“A toaster makes the same product for myself
or – let’s say – the President on the day he slaughters a small village in
[insert name of faraway disposable nation]. Undoubtedly, the President’s toast
tastes better, due to the sense-heightening benefits of easy
victory, but that is not the toaster’s doing. Or so I believed, until
that day I was corrected by a dull broadside issued by a neo-Luddite, whose
borrowed syntax’s hollow ring made me fall asleep at the cognition switch .”
Pèse
Ludion, “The Veinless Limousine”
“If machinery is not neutral, then it must be capable of love, and
(if a machine is capable of love) it is a natural surrealist interest. Truth is,
a surrealist cannot afford to turn away from the experiences afforded by
technology, if only because love is waiting at the roundhouse,
and no one wants to see their object of desire in the arms of another
man, especially if that man owns a defense plant.”
Robine M.
Pitre, “Machines of Affection”
“What IS the difference between a “slave” and a “slave system”?
Anyone could answer that easily. So why is anyone incapable of distinguishing
between "technology" and a "technological system"? Systems
are built to confiscate the imagination, to lay claim and profit from the
pursuits of individuals. Technology is as simple as a stick to swat flies with.
But the fact remains, the pencil is NOT the pencil industry, but the booty of
the pencil industry. Thus, NOT to use pencils –
so as to claim one is free of that industry – is a vivid error. I
imagine many manifestos have been composed using pencils and paper, and – just
because the President/CFO of Morbidity Inc. uses a pencil – it is a deadly stupidly
to claim one is being revolutionary by resisting their use. These are the same
people who think they are saving the world just because they don’t use the
once advanced technology of the toilet,
and instead shit on the floor. A gesture – yes – but one designed to make
you repugnant to your friends, and bring no permanent pain to the captains of
the hygiene industry.”
Berlue Rebondi, “Yeti Versus Robot”
There is a critical attachment, a long and oddly flat “wand” which
emerges from the Machine’s perforated base and ends in a black fan studded
with numerous – delightfully useless – buttons. This monument to progress
– a type of preemptive vacuum – works most efficiently upon the louche
affections of leftist sentimentalists and other ritualists, and tends to
coalesce into a question, a rhetorical flourish equal to the back of the hand
(in a room full of children), or to the ironic determinism of the wage earner,
and (as it cannot be avoided) it is best to keep watch, if nothing else.
Otherwise, we are unprepared to unlock the bedroom with the simple machinery of
the key.
Yet, an affinity between this “machine mâchoir”
– brand name Wittgenstein – and those sun-sweetened Dadaists in the
collapsible middle-distance critiques those most incapable of de-trooping from
their own accumulated orders: there is a “pity parameter”
Ñ
essential to each difficult escape. Romanticism, as applied to the Machine,
insists that we “materialize our under-funded residues” and face the world
AS a set of serial consequences: that gear is a geranium, a geranium turns on a
whim, and whims turn the gears, and – out the other end WITHOUT conscious
input – a human “purpose” is excreted. I don’t know where to put it! I
search OUTSIDE, because I DON’T WANT IT IN HERE.
Å
There, quite unfortunately for those who oppose my loving Machine, a
certain ecology – a brave circuitry
å
– of hat containers and instrumental music flutters undulates in the air of
language. And language – indeed – does get rolled into the garage, the ivory
repair bunker, and is hoisted up the backs of the Club of Mute Sophists W,
who gather only to un-gather, fearing a public backlash. What can be done about
THAT which hasn’t already been suggested (by lapsed Leninists on stolen
bicycles) also be done to THIS? Nothing human: charlatanism collectivized by
dull Ludds. The battle-cry “Down with zippers!” brings the faithful out to
the free speech park.
It is difficult – do not imagine we are unaware – to be resolutely
appalled by that which surrounds you EVERYWHERE: that pencil is a lever, this
skirt is a cantilevered pleasure, those shoes (even!) are both cobbled and oddly
welcoming, seductive even. And those who decide to attempt The Dream without
language? Fascists of a new sort, or studying to be advocates, their fur firmly
stroked the wrong way by natural extensions of human bodies. Don’t use the
brush, I understand: it may be seized by the next G-Man and turned into a death
ray V.
Can that chance be taken by anyone shrunken to the size of a caveman?
So, we return to the Loving Machine: she is perfectly undressed and
willing. Oh look! She has a pair of glasses on, just at the precise moment we
desired a naked face! And how does she make that motor run? Idle meditations are
humming in the street, which is also a Machine, as are the houses and the
underclothes only she has shed, asking us to manipulate her, when she might as
casually have begged Mussolini for a back rub, or conned Bill Gates into
digitizing her ardors. Well, how coy of her. Let’s say that a rather randy
toaster has just entered a room quietly on its stubby legs, smelling of burnt
crumbs, the fragrance of expected developments and eventual progress (into the
joining chamber). YOU turn away. I’m staying. The only Machine I despise at
this moment is the ceiling lights and the useless buttons. Oh, for the sexual
track of the zipper!
– Dale Michael Houstman, August 24, 2004
Ñ
This phenomenon was
first noted by the Squat Enumerists (in their landmark volume, Borders
and Balconies) and reiterated in the formula a = t2(z+cm),
where a is the number of visible boundaries in an invisible field, t
is the number of points common to all boundaries, z is the height of
the highest boundary divided by the height of lowest boundary, and cm
is the “cloud matrix,” the universal constant discovered by three
athletic youths in Detroit.
Å
Who really does? The problem is this: if an “outside” represents all that is
potential and an “inside” represents all that is grasped, where did the
yellow go?
å
The term created by the Viennese topologist Tybur Korlan (The Cretinism
of Surfaces) to describe a mesh of inalienable processes which
accumulate over the course of a dishonest conversation.
W A mathematical brotherhood dedicated to rejecting the very air they breathe, because it is also inhaled by CEOs and Hollywood celebrities. Needless to say, their membership tends to drop.
V
This
has already occurred, shocking the home beauty-care industry into initiating
stricter controls against the exploitation of combs. Since then not one hair
care product has been transformed into a weapon of any sort. This
is proof security measures work.