Umanoides


Halloween, los curas, y Žižek by usoidesfero
noviembre 2, 2008, 12:53 am
Filed under: General | Etiquetas: , , , , , , ,

En el Diario de Sevilla se publicó hoy este miniartículo:

El cardenal de Sevilla, Carlos Amigo Vallejo, alerta de la trivialización de la muerte que se está produciendo en los últimos años con fiestas como Halloween.

En declaraciones a este periódico, monseñor Amigo manifestó que “en algunos sectores, sobre todo, entre los jóvenes, se ha trivializado el concepto cristiano de la muerte con celebraciones como la de Halloween”. El prelado hispalense considera que “El cardenal de Sevilla, Carlos Amigo Vallejo, alerta de la trivialización de la muerte que se está produciendo en los últimos años con fiestas como Halloween.

En declaraciones a este periódico, monseñor Amigo manifestó que “en algunos sectores, sobre todo, entre los jóvenes, se ha trivializado el concepto cristiano de la muerte con celebraciones como la de Halloween”. El prelado hispalense considera que “este fenómeno se produce cuando la religiosidad auténtica disminuye”. Según Amigo Vallejo, “en estas circunstancias aparecen símbolos propios del mundo esotérico, de la magia y de la superstición, que nada tienen que ver con nuestra cultura cristiana”.

En este sentido, el cardenal de Sevilla defendió el sentido religioso de la festividad de Todos los Santos y del día de mañana,”dedicado a recordar a las personas queridas que fallecieron”.”. Según Amigo Vallejo, “en estas circunstancias aparecen símbolos propios del mundo esotérico, de la magia y de la superstición, que nada tienen que ver con nuestra cultura cristiana”.

En este sentido, el cardenal de Sevilla defendió el sentido religioso de la festividad de Todos los Santos y del día de mañana,”dedicado a recordar a las personas queridas que fallecieron”.

Lo que me llama la atención es la referencia del obispo a la “cultura cristiana.” Todos los años por estas fechas es normal encontrar en los medios a montones de personas atacando la celebración de Halloween en nuestro país, ya que no es una tradición española. La costumbre en España es la de ir al cementerio, etc. Esto me recuerda a lo que dice Žižek sobre el fundamentalismo: hoy día la religión se ha diluido en la cultura, uno respeta ciertas tradiciones o mandatos religiosos porque son parte de su cultura (Žižek pone el ejemplo de un judío no creyente que come comida Kosher por tradición, otro ejemplo, sería la celebración de la Navidad por parte de los no creyentes). Un fundamentalista es el que se toma en serio sus creencias, el que cree de verdad.

Por eso me parece tan curioso que un obispo haga referencia a “nuestra cultura cristiana.” Según Amigo, “este fenómeno [celebraciones como Halloween] se produce cuando la religiosidad auténtica disminuye,” aunque se podría argumentar que también esas llamadas a respetar las tradiciones cristianas sólo por ser parte de las “costumbres,” del estilo de vida también pueden interpretar como muestras de una disminución de la religiosidad auténtica.

Anuncios


Entrevista a Zizek en The Guardian by usoidesfero
noviembre 2, 2008, 12:26 am
Filed under: General | Etiquetas: , , , ,

En I Cite encontré hoy esta entrevista a Slavoj Zizek publicada en The Guardian hace un tiempo:

When were you happiest?

A few times when I looked forward to a happy moment or remembered it – never when it was happening.

What is your greatest fear?

To awaken after death – that’s why I want to be burned immediately.

What is your earliest memory?

My mother naked. Disgusting.

Which living person do you most admire, and why?

Jean-Bertrand Aristide, the twice-deposed president of Haiti. He is a model of what can be done for the people even in a desperate situation.

What is the trait you most deplore in yourself?

Indifference to the plights of others.

What is the trait you most deplore in others?

Their sleazy readiness to offer me help when I don’t need or want it.

What was your most embarrassing moment?

Standing naked in front of a woman before making love.

Aside from a property, what’s the most expensive thing you’ve bought?

The new German edition of the collected works of Hegel.

What is your most treasured possession?

See the previous answer.

What makes you depressed?

Seeing stupid people happy.

What do you most dislike about your appearance?

That it makes me appear the way I really am.

What is your most unappealing habit?

The ridiculously excessive tics of my hands while I talk.

What would be your fancy dress costume of choice?

A mask of myself on my face, so people would think I am not myself but someone pretending to be me.

What is your guiltiest pleasure?

Watching embarrassingly pathetic movies such as The Sound Of Music.

What do you owe your parents?

Nothing, I hope. I didn’t spend a minute bemoaning their death.

To whom would you most like to say sorry, and why?

To my sons, for not being a good enough father.

What does love feel like?

Like a great misfortune, a monstrous parasite, a permanent state of emergency that ruins all small pleasures.

What or who is the love of your life?

Philosophy. I secretly think reality exists so we can speculate about it.

What is your favourite smell?

Nature in decay, like rotten trees.

Have you ever said ‘I love you’ and not meant it?

All the time. When I really love someone, I can only show it by making aggressive and bad-taste remarks.

Which living person do you most despise, and why?

Medical doctors who assist torturers.

What is the worst job you’ve done?

Teaching. I hate students, they are (as all people) mostly stupid and boring.

What has been your biggest disappointment?

What Alain Badiou calls the ‘obscure disaster’ of the 20th century: the catastrophic failure of communism.

If you could edit your past, what would you change?

My birth. I agree with Sophocles: the greatest luck is not to have been born – but, as the joke goes on, very few people succeed in it.

If you could go back in time, where would you go?

To Germany in the early 19th century, to follow a university course by Hegel.

How do you relax?

Listening again and again to Wagner.

How often do you have sex?

It depends what one means by sex. If it’s the usual masturbation with a living partner, I try not to have it at all.

What is the closest you’ve come to death?

When I had a mild heart attack. I started to hate my body: it refused to do its duty to serve me blindly.

What single thing would improve the quality of your life?

To avoid senility.

What do you consider your greatest achievement?

The chapters where I develop what I think is a good interpretation of Hegel.

What is the most important lesson life has taught you?

That life is a stupid, meaningless thing that has nothing to teach you.

Tell us a secret.

Communism will win.



Sobre Beatriz Preciado by usoidesfero
febrero 6, 2008, 9:37 pm
Filed under: General | Etiquetas: , , , , , , ,

Se tiene por “postmoderna” la incredulidad con respecto a los metarrelatos. (Lyotard, 10)

 Creo que era Zizek (pero no recuerdo dónde, si alguien lo sabe, que me lo diga) el que decía que el postmodernismo consiste en no tomarse nada en serio, pero comportarse como si no fuera así.

 En el marco del contrato contra-sexual los cuerpos se reconocen a sí mismos no como hombres y mujeres, sino como cuerpos parlantes, y reconocen a los otros como cuerpos parlantes (Beatriz Preciado, 18)

Práctica contra-sexual incluída en su Contrato Contra-Sexual:

resexualizar el ano (una zona del cuerpo excluida de las prácticas heterocentradas, considerada como la más sucia y la más abyecta) como centro contra-sexual universal. (Preciado, 30)

 La contra-sexualidad afirma que en el principio era el dildo. El dildo antecede al pene. Es el origen del pene. La contra-sexualidad recurre a la noción de “suplemento” tal como ha sido formulada por Jacques Derrida (1967); e identifica el dildo como el suplemento que produce aquello que supuestamente debe completar. (Preciado, 20)

”Whereas representation tries to absorb simulation by interpreting it as false representation, simulation develops the whole edifice of representation as itself a simulacrum. These would be the successive phases of the image:
1 It is the reflection of a basic reality.
2 It masks and perverts a basic reality.
3 It masks the absence of a basic reality.
4 It bears no relation to any reality whatever: it is its own pure simulacrucm.
In the first case, the image is a good appearance: the representation is of the order of sacrament. In the second, it is an evil appearance: of the order of malefice. In the third, it plays at being an appearance: it is of the order of sorcery. In the fourth, it is no longer in the order of appearance at all, but of simulation. ” (Baudrillard,
170)

“Thus perhaps at stake has always been the murderous capacity of images: murderers of the real; murderers of their own model as the Byzantine icons could murder the divine identity. To this murderous capacity is opposed the dialectical capacity of representations as a visible and intelligible mediation of the real. All of Western faith and good faith was engaged in this wager on represenation: that a sign could refer to the depth of meaning, that a sign could exchange for meaning and that something could guarantee this exchange–God, of course. But what if God himself can be simulated, that is to say, reduced to the signs which atttest his existence? Then the whole system becomes weighteless; it is no longer anything but a gigantic simulacrum: not unreal, but a simulacrum, never again exchanging for what is real, but exchanging in itself, in an uninterrupted circuit without reference or circumference. (Baudrillard, 170)