[NetBehaviour] Theory in the previous piece titled "california dreamin"

Alan Sondheim sondheim at panix.com
Sun Jan 10 16:11:58 CET 2021

Theory in the previous piece titled "california dreamin"


My work is based on theory, basic theory, baseless theory; what
passes for poetry collapses on that gravel.

"hotel california dreamin" references The California Ideology,
amplified by "ideology"; "don't tread on me" of course is a
reference with the American Revolution, which is now "kaputt" as
the result of the recent events in the Capitol. "putt" also
refers to golf, as if this were a game which it isn't - hence the
anxiety. This passes for the title and its potential elisions.

After this the body of the text/textual body/human bodies begins:
"soft silky syrupy smooth skin" is in relation to discomfort,
advertising, and a kind of abjection that brings one close to
vomiting. it's the commercialized body that leaves one gasping,
"breathtaking views" - marked, demarcated, beside itself as the
overlapping images in the video occlude and contradict each
other, going nowhere. And "views" - as if this were an
advertising brochure for some uncanny and monstrous island
vacation spot, which also carries its own legacy of abjection.

"mark mark" - the plural marks are beside themselves, the
dreaming beside the gendered or exhausted body (the second
herself is a typing error; it should have read "himself")
pluralized and writhing, displacing space and time, sedimentary -
Serres' The Parasite comes to mind.

After this - including "breathless" referencing Covid - in other
words these translucent bodies carrying nothing but disease and
its future" - the numbering begins. Note also that in _relation
to the moving image_ - the model is wearing eyeglasses that seem
thick; I wear the same, it's my body that's abject perhaps,

And I should note here that the deconstruction is _steady-state_
- there's no evolution or potential evolution in the diegesis;
it's a psychological state stretched out, immobilized in its
mobility: there's a claim being made that this is our _current
state,_ spread from past to future, carrying nothing with it but
situationist simulacra. A claim.

"I feel I'm selling something. I'm not." What's feels like
selling is the pastel body sliding against itself or an other,
an other against an other. As if the video were a proffering,
instead of a fundamental emptiness which also relates to our
current political state. The claim is made that the state plays
out against the collusion of bodies, that the pastel bodies of
the past are recognized as nothing more than a dreamland torn
apart by ideologies ranging from the californian through the far
right's implicit desecrations of habitus. You never know where
the next bullet's coming from.

"2. no perfume is involved in an almost sweetly gagging scent
almost too intense for being alive." As if a disclaimer building
on the discomfiture of sweetness, to the point of vomit - the
hidden entropic lure of darkness, the sweetness of political
abjection for example, the giving in to the e-valuation of the
leader for example, the giving one's nude and supine body to an
imminence far greater than one-as-a-singularity could conceivably

"3. a bandage on itself as if this affect the body politic." Or a
carapace of ill-legality, all the way back to Reich's character
armor, or body-armor, or the hardening proffered by phallic guns
or choratic explosions, everything layered, moving at high-speed
digital display of fake avatars, fake news, fake behaviors albeit
produced by the alteration of _real people in real situations_ -
another form of the problematic of truth in the age of digital

"4. no it effects the body politic." It produces the body
politic, this sickly body, this covid body, this sweet body of
carapace." "it" here is singular; above there's an implied
grouping-into-singularity, "as if this affect," affect and effect
playing off each other.

"5. repetition does not make it so." Digital repetition and its
problematic of truth is everywhere on the cultural horizon. That
doesn't create truth or ontology, doesn't make or remake the
"idiotic real."

"6. an almost gagging sensation as the body confronts itself."
This again emphasizes the loose model of the video, with its
absolute static-moving image, its steady-state. No body, nobody
is confronted, the world loops against itself, tawdry and

"7. i am in the background and am the background." Because this
is ontology, everywhere and nowhere at once, aided and abetted by
nothing more than flat imagery, let's say cheap ontology, easy to
by and sell, nothing here to see but the nagging presence of
pastel images, pastel and digital imaginary.

"8. i am breathless among them. my little virus. i am breathless
among them." Of course we know all of this. The digital doesn't
breathe; this is a steady-state video; this is a fundamentally
mute work; this is boring, too long, and so forth. And yet there
is a "curlicue" in all of this, as if there's something that's
being said, that might be said, something troubling, something
beneath the surface.

Finally, this small addition: "Does darkness descend, or does it
upwell from the earth?" which seems apropos in a poetic sort of

Original piece follows, still image removed:


hotel california dreamin anxiety dont tread on me kaputt

https://youtu.be/gq5bWLZRtz0 VIDEO

soft silky syrupy smooth skin breathtaking views
mark mark beside itself dreaming beside herself
dreaming beside himself breathless writhing among
themselves. 1. i feel like i'm selling something.
i'm not. 2. no perfume is involved in an almost
sweetly gagging scent almost too intense for being
alive. 3. a bandage on itself as if this affect
the body politic. 4. no it effects the body politic.
5. repetition does not make it so. 6. an almost
gagging sensation as the body confronts itself.
7. i am in the background and am the background.
8. i am breathless among them. my little virus.
i am breathless among them.

Does darkness descend, or does it upwell from the earth?



More information about the NetBehaviour mailing list