Subjectivity

Bueno volvi a Grossberg, aunque en un punto me habro, por que trae a discusion todo lo que me intereza. Grossberg ademas especializa la subjetividad y eso es exactamente lo que me intereza. Un punto en el que estoy desde ayer es si poninedolo en dialgo con massumi nos queda que el cuerpo y el movimineto son las fuerzas que se transforman lugo en "sujeto", espacio y lugares. claro es imposible pensar en cuerpos moviendose por algo que no es espacio social, y me quedo pensando si hay cuerpo sin interpelacion (butler y althuser dicen que no), aca me sirve rsossberg de nuevo en pensar que los cuerpos estan en algun lugra que no es posicion de sujeto necesariamente (esto es una critica un poco de mas de massumia grossberg) pero si es posicion que da ciertas posibilidades de movimiento y reposo y cirtas posibilidades y potencia para actuar. por eso mas que lugares sociales esas localizaciones son las trayectorias entrecruzadas de las que habla massey. el sujeto ntonces seria algo secundario que viene de la separacion y la reagrupacion, que en la modernidad ya sabemos mas o menos como opera. en este punto me da nostalgia la nocion de clase que al menos presneta un sujeto colectivo que transforma y actua no como uniformidad pero si como fuerza que se suma. si voy a mantener la nocion de sujeto que no reprodusca la individualidad y la agencia como puntos de partida, necesito algo que me permita esa dimnsion, pero que de posibilidad a comunidad definida por sus miembros prescindibles (deberia leer el agamben que menciona grossberg).


Subjectivity, identity and agency have been central concepts in contemporary debates over the possibilities of transformation and manoeuvre within a given social structure. I follow Grossberg (1996) in his critique up to a certain point at which I diverge. Identity and agency have generally taken for granted modern notions of subjectivity as individual and rational. Agency tends to understand action as a strategy and a negotiation, disregarding the unrational aspects of practice. Identities have stressed what are the mechanisms by which people act together within a given articulated formation, this is within a given system of equivalences that unify in order to be recognized by an exterior. Identities have been criticised as ignoring the inequalities and misunderstandings that also bring people together as well as the internal power relations in any given articulation. Both perspectives take as a starting point an individual modern subject, they collapse it with the notion of identity (sef) and agency and leave no alternative to modernity. Theories based on the negative construction of the other as a necessary movement of modernity, negate any possibility of a constitution of something different than modernity. Difference is the other that threatens form within or from the outside to the order of things. To unpack the three concepts he proposes to understand three levels in the process of individuation: subjectification that results form the positioned body in geopolitical organization of space, self as inscription of difference in the body, agency as the possibilities available to act over space in regards to the power organization of space and difference.
This is why Grossberg proposes to think of subjectivities by the means of alterities. He proposes to think of a positive and spatialized subject, and as the capacity of affecting and being affected. I agree with him but I still consider that is not very clear how he makes this subject into a collective one, and especially how he understands what is before the subject. What comes before the subject for Masumi is movement, bodies and the capacity of affecting and being affected. I consider that Massumi again concentrates too much in the individual body, even when he is making very interesting analysis of politics becoming affective. It does not offer me ways of understanding how a body can become part of a collective bodies and where are the openings for collective subjects.
I consider movement, subjectivity and spatiality as ineviatably embodied. I am interested in describing the directionality, trajectories and speeds of different types of movements, considering what is the intensity of those involved in them and how much they get empowered by them. In this way my project searches to make a contribution to the study of spatiality by engaging to the experience of movement as a not just a hiatus of in betweenness, which fades under the “concrete” definition of places, but as a significant moment of generative practice which can both recreate and transform the configurations of power over space and the unfolding possibilities of subjectivity to vary.