1

TO BE READ TO RE-MADE SLOW MOTION (1st Version) Zayne Armstrong, 2011

A quote, which I will not here disclose, describes a situation of an individual body being many Beings, a situation commonly referred to as possession, that is, spirits (demonic or otherwise) inhabiting a body which is not their own. The voice, which can speak from this possessed body is singularthat is of one bodythat is: one human body and is therefore virtually singular. What is, not singular is the way in which this virtually singular body refers to itself, as a 'we', where the singular body functions as a meeting place for a many, and presents itself (a plurality) in (located within the gesture of) a singular voice to other subjects as its plurality. The virtual singular presence of a body in being possessed frames the body as a container or referent which allows for the forming of a plurality into a united singular. Call in three months time and Ill be fine I know Well maybe not that fine but Ill survive anyhow I wont recall the names and places of each sad occasion But thats no consolation here and now So what happens now? Another suitcase another hoping their lover will help them or keep them Support them, promote them Don't blame them, you're the same

How is this plural Other possible, and what is plural about this plurality and what makes this body singular, and what suggests that a body is of an individual and not a plurality of individuals always? Goodnight and thank you Emilio You've completed your task What more can we ask of you now? Please sign the book on the way out the door And that will be all, if she needs you she'll call But I don't think that's likely somehow Oh but it's sad when a love affair dies But when we were hot, we were hot I know you'll look back on the good times we've shared Which means ... There is noone, noone at all Never has been, and never will be a lover, male or female Who hasn't an eye on, in fact they rely on Tricks they can try on their partner They're hoping their lover will help them or keep them Support them, promote them Don't blame her, you're the same There is no soap, no soap like Zaz No detergent, lotion ay but you'd be in the way So do up your trousers and go Oh but it's sad when a love affair dies The decline into silence and doubt Our passion was just too intense to survive Which means ... This is a club I should never have joined Someone has made us look fools Argentine men call the sexual shots Someone has altered the rules Fame on the In June of forty-three there was a military coup Behind it was a gang called the G.O.U. Who did not feel the need to be elected They had themselves a party at the point of a gun They were slightly to the right of Atilla the Hun A bomb or two and very few objected Yeah, just one shell and governments fall like flies, kapow, die They stumble and fall Now the man behind the President calling the shots Involved so discreetly in a lot of their plots

Was Colonel Juan Peron, would be dictator He began in the army out in Italy so Saw Mussolini's rise from the very front row I reckon he'd do likewise sooner or later Yeah, just one blast and the tear gas falls like rain, kapow, die They haven't a chance, bye bye The terrorists advance But one guy doesn't dirty his hands Peron was biding time out in the slow lane Yeah, suddenly an earthquake hit the town of San Juan, kapow, die They stumble and fall, Not just in the case of demonic, or otherwise, possession. Is it possible for a voice to be of a plurality of individuals? What would that mean, what would it look like and how can we talk about it or how can this plurality speak as a plurality? A new Argentina, the chains of the masses untied A new success We weren't quite sure, we had a few doubts Would Evita win through? But the answer is-A qualified-Yes! Eva started well, no question, in France Shining like the sun through the post-war haze A beautiful reminder of the carefree days For the first time I read that On smaller fairs Its globally perceived There is a group of people Somebody joins them But what is interesting is that microstructures exist The biopic ('biographical picture', or biographical narrative motion picture) provides an example of cohabited identity. Who speaks in the reading of a text? "A text, whether book, paper, film, painting or building is not only a conduit for the circulation of ideas but a passage or point of transition from one (social) stratum or space to another. [A text] is a process of scattering thought; scrambling terms, concepts, and practices; forging linkages; becoming a form of action. And for the downfall of the British Empire 1st

A military genius Formed around, as an icon, the story or narrativization of a particular subject The name is inhabited Is the biopic only understood as a text - does it only exist as a location, as a concrete object or can it and does it act, can it act? Or rather, once this aggregated community is located in the film, in the biopic, can it speak? Or is it mute? That which we refer to as distorted is (simply) that which is not the same as a remembered (or imagined) prior form of a text and this dissimilar text is, in the event that we cannot claim what it is, is what it does. The paradox is that something as impersonal as a text, or a record, can nevertheless deliver an imprint or a trace of something as lively, immediate, and transitory as a voice. E. Said If the text of the biopic, that is, the biopic, occurs in the world, with a voice, this is the voice of many within the form of a rendered subjectivity. The many on behalf of which this rendered subject speaks is that of the plurality of subjects involved in the production of this rendering. Just as an icon is painted. Speaks as an icon speaks. any text, if it is not immediately destroyed, is a network of often colliding forces, but also a text in its actually being a text is a being in the world; it addresses anyone who reads The discursivity of such a text is available in its being ... produced ... read ... paid visits. And another was the great KUBLAI KHAN emperor of china And when conquest was finished half the population of the world was contained in the Mongol the empire all in the imagination of the prince of commons, Genghis Khan. The idea of a reader making whole or fully meaning full a text, is only possible in that this whole-ness is not a finite whole ness, with concrete parameters, but rather that the reader reads and literally makes or builds the text, its being understood, with the text and with the situation and environment of reading. this and the proportion of happiness is in all of us and the power of our imagination Im writing a novel I dont suppose you have even the time or inclination to even read a novel Ive written one its going to be published and Im writing another Oh can can I read it?

No ones read it, not even my friends Whats it about? About? Something for everyone. A bit like Shakespere? Perhaps, yes. Please dont talk Habermas speaks about in terms of validity and justifiability To do. Arent you particular about words? I I I a Frenchman Ambiguities of the readings of text are an integral element of their function as a series of pointers with which a whole network of authors and readers alike are called upon. speech and circumstantial reality exist in a state of presence, whereas writing and texts exist in a state of suspensionthat is, outside circumstantial realityuntil they are actualized and made present by the readercritic. Suspending identity as a primary operation of the biopic. Yes, my darling clever cat you wrote books! Books. I wrote You wrote novels, wonderful novels How to see dwelling as something other than the containment or projection of subjects? (E. Grosz pg 59) to consider dwelling a mode of interacting with or being organized by, rather than some sort of location with specific parameters for what it can contain; that a dwelling or space can accommodate being simultaneously without this containment being established or necessary a question that cannot and should not be answered but must be continually posed as an answer to this question may defeat the purpose of it being asked; those who are entangled in the specifics of any situation of inhabiting are always plural: that subject which inhabits, and that space which is inhabited. How can a subject speak of, or with, or listen to that which is inhabited? How do and can the inhabited and inhibiter engage with one another? And does inhabiting infer territorialization of the inhabited? For example: Can we ask 'who is in the Statue of Liberty?' or 'Who is the Statue of Liberty?' And he went with a quack and a waddle and a quack and a flurry out of town But at every place they said to his face, get out of here get out get out of

ok see you later bye And a very unAnne shes at the doctor but shell pass by later And shell go back to the gallery Ok, cool Ok See you later See you Great bye, Than I knew For everywhere I wonder many friends Do you remember the . Wonderful Anywhere I wonder Anywhere I go See you Edward Saids worldliness points to a contextual contingency being in 'the world' and circulating in and with other beings in 'the world.' The idea of, as Said puts it: correspondences between words and objects is complex in how correspond functions. Words have a role similar if not the same, categorically, as objects, if we are talking about words as those parts of language, and also to expand that even further and to consider that which we refer to as language as such (English for example) as an object. (laughs) Oh wonderful (Laughs) Not to say that language does not happen, but that exactly what language suggests is a series of rules and regulations on and supposedly of communication when language is that which exactly points to (with subject's finger) what happens, what happens between and with people. I herd you crying Oh Hans Noones Its here Thats crazy --Language is not as Said puts it, that which is between subjects and a vast indefiniteness, and is rather that which suggests to subjects his worldliness, references and is all that is not this vast indefiniteness (if for no other reason than this vast indefiniteness is only referenceable as such in that we have (purchase on) language to do so), that is a subjects' vast

indefiniteness, which he alone has access to, with language between him and all the other specific vast indefinitenesses which make up the world or rather this specific subject's the world. Thats crazy! No, its slightly When did she send it, she sent it at the weekend Press again Oh Language is what necessarily is of real usage and is regulated by this usage. It is itself this regulated usage, in that together with the objects that are words and language, real usage happens and is a collaborative end. Nothing is strict about linguistic interactions beyond a necessarily incomplete and indefinite consideration of all of that (vast indefiniteness) which language is, in relation to, or is pointing to. I have asked that this is read while a specific film is being shown. There is a bit of a break here in the text a transition. Presenting this text with this film is a way to accommodate the necessarily incomplete nature of the film being shown, and the possibly incomplete nature of this text. Or rather: to present the interdependence of the two, text and film, both on other un-organizable, un-controllable operations. With this two-part film currently being produced, the mode is in its negotiation of crediting authors the plurality of authors involved and necessarily invested (by means of their time, resources, etc.) in the production and the product. The difference between the way in which their investment contributes here and how it shows up in other kinds of, lets say, less stylized filmmaking is that rather than their efforts contributing to the whole discreetly, or naturalistically (Ill return to define how Im using the word naturalistic) the subjects which make up this plurality are brought into the narrative directly. We went to the doctor and he said theres nothing wrong. does he use his fingers Not only is your case irrelevant but its irresponsible It can lead to a weakening of resolve Opening the door to temptation. When tense I find there are little tricks to relaxing I close my eyes. The actual objections that are made You didnt make assholes of us did you? how about you?

I suppose Ive been a one or two in my life but its taken a long time to recognize it and now? Exactly! Social restraint! What do you think ? There are those who argue that sex is largely a matter of Of course not. Im just a taxonomist. That is, the implementation of a quiet set will be dismissed, as well as cinematographic conventions like the framing of scripted and located events exclusively. In other words, the script or score even, is a tool implemented to contribute a thread, to run through a series of events, the total nature, intention and form of which is explicitly produced in its making. Bruno Latour here is not speaking exclusively about objects in the traditional sense, instead we can imagine if you will a non-objectified being substantiating the object in his text, a being of any form, inclusive of the inanimate object and the person alike: You may kiss the bride. For every one of these objects, you see spewing out of them a different set of passions, indignations, opinions, as well as a different set of interested parties and different ways of carrying out their partial resolution. How young were you when you first masturbated? I never did that. The male without a history of out of context to make sensational readings. Still its hardly your place to offer moral Youre sounding more like a preacher than a scientist. My father always thought Id become a preacher. Why do you insist on flaunting your association with the foundation? not only here but across the globe. Yes it has been. I every aspect of the project This charactorization of the object is, in a way, a relinquishing of the supposed or assumed final, absolute or overall control that the film director has while engaging with the people, professions, roles, the various paradigms of filmmaking institutions, rather than adhering to them, this as-of-yet-unmade film asks that they gather as usual to make a film, but rather than this production process being unidirectional, the narratives porous form absorbs the plurality of projects at hand in the production as explicit. How can this occur though? And is it not just an egotistical and romantic idea The soundtrack simply includes the conversations that are going on during the production the camera operator and the Director of photography are hungry, and they wish that they had worn different shoes on the set today.

Each object gathers around itself a different assembly of relevant parties. These parties could be thought of as the context of the object, but not only the existing properties of the contexts, but the intended ones as well, these properties extended. The (human) subject as object, the human subject as subject in the biopic, the biopic as a series of cohabited object-oriented perspectives, each facet employing different framing devices. it has remained a puzzle: How to represent, and through which medium, the sites where people meet to discuss their matters of concern? This kind of site will from here on be referred to as a Ding. The old word "Thing" or "Ding" designated originally a certain type of archaic assembly. Many parliaments in Nordic and Saxon nations still activate the old root of this etymology: Norwegian congressmen assemble in the Storting; Icelandic deputies called the equivalent of thingmen' gather in the Althing; Isle of Man seniors used to gather around the Ting; the German landscape is dotted with Thingstatten and you can see in many places the circles of stones where the Thing used to stand. We have an exhibition opening next week Im working in that space Do that, yes Yeah, we will definitely do that What a coincidence You did it well Required is not a survey of the sites that operate in this manner, a survey of Dings, but a possibly ongoing, consideration of such a question and the formulation of such sites. This film proposes itself as a site for exploring how matters of concern are handled within the form of the film, around or in tangent to the proposed script - while the script suggests that the action is set within proposed Ding sites. The question it asks is what do object-oriented matters of discourse look like? How can object-orientation happen? Tickling Its actually quite interesting cause you think feet intimate to print out something If you unfold your display A little bit of a phase For too long, objects have been matters-of-fact. This is unfair science, unfair to objectivity, They are much more interesting, wrongly portrayed as to them, unfair to unfair to experience. variegated, uncertain,

10

complicated, far reaching, heterogeneous, risky, historical, local, material, and networky than the pathetic version offered for too long by philosophers. Rocks are not simply there to be kicked at, desks to be thumped at. This object is not just the subject that is: what is at stake but it is also the object as in the Ding, the locust for concrete assertions, so wrongly projected upon it as a total understanding, rather than a proposal for exchange. While we have a history of portrayal of the object, and here we can see two different views of what the characteristics of the object are, we can also now see the object as site without that site being some absolute location, consistent, reticent, and used. The object, may remain outside of all assemblies, but not the Ding. Hence the question [is]: What are the various shapes of the assemblies that can make sense of all those assemblages? Through some amazing quirk of etymology, it just happens that the same root has given birth to those twin brothers: the Demon and the Demos Yes, Who on earth is that ravishing boy? I take it youre not referring to either of my sons? Carrington? Oh god. Someone I want you to meet. Coming. Whats the matter? I was just thinking about that disgusting old man with the beard. after all he is a bugger. What? I never know what that means? Hes a homosexual. You mustnt denounce our simple pleasures. Weve not much else to look forward to except old age. thought can you imagine it? A , the loneliness, the regret. No I cant imagine it. Well, you just wait until it stairs you in the face How old are you anyway? Im 36 next birthday. . Me too. everyone is either deaf or French. someone like me had a huge suicide. what is it about that white secretion that pulls down the corners of an Englishmans mouth. Thousands of boys are dieing everyday to preserve this, do you know. Yes. God damn, blast . And fuck the upper classes The word "demos" that makes half of the much-vaunted word

11

"demo-cracy" is haunted by the demon because they share the same Indo-European root da- to divide. Youre the lady. Im the boy from the east end. Course not. Then why dont you admit it? Because its not true. You dont understand. I need my freedom. Freedom? I want to. Cant you see that asking you to help me. If the demon is such a terrible threat, it's because it divides in two. If the demos is such a welcome solution, it's because it also divides in two. A paradox? No, it's because we ourselves are so divided by so many contradictory attachments that we have to assemble. hes been very shy We might be familiar with Jesus admonition against Satan's power, but the same power of division is also what provides the division/divide, namely the sharing of the same territory. There was this one guy - he went to a party with her. Lenny, I dont have to spell it out for you do I? Did my mother have anything to do with this? Sally? Lenny Im not making this stuff up! If you dont believe me, then check it out for your self. I mean I have got involved in a lot of thing I wish I didnt Hence the people, the demos, are made up of those who share the same space and are divided by the same contradictory worries. I really did Honey Yeah Lets get married. What? To ask for a location a where to assemble is not, here at least, a telos, but rather a proposal for a telos. What ya doin? Hows Penny? Im glad to be here tonight. Alright ladies and Sandy? Very good. Usually I dont like doing interviews. But I find you very interesting.

12

But what came out of that was damn good teachers. And do you know what it takes to make good teachers/ And Ill tell you something else. There wasnt one incident reported where a kid came home and said today in school we had five minutes of geography and ten minutes of cock-sucking. To interpret this as iconophileic would be to see it as a route, where as the proposal is always proposed to, always dependent on the Ding to allow for, however uncomfortable, or undesired, an opposition. Uh oh This does beg an icon. It asks for the object, this expanded object, to be produced as icon, to assimilate the object with dogma as integral, while accepting the ambivalence of such a condition. To then see the icon as container in a similar way as the enlightenment architects saw their plans for and productions of their buildings as proposals for locating a public, a folk, and particularly a ding. Ladies and gentlemen: Lenny Bruce. Super Jew. There is not necessarily opposing interests in the biopic. The film-production (not necessarily the completed film) is a ding, or location for one, but not one which is organized as a political meeting, however political it may be. has given permission to become a nun, but only on Fridays. Whats that? King kong is ready now. Ok hes almost ready Were gunna have the king for the second show. I gotta warn you, the photographers not to take any flash photos, cool it with the flash. Otherwise the king gets a little Just give him a a a an air.. a building to play with or an airplane to squeeze The biopic provides a particularly complex understanding of how the ding of film-production occurs as plurivocal, entirely jeopardizing the hierarchies of the film-production. About what object? And what is that thing made of? You this is really wild man, because the judge can get Just sits up there, That just jumps out of his head man, and says hell take that advice Where was I ? Oh! a man or a woman just to arrest me?

13

The words, uh, fuck you to Objection The council will control their client. You may continue. Alright, what else do you recall. Uh, sorry your honor Ill rephrase the question for Mr. Bruce. Alright, Sergeant, Ill He used a microphone Would you mind demonstrating it for the court please? Oh come on man I never meant that to mean jack-off what he was doing was obscene If anyone can do my act it certainly. Mr. Bruce, Im not talking about tits and ass By repeating those words tits and ass tits and ass The point that Im trying to make is that we all live in a ... this court