La Haine and Injustice double bill 6pm Goldsmiths 13.2.2012

La Haine and Injustice double bill

6pm-10pm Goldsmiths RHB 137a

all welcome

La Haine: dir. Mathieu Kassovitz, France, 1995, 97 mins

Injustice: dir Ken Fero & Tarig Mehmood 2001, 98 mins

these two screenings on police and deaths in custody in conjunction with the Centre for Cultural Studies, Capital course, Text and Image course and the No Borders Convergence. All welcome.


Capitalism and Cultual Studies essay prompt:

Using theoretical categories of Marx’s Capital, as read in this course, (and even if you wish, coquetting with his style) consider how this analysis may or may not be pertinent to a contemporary issue, class formation, or campaign of which you may have experience or knowledge.

For example you may have been engaged in areas such as am environmental movement, feminist struggles, education, mental health, bank reform, anti-racism, international solidarity, and can use this experience as a way to think through what reading Marx might be (good for) today. This is an opportunity to examine your own recent or present involvement as a student, worker (full or part-time), or other relevant subject position under Capitalism (benefits recipient, ‘artist’, activist, tourist, migrant, musician, tinker, tailor, soldier, spy… gender, sexuality, sub-cultural group, political persuasion…).

This may mean examining your position within a particular institutional apparatus, or evaluating subjective elements against the abstract categories and dialectical method. It is hoped you can develop the analysis of concepts from Capital so as to bring out more clearly the circumstances in which your own contribution, or not, to surplus value production is implicated (in class struggles).

In making your assessment, give some consideration to the rendering of Marx’s Capital by any of the major commentators considered in the course (Derrida, Bataille, Spivak, Autonomia, Heideggerian Marxism[?], Frankfurt School, Fortunati, Jameson etc).

Keyword prompts: war, imperialism, arms trade, star wars, drones, science policy, science workers, support workers, innovation, anti-racism, anti-imperialism, culture industry, hip hop, sexuality, minority/majority, ethnicity, whiteness, education, teaching factory, students, online, corral, olympics, transport, corruption, crisis, policing, control, health, climate, childcare, data input, cleaning, mining, tourism, sweatshops, art, library, publishing, etc., deportation, detention, border, crisis, austerity

Three events for CCS – Write Now – Deleuze – No Borders.

Three near overlapping events in thee next 10 days for Centre for Cultural Studies people at Goldsmiths:


Write Now! BER-CPH-LON PhD Symposium (Feb 9-11 2012)

You have to, you want to, you need to Write Now!

But how do you publish? 

In an atmosphere of loneliness, alienation, rejection, competition, anxiety, hierarchy, nepotism and jealousy, how does the “early career scholar” (re)negotiate the imperative to produce? Given the increases demands of the academic publishing industry, how can we avoid labouring under illusions, false promises and unrealistic expectations?  

And yet the pleasures of the text, new platforms and opportunities for publishing and sharing, are there before us. 

Open to Goldsmiths PhD candidates of all departments. 

Practical aspects of working towards a book publication will be a core part of the symposium.

Bring your ideas, texts, criticism. 

no charge (supported by the Goldsmiths Annual Fund).




Deleuze, Philosophy, Transdisciplinarity 

Goldsmiths, 10th-12th February
Plenary Speakers: Jean-Claude Dumoncel, Eric Alliez, John Mullarkey, Laura Cull, Anne Sauvagnargues

Invited Speakers: Giuseppe Bianco, Andrew Goffey, Marjorie Gracieuse, Tatsuya Higaki, Christian Kerslake, Iain MacKenzie, Stamatia Portanova, Nathan Widder

Organised by the Centre for Cultural Studies, Goldsmiths University of London (Masa Kosugi) and the Faculty of Humanities and School of European culture and Languages, the University of Kent (Guillaume Collett)

We are now entering a new phase of Deleuze studies which seeks to understand the specificity of Deleuze’s mode of philosophising. This is necessary, firstly in order to establish an account of his work’s developments and ruptures which is neither reductive nor partisan and secondly, to be able to better situate Deleuze within the context of contemporary thought. While the concept of immanence has recently been seized upon as the way of measuring Deleuze’s philosophical development (Kerslake, 2009; Beistegui, 2010), this conference would like to shift the focus to another yet closely interrelated problematic, which is the concept of philosophy and its essential relation to transdisciplinarity.
What precisely does Deleuze understand by the term ‘philosophy’? In The Logic of Sense, Deleuze states that ‘Philosophy merges with ontology, but ontology merges with the univocity of Being’ (p. 205, Continuum, 2004). Does philosophy have privileged access to a univocal Being that is itself non-philosophical, and which subsumes not only philosophy but also philosophy’s preconditions – what The Logic of Sense refers to as the ‘sciences’ of logic, phenomenology, and psychoanalysis, as well as art? Does Deleuze and Guattari’s re-formulation of this problematic in What is Philosophy? contradict the earlier Deleuze when it appears to posit a more extrinsic relation – or interference – between philosophy, science, and art, all three of which open up to Chaos, which they claim is equally distinct from the preconditions of philosophy, science and art (nonphilosophy, nonscience, nonart)? Are we to understand Deleuze’s concept of philosophy as essentially and inherently transdisciplinary, and if so, how? What is at stake here is the possibility of establishing a ‘common ethico-aesthetic discipline’ (Guattari, Continuum, 2000) and the role of philosophy in such a project.

We aim to have a wide range of papers converging on the concept of philosophy found in Deleuze’s work and dialoguing with the problems we have alluded to. Suggested paper topics include, but are not limited to, the following:
– Deleuze and the history of philosophy: his methodology, his conception of the history of philosophy, his readings of specific philosophers and thinkers
– The place of science and logic in Deleuze’s philosophy
– The place of art in Deleuze’s philosophy
– Deleuze and non-philosophy, and the role of the pre/post-philosophical in his philosophy
– Shifts in Deleuze’s readings of particular philosophers, and more generally in Deleuze’s own concept of philosophy, throughout his career
– The critical assessment of Guattari’s influence on Deleuze’s philosophy

Registration is free but please contact us (, early if you would like to attend the conference.
**The event is supported by the Arts and Humanities Research Council, the School of European Culture and Languages and Faculty of Humanities, the University of Kent, the Centre for Cultural Studies Goldsmiths, and the Graduate School, Goldsmiths, University of London **

and the No Borders Convergence – click on the poster or seek out:

Born Free – MIA’s Poetry After Guantanamo

A piece written before this week’s release of Bad Girls, coming out soon in Social Identities.

Abstract: The recent work of the Sri-Lankan-British musician and sonic ‘curator’ known as M.I.A. (real name: Mathangi Arulpragasam) is considered as a commentary on atrocity and read alongside the well known essay ‘The Storyteller’ by Walter Benjamin and comments on Auschwitz by Theodor Adorno. The storytelling here is updated for a contemporary context where global war impacts us all, more or less visibly, more, or less, acknowledged. It is argued that the controversy over M.I.A.’s Romain Gavras video Born Free is exemplary of the predicament of art in the face of violence, crisis and terror – with this track, and video, M.I.A.’s work faced a storm of criticism which I want to critique in turn, in an attempt, at least, to learn to make or discern more analytic distinctions amongst concurrent determinations of art A careful reading of Adorno can in the end teach us to see Born Free anew.


Keywords: Benjamin, Adorno, Gavras, M.I.A, music, terror, racism, orientalism.

PDF Here Poetry After GuantanamoFinalDraftSocialIdentities.

No Olympics

this one was made by the Nomadic Action Group for the campaign against having the olympics in Melbourne in 1988

To which (via Simon S) we can now add some London related resources:

Anarchist alternative art for the Olympics….
Report backs on a ‘Countering Olympics’ conference held recently….
I guess Occupy Olympics was an obvious alliteration.  Not a lot going on here at the moment….
….but the powers that be are obviously concerned about this kind of development….
Atos Origin is the Games’ IT Partner.  (something for Anonymous to look into perhaps?)…..
Disabled rights protests against Atos and their involvement in the Olympics have already started (nice link to Bhopal too)…..
Nothing on the games yet but worth keeping an eye on this group….

Marxism 7.0

A quick response to a question (asked for a radio item):  ‘Does the Internet open up new ways of introducing Marxist ideas and concepts in the real world? – Marxism 2.0’
I have not seen anything great on this theme (meme). I am not convinced by Negri and Hardt and the hype about 2.0. But there was the book ‘CyberMarxism’ by Dyer-Witherford a few years back – largely autonomia influenced. And for sure the Marx-Engels Internet Archive has been phenomenally influential, but not all the MEGA is online yet.
I’m not convinced reading online opens up new ways of reading Marx as such. Well, several new ways of reading anything of course are there – as its on screen not a book, and searchable. But Marxism isn’t something that is just reading. And Marxism 2.0 sounds dangerously like an excuse for a simplifying article (which I am sure you will not do – a critique is needed).
Anyway, wasn’t Engels Marxism 2.0. Then Lenin, then Mao, then… We are surely up to 7.0 at least!
You must already know this would be my response – since in my lectures on Capital volume 1 at Goldsmiths, they are open to the public precisely because I am keen not to be too fast and loose with scholarship as to reduce the world of Marxism, or the politics of fighting for revolutionary change, to David Harvey’s online lectures, or some other version of googleMarx™. I feel that we need time to read, Marx and others – including Harvey, but also Marx’s sources, Hegel, Smith, Ricardo, Shakespeare, Leonard Horner – and not to do so would be to ignore the convoluted processes of learning to read Marx and the world in dialectical terms, necessary for making sense and making change – the point, etc…