 Deleuze conceptualises the time-image as a cinema of infinite variation, opening the stable forms of the movement-image to an unformed and virtual outside. Five years later he would develop a similar analysis in the short ‘Postscript on the Societies of Control’, arguing that a new system of organisation was expanding the disciplinary formations that had reached their peak in the first part of the twentieth century. In both works Deleuze explores a world in the process of systemic deterritorialisation that has profound implications for the way that society is organised and in which the world is thought. This essay argues that the ungrounding discussed in both of these later works should be understood as part of a similar shift in the ordering of the world, where a new regime of thought has emerged. The relationship between these two concepts in Deleuze's thought has important implications with respect to our understanding of his work on cinema. I argue that this connection reveals the political dimensions of Deleuze's focus on the intolerable in the cinema books. An impoverished life, through lack of access to capital, protection and education, offers less access to life-chances and potential social transformations. I focus on cinematic depictions of poverty and powerlessness in two films by Béla Tarr to account for the significance of poverty in Deleuze's overlapping thought on cinematic creation and media control.
6
Braatvedt, Katherine. "The Dividual Interior." idea journal 17, no. 01 (October 21, 2020): 13–28. http://dx.doi.org/10.37113/ij.v17i01.379.
Full textAbstract:
In his much-discussed short essay, ‘Postscript on the Societies of Control,’ Gilles Deleuze described a fundamental shift in power that occurred in the 20th century. Previously, Michel Foucault had argued that human behaviour was controlled by ‘enclosed systems’ of power: the family, the school, the factory, the barracks, the prison and the hospital. These comprised what Foucault considered a ‘disciplinary society.’ Deleuze argued that Foucault’s ‘enclosures’ are in crisis, and that the current system is instead a control society, effectively governed by a single entity, the corporation. In this society of ‘ultra-rapid forms of free-floating control,’ people are reduced to data points. For Deleuze, individuals are ‘dividuals,’ and masses are data. This visual essay investigates the implications of control society on domestic space, exploring how digital applications and appliances, social media, and surveillance combine to form a dividual interior. Virtual space not only records and stores, but folds back into physical space, as images of domestic life online influence our perception of the built environment. The domestic interior, therefore, translates back and forth between the virtual and the real, each gathering information and informing the other.
7
Thompson, Greg, and Ian Cook. "Spinning in the NAPLAN Ether: ‘Postscript on the Control Societies’ and the Seduction of Education in Australia." Deleuze Studies 6, no. 4 (November 2012): 564–84. http://dx.doi.org/10.3366/dls.2012.0083.
Full textAbstract:
This paper applies concepts Deleuze developed in his ‘Postscript on the Societies of Control’, especially those relating to modulatory power, dividuation and control, to aspects of Australian schooling to explore how this transition is manifesting itself. Two modulatory machines of assessment, NAPLAN and My Schools, are examined as a means to better understand how the disciplinary institution is changing as a result of modulation. This transition from discipline to modulation is visible in the declining importance of the disciplinary teacher–student relationship as a measure of the success of the educative process. The transition occurs through seduction because that which purports to measure classroom quality is in fact a serpent of modulation that produces simulacra of the disciplinary classroom. The effect is to sever what happens in the disciplinary space from its representations in a luminiferous ether that overlays the classroom.
8
Jeong, Boram. "The Production of Indebted Subjects: Capitalism and Melancholia." Deleuze Studies 10, no. 3 (August 2016): 336–51. http://dx.doi.org/10.3366/dls.2016.0230.
Full textAbstract:
In the essay ‘Postscript on the Societies of Control’, Deleuze discusses the differences between nineteenth-century capitalism and contemporary capitalism, characterising the former as the spaces of enclosure and the latter as the open circuits of the bank. In contemporary capitalism, ‘[m]an is no longer man enclosed, but man in debt’ ( Deleuze 1992 : 6). Deleuze claims that under financial capitalism, where the primary use of money is self-generation, economic relations are thought in terms of an asymmetrical power relationship between debtor and creditor, rather than an exchange between commodities. Taking up Deleuze's claim, this paper analyses how time functions in the formation of subjectivity under financial capitalism, by focusing on the temporal structure of debt. The indebted are expected to bind themselves to the past, not only in the moment they make a promise to pay back, but from that moment onwards; in this process, a subject finds himself passively subjected to the temporality determined by the condition of indebtedness, and yet he also actively reproduces and imposes the fact of indebtedness on himself by the feeling of guilt. Guilt, arising from the irreversibility of what has been done and resulting in the inability to proceed into the future, is central both to the indebted and the melancholic. Thus a melancholic subject emerges: a subject conditioned by the dominance of the past and the impossibility of the future.
9
Muir, Lorna. "‘Control Space?: Cinematic Representations of Surveillance Space between Discipline and Control’." Surveillance & Society 9, no. 3 (March 27, 2012): 263–79. http://dx.doi.org/10.24908/ss.v9i3.4273.
Full textAbstract:
Recent developments in surveillance practices and their related technologies suggest that the heretofore dominant Foucauldian paradigm of discipline, with its sites of confinement in which space is “segmented, immobile [and] frozen”, may no longer be an adequate theoretical framework in which to discuss space within surveillance studies (Foucault, 1995: 195). In his essay Postscript on Control Societies, Gilles Deleuze claims that these sites are in the midst of widespread breakdown, leading to a fundamental shift in the notion of space, characterised by the term ‘modulation’ (Deleuze, 1990: 178-179). In the control model, urban surveillance can be said to be characterised by an emphasis on the use of digital surveillance practices, leading to a view of urban space and the city, as well as its inhabitants, which largely resides within a computer mainframe. This raises the question: if the surveillance carried out within this conception of urban space can be described as concentrated, hidden, passive, functional, mobile, and varied, how can these changes be communicated cinematically since there is an obvious problem of representation; when much of the surveillance technology is computer and digital in form, how does cinema make visible the potentially invisible? In considering the question of how film engages with urban space between the paradigms of discipline and control, two cinematic views of the (informational) city will be discussed by considering three scenes from Erasing David (2009) and Minority Report (2002) in order to identify some of the cinematic strategies used in communicating contemporary surveillance practices increasingly characterised as invisible and immaterial.
10
Kaziliūnaitė, Aušra. "Foucault Panopticism and Self-Surveillance: from Individuals to Dividuals." Problemos 97 (April 21, 2020): 36–47. http://dx.doi.org/10.15388/problemos.97.3.
Full textAbstract:
The paper analyses the concept of panopticism formulated in Foucault’s works and its possibilities of relevance in contemporary power and (self)surveillance studies. In the book “Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison”, Foucault, applying Jeremy Bentham’s idea of a panoptical prison, writes about the power of the sovereignty that is replaced by the society of discipline. Foucault discusses panopticism in order to unfold the concept of the society of discipline. Here the essential measure of the society of discipline and panopticism becomes the concern for the individual per se. Deleuze in his text “Postscript on the Societies of Control” states that we no longer live in a society of discipline, but rather in a process, where we switch from the society of discipline to the society of control. In these changed circumstances, according to Deleuze, there are no longer individuals, rather dividuals. In these circumstances, is it possible to talk about panopticism? The paper shows that panopticism is still relevant while switching to the society of control. Also, it states that the currently unfolding scheme of the society of control has been programmed in the asymmetry of the panoptical gaze. Precisely in the processes produced in the asymmetry of the gaze gain its flexible totality in the society of control.
Dissertations / Theses on the topic "Deleuze, Postscript on the Societies of Control"
1
Read, Jason. "Postscript as Preface: Theorizing Control After Deleuze." Universität Leipzig, 2020. https://ul.qucosa.de/id/qucosa%3A72863.
Full textAbstract:
Gilles Deleuze’s “Postscript on Control Societies” functions as an index of epochal change. It opens with an invocation of the past, situating Foucault’s theory of disciplinary power in the nineteenth century, and has been read as theorization of the present, of the shifts in power in the late twentieth century. What, however, of its legacy? Or its future? It seems that now, close to thirty years after its publication, it is possible to ask two series of questions of this notion of control. First, where are we with control now?
2
Schleusener, Simon. "Deleuze and Neoliberalism." Universität Leipzig, 2020. https://ul.qucosa.de/id/qucosa%3A72860.
Full textAbstract:
The following essay takes the topic of this special issue as an opportunity to not just investigate Deleuze’s “Postscript on Control Societies,” but to look more generally at the text’s place within his work as a whole. Indeed, as various authors have observed, there are a number of aspects that clearly distinguish the essay from the bulk of Deleuze’s other writings. First, what the Postscript aims at is a very direct and immediate “diagnosis of the present” (Foucault 1999: 91). Despite its brevity, the essay therefore entails a wide-ranging account of the (social, economic, cultural, and technological) ‘system’ which was about to take hold when Deleuze wrote the essay (1990) – and which still seems pervasive today. Second, the Postscript represents one of the few instances where Deleuze addresses new media, the digital, cyberspace, and computers: technologies, that is, which in the last few decades have thoroughly transformed the world we live in (cf. Galloway 2012). Third, while Deleuze is usually considered to be a thinker of affirmative creation and a joyous politics of difference and becoming, the Postscript may be the text that most evidently lends itself to discovering not only a more contemporary, but also a somewhat ‘darker’ Deleuze (cf. Culp 2016). For although it underlines the necessity of “finding new weapons” and developing “new forms of resistance” – pointing out that the question is not “whether the old or new system is harsher or more bearable” (Deleuze 1995: 178) – one can argue that the Postscript’s general perspective and tone is in fact more bleak and pessimistic than most of Deleuze’s other writings.
3
Noys, Benjamin. "Zones of Trauma: On Deleuze and Control." Universität Leipzig, 2020. https://ul.qucosa.de/id/qucosa%3A72854.
Full textAbstract:
In his discussion of the transition from the cinema of the movement-image to the cinema of the time-image, Deleuze famously makes way for the traumatic intrusion of history. This transition, he writes, is not purely internal to cinema, but the result of the emergence of
'‘any spaces whatever’, deserted but inhabited, disused warehouses, waste ground, cities in the course of demolition or reconstruction. And in these any-spaceswhatever a new race of characters was stirring, kind of mutant: they saw rather than acted, they were seers. (1989: xi) '
These spaces are the result of the destruction caused by the Second World War, creating new forms of anonymous or empty space: bombed cities, abandoned villages, the chaos of what Thomas Pynchon, in Gravity’s Rainbow, called “the zone” (1975: 281-616).1 It is these spaces, especially in Italian neo-realism, which will break up the movement-image and release “a little time in a pure state” (Deleuze 1989: xi). Due to the stark emptiness of these spaces and their anonymity, characters or images will no longer be embedded in movement but instead become detached into time.
4
Raunig, Gerald. "Cipher and Dividuality." Universität Leipzig, 2020. https://ul.qucosa.de/id/qucosa%3A71582.
Full textAbstract:
The “Postscript on Control Societies” is considered one of the most accessible texts by Gilles Deleuze, contemporary, yet untimely, ahead of its time, perhaps even ahead of our time. In just a few pages, Deleuze here touches on the specifics of discipline and control and subjects them to three perspectives: history, logic, program. On closer reading, however, one comes across some stumbling blocks, where thinking falters. The paragraph in which the word ‘dividual’ appears for the first time in the text is such an instance. Of course, the individuals of control become dividuals, and the masses become banks. But what does ‘code’ mean here, and what is the difference between the ‘precept’ of disciplinary society and the ‘password’ of control society? As is so often the case, the key lies in questions of context and translation.
5
Bignall, Simone. "Colonial Control." Universität Leipzig, 2020. https://ul.qucosa.de/id/qucosa%3A72858.
Full textAbstract:
Just prior to his untimely death in 1961 in a hospital in the United States of America, Franz Fanon taught a series of lectures at the University of Tunis. His lecture notes include a section titled “Le contrôl et la surveillance”, in which he makes “social diagnoses, on the embodied effects and outcomes of surveillance practices on different categories of laborers when attempts are made by way of workforce supervision to reduce their labor to an automation: factory assembly line workers subjected to time-management by punch clocks and time sheets, the eavesdropping done by telephone switchboard supervisors as they secretly listened in on calls”, and other forms of management by surveillance (Browne 2015: 5-6). Here, Fanon produces an original account of control as an alienating and dehumanizing force of social production. Importantly for Fanon, technologies of control also generate and reinforce subjective experiences of racialization as an aspect of dehumanization in capitalist modernity. Yet, despite Fanon’s close intellectual friendship with Sartre and his involvement with Parisian philosophical circles during the postwar period, the emerging generation of French poststructuralist thinkers who became Sartre’s heirs do not seem to have regarded Fanon’s work on control as influential upon their groundbreaking theorizations of contemporary power and social production. As Simone Browne notes (2015: 165), Foucault does not reference Fanon in his early lectures on discipline and affective embodiment in “Madness and Civilization”, delivered during his own residency from 1966-68 at the University of Tunis; nor does he cite Fanon’s work in his later lecture series on biopolitics and security delivered at the Collège de France from 1977 to 1979. Similarly, although Fanon’s critical approach to psychoanalysis is mentioned in passing by Deleuze and Guattari in Anti-Oedipus (1983), Fanon is not cited by Deleuze (1988) as a precursor to his subsequent thinking about Foucault’s account of “disciplinary society” as a paradigm of modernity. Deleuze’s “Postscript on the Societies of Control”, which Gregory Flaxman (2019) argues should be read as an afterword to Deleuze’s earlier book on Foucault, again fails to consider Fanon a relevant source of knowledge regarding the nature of those power formations Deleuze believes are characteristic of a more contemporary shift towards “societies of control” (Deleuze 1992).
6
Linseisen, Elisa. "The “Post” in Postscript: Post-Productive Thinking, Re-Formatted Images." Universität Leipzig, 2020. https://ul.qucosa.de/id/qucosa%3A71587.
Full textAbstract:
In this article, I seek to discuss the principles of modulation and variation in Deleuze’s canonical essay “Postscript on the Societies of Control” (Deleuze 1992). Analyzing and testing what Deleuze recognizes as “inseparable variations, forming a system of variable geometry” and as a “self-deforming cast that will continuously change from one moment to the other […], like a sieve whose mesh will transmute from point to point” (1992: 4), I will focus on the digital image
7
Rölli, Marc. "Power Regimes of Control: Remarks on their Neoliberal Context." Universität Leipzig, 2020. https://ul.qucosa.de/id/qucosa%3A72861.
Full textAbstract:
In speaking of the society of control, new qualities of current social conditions are usually addressed in a diffuse rather than precise manner. Quite often, e.g. within surveillance studies, it is associated with technologies modelled after the fiction of god-like omnipotence of visual surveillance (cf. Gehring 2017). The relevance of a power of cybernetics – according to Wiener, the science of systemic control – which resonates in the concept of control, refers to normally invisible operations of technical systems that permanently evaluate data streams according to discursively determined parameters and in connection with commercial interests (cf. Wiener 1948).
8
Vogl, Joseph. "The Financial Regime." Univesität Leipzig, 2020. https://ul.qucosa.de/id/qucosa%3A72859.
Full textAbstract:
In his “Postscript on Control Societies,” Deleuze notably refers to a “mutation of capitalism” as one of the key characteristics of the post-disciplinary regime he terms control society. “The operation of markets,” he writes, “is now the instrument of social control and forms the impudent breed of our masters” (1992: 6). In the following essay, I will focus on a section of the economy in which this mutation is especially visible: the realm of finance, which in recent years has assumed an increasingly political and governmental function.
9
Buchanan, Ian, and David Savat. "Affect and Noise in the Society of Control." Universität Leipzig, 2020. https://ul.qucosa.de/id/qucosa%3A71593.
Full textAbstract:
In his short paper “Postscript on Control Societies” (Deleuze 1995: 177-82), Gilles Deleuze offered one of the most searing diagnoses of contemporary society critical theory has produced. Three decades later, this essay remains remarkable for its prescience, especially when one considers that the World Wide Web was not in existence at the time that Deleuze wrote his essay, let alone smart phones and social media. Now that we’re beginning to understand the impact of global corporations such as Facebook and Alphabet (Google’s parent company), it could be argued that the essay speaks to today’s technological reality even more incisively than it did thirty years ago. Deleuze identified some of the key principles and logics at work.
10
Allers, Lea, and Franziska Martinsen. "‘Becoming-Resistance’ and ‘The New Spirit of Capitalism’." Universität Leipzig, 2020. https://ul.qucosa.de/id/qucosa%3A72856.
Full textAbstract:
In his “Postscript on the Societies of Control”, which was written 30 years ago in 2020, Gilles Deleuze leaves us with the diagnosis that a profound transformation of society and capitalism has taken place: having left behind the disciplinary societies, which Foucault analysed (cf. Foucault 1975), after World War II, we are now living in societies of control that are inseparably connected to a new form of capitalism (cf. Deleuze 1992: 3-4, 6). This transformation of society has led to a “generalized crisis in relation to all the environments of enclosure” (Deleuze 1992: 3-4) which were being reshaped through various reforms, resulting in “the installation of the new forces” (1992: 4), that is, the “progressive and dispersed installation of a new system of domination” (1992: 7). Apparently, Deleuze’s clairvoyant idea of the society of control seems to have come true: we no longer need to imagine science fiction, since contemporary reality is already structured by digitised control mechanisms of multiple sorts and characters. Many of our social, economic, and political actions in both public and private everyday life are at least influenced or even caused by algorithms. Several of these algorithms may make our lives more convenient, especially in terms of the possibilities of the Internet, such as deterritorialised connection, access to information, and shared technological knowledge. However, in the “age of algorithm” (Sunstein 2017: 3), most areas of digitised reality based on ‘big data’, like social media, financial markets, smart technologies, or artificial intelligence systems are characterised by anonymity, non-transparency, and undemocratic structures which appear like asymmetrical mechanisms for controlling individuals. The function of algorithms enables all kinds of political and private organisations, like companies and governments, to evaluate patterns of individual behaviour and actions and to handle them as impersonal, general, and – in the Deleuzean idiom – dividualised facets of reality (cf. Baranzoni 2016: 45-46): a reality that is rather to be calculated in capitalistic terms than to be created and to be designed by human beings themselves (e.g. as political actors).
Book chapters on the topic "Deleuze, Postscript on the Societies of Control"
1
Deleuze, Gilles. "Postscript on the Societies of Control*." In Surveillance, Crime and Social Control, 35–39. Routledge, 2017. http://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9781315242002-3.
Full text
2
Sorensen, Bent Meier. "How to Surf: Technologies at Work in the Societies of Control." In Deleuze and New Technology, 63–81. Edinburgh University Press, 2005. http://dx.doi.org/10.3366/edinburgh/9780748633364.003.0005.
Full text
3
Keeling, Kara. "Interregnum." In Queer Times, Black Futures, 41–52. NYU Press, 2019. http://dx.doi.org/10.18574/nyu/9780814748329.003.0002.
Full textAbstract:
This chapter begins to explore what Herman Melville’s 1853 “Bartleby the Scrivener: A Story of Wall Street” offers to Queer Times, Black Futures.With its setting being Wall Street, New York City,its title explicitly referring to that center of finance, and Bartleby’s occupation as a legal copyist directly implicating the story in questions of law and governance, “Bartleby” has inspired philosophical concepts relevant to the spatiotemporal entanglements of concern throughout this project.The ensuing sections on “Bartleby”also call attention to the story’s interplay of sound and vision in ways that might be of interest to those who are thinking with and through the digital regime of the image in societies of control, and how the story raises questions about the American enterprise that might generate imaginative formulations of the errant possibilities it harbors. Finally, I argue that what Gilles Deleuze refers to as Bartleby’s “queer formula”—“I would prefer not to”— can be understood as a mode of radical refusal, a de-creative, unaccountable, ungovernable, and errant insistence that confronts such violences head on in search of an expressive realization of existence beyond measure.