Deconstruction Music Deconstruction Musical Experience Deconstruction
Music today, — revolutionary, modern, popular or even now cliché?
Because this year (2025) and the year before (2024) a whole series of philosophical talks ( in our Philosophical Practice in Vienna ) on the topic of Deconstruction Music Deconstruction Musical Experience Deconstruction is running/being performed (this time in German with jazz students from Switzerland, the Federal Republic of Germany, Austria, Australia and Italy), here is the text published last year (January 2024 only in English) slightly modified and supplemented with information on practice in English and from today also available in German. (cf. link)
Deconstruction Music Deconstruction Musical Experience Deconstruction
Music today, — revolutionary, modern, popular or even now cliché? Music deconstruction Musical experience deconstruction
Gerhard Kaučić
Philosopher, Feminist, Mediator, Author, Freerider, born 1959, Dr. phil., age 66, 2025
Associate in the grammatological philosophical Practice since 2009 in Vienna and beyond
Anna Lydia Huber
Philosophin, Feministin, Mediatorin, Autorin, Freerider:in, geboren 1959, MSc, Alter 66, 2025
To contact us, please use only these emails:
g.kaucic[at]chello[dot]at or gack[at]chello[dot]at
The musical experience and its political, social and philosophical-grammatological implications and presuppositions
https://disseminationsdjayphilpraxkaucic.blogspot.com/2024/01/musical-experience-grammatology.html
Mobile Version (lesen ohne Teaser und Footer im Blogspot-Blog 2014 ff.):
Beethoven heute Beethoven seinerzeit
„Ist“ Beethovens Musik?
Revolutionär, modern, populär oder gar inzwischen Klischee?
Music today, — revolutionary, modern, popular or even now cliché?
Music deconstruction Musical experience deconstruction
Musik Text Beethoven Moderne Postmoderne
(German/English)
Philosophischer Salon Gerhard Kaučić & Anna Lydia Huber
Film Denken
Mobile Version (ohne Teaser im Blogspot-Blog 2014 ff.):
Philosophischer Salon Gerhard Kaučić Djay PhilPrax & Anna Lydia Huber Gasometer Wien
Philosophical Lounge / Philosophischer Salon G Kaucic & AL Huber Vienna, Austria, – Gerhard Kaučić (*1959), head of a philosophical practice for 36 years in Vienna ( 1989-2025 ff.)
To contact us, please use only these emails:
g.kaucic[at]chello[dot]at or gack[at]chello.at
Narratives, Reports, Analyses, Reflections from the Practice/from my/our Philosophical Practice
Vienna 36 years of practice jubilee (1989-2025 ff.) jubilee 36 years PP 2025
PHILOSOPHICAL PRACTICE Gerhard Kaučić (Dr. phil., b. 1959) & Anna Lydia Huber (MSc, b. 1959) VIENNA AUSTRIA EUROPE
Music deconstruction Musical experience deconstruction
Music today, — revolutionary, modern, popular or even now cliché?
Music Education Culture Politics Text
Beethoven’s Ninth (200 years May 2024)
Modernism
Schönberg (150 years September 2024)
Postmodernism
Revolutionary, modern, popular or even now cliché?
An addition, a supplement, a repetition, – a philosophical practice yesterday, today and tomorrow
Gerhard Kaučić (*1959), head/director of a Philosophical Practice for 36 years in Vienna (1989-2025 ff.)
[ Conversations, analysis, discourse, problematization, identity dislocation, subjectivation, formalization, folding, complication, aporia, deconstruction
Gerhard Kaučić Djay PhilPrax, Philosopher, Writer, Feminist, experienced practised music Listener and relevant Reader for 50 years, Freerider, Philosophical Practice, Vienna, PP since 1989, Dr. phil.
Gerhard Kaučić (born 1959), Philosopher, philosophical Practitioner 1989 ff., grammatologist, author, feminist, translator, cyclist, freerider, ecomobilist, the philosopher as cyclist, the philosopher as freerider, the philosopher as circulator, the philosopher as mover, the philosopher as scout …….. trace……. Trace …….. … ]
At the same time we think the impossible and that (this >at the same time<) is the impossible! (Derrida, Donner le temps I)
Music deconstruction Musical experience deconstruction
Music today, — revolutionary, modern, popular or even now cliché?
It is a fact – concert music and opera have become (in contrast to the 19th century) a rather peripheral matter of political life today.
No streaming platforms, no YouTube and no Internet help here either.
We need to deepen the horizon of the musical experience if we want to talk about music and music history as a social history and thus think about it. We must open up access to ways of listening that are located in history and in the respective culture beyond music.
We must make the political, social and philosophical implications of music visible. Music is not an independent closed circuit of aesthetic phenomena and its stylistic characteristics, instrumentation, arrangements, performance practices etc. are not independent of other social force fields of the past and present.
In particular, the economies, the media and the ever-present techniques, including their culturalisation between the power blocks of politics, capitalism, state, society, mediatisation, science, religion, class society, power relations and the state of industrialisation.
Using Vienna as an example, Western musical culture from the Baroque to modern and postmodern times – from Haydn and Mozart in the mid-18th century to Schönberg ( 13.09.1874 Wien – 13.07.1951 Los Angeles, 2024, 150th anniversary, P.s. see footnoteY ), Krenek and Berg in the first half of the 20th century, to Clemens Gadenstätter, Bernhard Lang, Olga Neuwirth and many others in the second half of the 20th century and the first two decades of the 21st century – shows us a very rare opportunity for our thinking to access our European and Austrian past via musical creation, and especially the self-image of today’s Vienna. The arts bear witness to us and our best values for freedom and sociality as well as the possibility of growing beyond ourselves.
footnoteY:
[ To what extent does Schoenberg speak of himself as a „freetone composer“ and not of „atonality “ or twelve-tone composer?
Schönberg rejects the fighting term „atonality“, – he speaks of himself as a „free toner„!
Arnold Schönberg described himself as a „free toner“ to describe his musical task. This term is associated with the development from free atonality to twelve-tone technique.
In the phase of free “atonality”, which Schönberg practised from around 1907, he broke with traditional tonal structures. The contrast between consonance and dissonance is cancelled. A continuum of different tonal colours emerges. The reference to a fundamental tone is abandoned. Tones and sounds stand in a new, non-repeatable relationship to one another.
Schönberg introduced the twelve-tone technique in order to transform free atonality into a bound form. In this technique, each score is based on a twelve-note row that contains each note of the tempered scale once. The choice and arrangement of this row is at the composer’s discretion. The twelve-tone technique opened up new possibilities for musical structuring and Schönberg had a significant influence on a wide range of musicians.
Overall, Schönberg revolutionised the world of music with his radical approach to tonality, creating a new approach to musical experience as a phenomenon of musical complexity and the lust effects of listening. The human body recognises itself as a body of pleasure and as a body of pain (cf. Freud!,- for more on this, see below in the depths and lengths of our posting or our blogs/weblogs) ]
Sounds today are quotations, clichés, semantic objects, not mere series of structurable parameters. The extreme case today is the recontextualisation of often only minimal change into a „new“ work. Almost a real readymade.
Particularly frequent is the transformation from other media into the music and the playing of different soundtracks by means of various machines ( Miles Davis already played revolutionary in his 1969 album „Bitches Brew“, called Fusion Jazz, before him also Frank Zappa, influences from Woodstock to Stockhausen were mentioned as decisive for this; cf. esp. J Dilla, James Dewitt Yancey, auch Jay Dee gerufen, 1974 – 2006, also great influence especially on jazz musicians ).
Sampling and other similar digital techniques spread all over the globe, only the concert halls are largely unimpressed by them. This is also a major reason for the marginalisation of these traditional music businesses. The sailing ships among today’s high-tech boats.
Cage as father figure of all these developments. Collage, bricolage, assemblage, remix, sampling, patch-work, mash-up, intertextuality, texture …
The Internet, collage, the art of the future and the art of the present. Availability of the audio archives of the world. Democracy as a pre-condition. Postmodernism, the possibility of participation for all. Art and enlightenment, the intellectual light of the world. The deconstruction of Derrida.
Understanding Beethoven and/or understanding Beethoven’s music? Along the discourses of the last 300 years between the representatives of programmatic music on the one hand and those of absolute music on the other.
The almost eternal question: Do Beethoven’s instrumental music have an „extra-musical“ meaning or do they have no such meaning?
The group of absolute music (Hanslick, Schönberg, Pfitzner, Schenker, Adorno) works in the conviction that Beethoven’s work has been withdrawn from understanding by the dominant post-Wagnerian „Beethoven image“(!).
What role(s) does music play within the great social discourses of the 19th and 20th centuries.
How does music work and why does it become popular?
For clarification, a large sociological discourse on the bourgeois European institutions, the clients, the musical rhetorical traditions and the increasing participation of amateurs as well as the industrialization of music is needed.
Likewise, there is a need to include discourses on the philosophy of language (keywords: F. Schlegel, F. Nietzsche, Kierkegaard, Husserl, Saussure, Marshall McLuhan, Heidegger, W. Benjamin, Th. W. Adorno, P. de Man, R. Barthes, Cynthia Chase, W. Hamacher, Anselm Haverkamp, H. Blumenberg, J. Derrida) on the unambiguity and ambiguity of word and music.
It is thus also about our field, which Kierkegaard had already touched on in the 19th century – about the process of reading (cf. especially Herbert Marshall McLuhan, Paul de Man and first of all you read Jacques Derrida) and the relationship between author, reader and medium.
Education expanded considerably after 1830, especially musical education. General knowledge and musical knowledge developed in parallel.
Kierkegaard wanted to learn to understand consciousness through patterns of repetition. According to Kierkegaard, consciousness arises from contradictory relationships between a so-called ideal sphere and the external(!) reality, which collided in consciousness. This would result in the experience of repetition, which would require that the event must have already appeared once in reality(!).
Note that Kierkegaard speaks without Freud!
Repetition makes people happy, says Kierkegaard. Memory makes them restless.
But Kierkegaard knows almost Freudian that there can be no pure repetition.
In the psychoanalytical literature, the concept of repetition, the concept of the compulsion to repeat, and in general the various phenomena of repetition are discussed problematically and in a very diverse way.
Also in Freud’s writing „Beyond the pleasure principle“ (1920) itself.
For the time being, the following applies to us here in general: repetition phenomena for the benefit of the ego are working off mechanisms whose task it is to resolve tensions by changing the inner(!) conditions (cf. Bibring, E.: The conception of the repetition compulsion).
Discourses, analyses, descriptions, critiques, explanations inevitably always fall under the category „commentary“.
Comments are always something added. They try to approach a thing, an event, an institution, an action, in short, a text in any form, even if it is music. Comments try to suspend something. This always fails. Comments create a displacement, a repression as well. And with time they often cover up the thing itself.
Why?!
The „commentary“ limits the open semantic game with the means of identity, repetition and the temptation to represent the same. In this way it makes itself a mechanism of control and order by restricting and delimiting discourse and trying to establish unambiguity.
A translation is never a replacement ! Every setting is already a translation of the thought and the unthought. A translation changes the place, shifts and changes and is thus always a different text.
Only an approximate signified can be saved over(!) this way.
Every reading ( even „conversations“ must be read! ) must first produce a significant structure.
There is no criterion for the identity of the meaning of an expression: the interpretation becomes in the scientific sense a matter of undecidability, which does not mean that one could and should not temporarily quasi-fix and evaluate it in a passagere consent of many readers.
So-called „islands of understanding“ of temporary text configurations!
Understanding also in the sense of: a small or larger group of discourse participants „stands“(!) temporarily on temporarily secured „understanding“ – or understanding – ground!
This reason for understanding, this „territory“ of limited (temporally and spatially) understanding, the image of temporary text configurations, the image of standing behind the mirror as „standing“ in the mirror, – a mirror of distortions and performances, a mirror of originally unoriginal transformations, – a mirror that gives off the image (! ) for our language, – our language as graphically marked poetics of communication, – literally !
(See J. Derrida, La dissémination, p. 350 and passim)
The commentary sets the author as the supreme principle of the order of discourse (vg. M. Foucault, Ordnung des Diskurses) and generates its authorities.
„We“(!) represent the task of disseminal critical communication as an open text of a writing, escaping exegesis and the re-presentation of the commentary.
The task is also to be expressed in such a way that „the speech is first as good and then better understood as its author“ (Schleiermacher, Hermeneutik und Kritik, p. 94).
For us, the only critique to be accepted is the permanently critical critique, i.e. a permanently deconstructing critique whose object is the writable of the text, a permanently multiplying text.
„A signifier is, from the outset, the possibility of its own repetition, its own image or its similarity to itself. This is the condition of its ideality. What identifies it as a signifier and as such gives it its function and relates it to a signified can never be a ‚unique and special reality‘ for the same reasons. From the moment the sign appears, that is, from ever since, there is no possibility of finding the pure ‚reality‘, ‚uniqueness‘, and ’specialness‘.” (Derrida, Grammatology, p. 165, germ. ed.)
The authority of the Logos, the commentary, the dominion of the interpretation of scripture nailed to its origins has for some time been exposed to the critical criticism of deconstruction and thus the chance of democracy in the coming (Derrida).
All this points to a radical possibility that cannot be thought of by any single science or abstract discipline (Derrida, Grammatologie, 168f., german edition).
Intertextuality and the underlying multiplicity of codes is in principle unlimited and cannot be limited.The resulting deconstructive textualities and their connotation texture cannot be included or even determined by any context.
The “text” has ceased to be an object in itself. The permanently absent presence of
I n t e r t e x t u a l i t y (this applies to every text, and has done since time immemorial), in which the power of the break with its contexts as a sum of never fully present presences has always been structurally immanent in every sign of writing, has always determined writing – writing without origin and destination (arche, telos).
Practice of d i f f é r a n c e ! ! !
One thing is clearly true of Beethoven’s music: Beethoven’s music provided a framework for the experienced past (or what one might think of as such!), for aesthetic repetition, subjective impressions, educated imagination and its associations and their extra-musical levels of meaning.
Whether the last decades of research have been able to bring us closer to Beethoven in Nietzsche’s sense remains to be seen.
One thing is also clear: new future generations of listeners should learn to distinguish between historical Beethoven and the traditional (!) reception. And that means: read read read read!
The different ways of reading have become inherent in the music itself(!).
Performers and composers should be knowledgeable(!) and at the same time not hide behind scientific and philosophical literature.
Each one may interpret, inspire and be passionately fascinating and intrigued.
It is a very long way to the appropriation of what we call our own history. Have the courage to ever adequately appropriate appropriation.
Have the courage to deconstruct.
Please read about this and beyond:
a) For the birds John Cage in conversation with Daniel Charles. Merve Verlag, Berlin, 1984 (Original French, Paris 1976).
b) Daniel Charles: Periods Performance Music Aesthetics. Merve Verlag, Berlin, 1989.
c) Ivanceanu/Schweikhardt: KKK Art. Sound. War XMedia by Vintila Ivanceanu and Josef Schweikhardt, Passagen Verlag, Vienna 2008.
d) Fuhrmann/Mahnkopf (Hg.): Perspektiven der Musikphilosophie. Suhrkamp Verlag Berlin 2021.
P.s:
As a passionate listener with an acoustically formed ear and sensitive senses in general, and especially as a reader ( ! see above ! ), allow me, at the provisional end of my few lines of memoir on some philosophical Prater walks with guests in connection with our grammatological philosophical practice in Vienna, to give you an interesting literature tip on music and Beethoven:
Leon Botstein: The Memory of Modernism. From Beethoven to Berg. Vienna, Zsolnay Verlag, 2013 (translated from English by Sven Hiemke)
As an introduction to our PPs, I recommend the short essay by Claus-Steffen Mahnkopf: Der Strukturbegriff der musikalischen Dekonstruktion, – easy to find on the Internet! (published as pdf on August 09, 2021 in German, 19 pages)
Beethoven heute Beethoven seinerzeit
„Ist“ Beethovens Musik?
Revolutionär, modern, populär oder gar inzwischen Klischee?
Musik Text Beethoven Moderne Postmoderne
(German/English)
Translation into English, Gerhard Kaučić (Dr. phil., born 1959, Age 66, 2025, PP 1989 ff.)
European Philosopher, Writer, Feminist, deconstructed Hegelian, Translator, Mediator, Freerider, Bicycle Traveller, Enduro Biker, Ecomobilist, Survivor, Philosophical Practitioner/Practical Philosophy, Analytical Philosophy of Language, Deconstruction, Philosophical Practice Vienna Austria Europe
“A text is only a text if it conceals from the first glance… the law of its composition and the rule of its play.
A text always remains imperceptible.”
“The concealment of the texture may well require centuries to uncover its fabric (toile).” Derrida, Plato’s Pharmacy, in: Dissemination, p.71 (Vienna 1995, Passagen Verlag)
( about ) deconstruction one cannot speak one must read “it/her ”.
Psychoanalyse, Sprachanalytische Philosophie, das Unbewußte
Die Sprache, das Sprechen, das Unbewußte (Ubw)
Der Satz und die Philosophie
Philosophical Practice Vienna 1989 ff. Analysis Complication Aporia Identity Dislocation Meta-thesis Deconstruction
DR. GERHARD KAUČIĆ / DJAY PHILPRAX (JG. 1959) LEITER EINER PHILOSOPHISCHEN PRAXIS SEIT 1989
…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. Philosophical Practices / Politics / Disseminations …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… Unsere Aufgabe ist es, die Diskurse der Macht, der Herrschaft, der Autorität – und jeder Diskurs impliziert Machtausübung ! – zu durchkreuzen, logothetisch (im Sinn der Schaffung einer neuen Sprache / einer anderen Sprachverwendung) zu disseminieren, indem wir deren Intertextualitäten, die Kreuzungspunkte vieler anderer Texte in einem jeden Text in viele heterogene Teile auseinander treiben. Der Intertextualität zugrunde liegt die Multiplizität der Codes, die grundsätzlich unbeschränkt ist. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. Mise-en-Abyme ……………………………………. mise en abîme ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. Abyssos …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. intertextuelle Strukturen als die „Natur“ der Sprache ………………………………………………………. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. This reason of understanding, limited by „territory“ (temporally and spatially), the image of temporary textual-configurations ( mise en abyme, picture in picture in picture…), „picture“ as a metaphor of re-flection, the picture of the mirror without tinfoil, the picture of standing behind the mirror as „standing“ in the mirror, – a mirror of distortion and performance/performation (!), a mirror of the initial transformation without origin, – a mirror, which gives the picture ( away ! ?!) for our language, – our language as graphically marked poetics of communication, – literally ! (see J. Derrida, La dissémination, p. 350 und passim) ……………………………………………………………. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. Jede Lektüre ( auch „Gespräche“ müssen gelesen werden! Gehörtes ist gehört worden und in der verstehenden Verstandestätigkeit „gelesen“ worden. Aus-gelesen! Ausgewählt! Aus-sortiert! Aus der gehörten „Wirklichkeit“ er-hört und ent-hört, ver-hört, verwirklicht, verkettet, sprachverkoppelt, verlesen!, zusammen-ge-lesen!, zusammengesammelt, ver-sammelt, ge-doublet, ge-setzt, produktiv ausgelesen! ) muß erst eine signifikante Struktur produzieren. Es gibt kein Kriterium für die Identität des Sinns eines Ausdrucks: die Interpretation wird im wissenschaftlichen Sinne eine Sache der Unentscheidbarkeit, was nicht gleich heißt, daß man sie nicht in einem passageren Einverständnis vieler LeserInnen vorübergehend quasi-fixieren und ver- und bewerten könnte und sollte. Sogenannte „Verstehens-Inseln“ temporärer Textkonfigurationen! Ver-stehen auch im Sinne von: eine kleine oder größere Gruppe von Diskurspartizipanten „steht“(!) temporär auf temporär gesichertem „Verstehens“- bzw Verständnis-Grund! ………………………………………………………. ……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. Dieser Verständnisgrund, dieses „Territorium“ begrenzten (zeitlich und räumlich) Verstehens, das Bildnis temporärer Textkonfigurationen ( mise en abime, Bild im Bild im Bild…), „Bild“ für die Metapher der Re-flexion, das Bild vom Spiegel ohne Stanniol, das Bild vom hinter dem Spiegel stehen als in dem Spiegel „stehen“, – ein Spiegel der Verzerrungen und Performungen, ein Spiegel der ursprünglich ursprungslosen Verwandlungen, – ein Spiegel, der das Bild ab-gibt (!) für unsere Sprache, – unsere Sprache als graphisch markierte Poetik der Kommunikation, – buch-stäblich ! (Vgl. J. Derrida, La dissémination, p. 350 und passim) ………………………………………………………………………………. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. Philosophical Practices / Politics / Disseminations …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………… Unsere Aufgabe ist es, die Diskurse der Macht, der Herrschaft, der Autorität – und jeder Diskurs impliziert Machtausübung ! – zu durchkreuzen, logothetisch ( im Sinn der Schaffung einer neuen Sprache / einer anderen Sprachverwendung / einer intensivierten Wahrnehmung / einer komplexeren Lesbarkeit ) zu disseminieren, indem wir deren Intertextualitäten, die Kreuzungspunkte vieler anderer Texte in einem jeden Text in viele heterogene Teile auseinander treiben. Der Intertextualität zugrunde liegt die Multiplizität der Codes, die grundsätzlich unbeschränkt ist. ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. The intertextuality and its underlying multiplicity of codes is principally unlimited and unlimitable. The growing deconstruction – textualities and their texture of connotation are not includable or even determinable by any context. ……………………………………………………………………………………… ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….. More complex readability ! More complicated readability of the world ! Intensified perception ! ! ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. ……….. ……….. To contact me, please use only this email: g.kaucic[at]chello.at ……… ………… ………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
Jedes Jahr ein Jubiläum / Jedes Jahr bewußt leben
Gegenwartsphilosophie
Adventure Philosophy!
Philosophische Praxis
Gerhard Kaučić / Djay PhilPrax, Wien ( Dr. phil. ), Philosophical Practitioner, Writer
philosophical practices face à face
b. 1959, Philosopher, Writer, 66, 2025
Gerhard Anna Cončić-Kaučić
Gerhard Anna Cončić-Kaučić (geboren 1959, Schriftsteller:in – Wiener Postmoderne – Dekonstruktion – Wien – Vertreter:in der Wiener Spielart der Dekonstruktion im Sinn Jacques Derridas)
Titel von Gerhard Anna Cončić-Kaučić bei Passagen
Gerhard Anna Cončić-Kaučić
S/E/M/EI/O/N/ /A/OR/IST/I/CON II
oder zur Autobiographie Sem Schauns
Reihe Passagen Literaturprogramm
/S/E/M/EI/ON/ /A/OR/IST/I/CON ist ein siebenbändiger Großtext, eine disseminative Lekritüre, dessen zweiter Band der Dekonstruktion von ‚Finnegans-Wake‘ gewidmet ist. Große Literatur ist nicht einfach nur Sprache, die bis zur Grenze des Möglichen mit Sinn geladen ist, wie Ezra Pound meinte, James Joyce verwirklichte, Arno Schmidt und Hans Wollschläger fortführten, sondern sie ist Schrift im Sinne Jacques Derridas, die diese Grenze ständig verschiebt, verdichtet, entstellt. Der Text besteht aus vielen Buchstaben, aus sehr vielen – und jeder Buchstabe ist ein ganzes Universum an Bedeutungen – mehr noch – an „Zeichen“. Jedes dieser Zeichen ist in Bezug auf sich „selbst“ und in Bezug auf alle anderen Zeichen zu setzen und zu lesen. Kein Zeichen darf nicht gelesen werden. Wie im ‚Book of Kells‘ oder den Handschriften des alten Orients in der „untergegangenen“ Bibliothek Sarajewo.
Dieser Grenzgang durch die Felder von Literatur, Theorie, Informatik, Wissenschaft, Philosophie und Sprachen arbeitet in und mit allen Überlieferungen des Orients, des alten Europa, der neuzeitlichen Wissenschaften und Literaturen sowie der postmodernen Theorie.
Gerhard-Anna Concic-Kaucic, geboren 1959, Schriftsteller, Wien.
Gerhard Anna Cončić-Kaučić
S/E/M/EI/O/N/ /A/OR/IST/I/CON III
oder zur Autobiographie Sem Schauns
Reihe Passagen Literaturprogramm
/S/E/M/EI/ON/ /A/OR/IST/I/CON/ ist ein siebenbändiger Großtext, eine disseminative Lekritüre, dessen dritter Band der Dekonstruktion von Wissenschaft und Theorie gewidmet ist. Große Literatur ist nicht einfach nur Sprache, die bis zur Grenze des Möglichen mit Sinn geladen ist, wie Ezra Pound meinte, James Joyce verwirklichte, Arno Schmidt und Hans Wollschläger fortführten, sondern sie ist Schrift im Sinne Jaques Derridas, die diese Grenze ständig verschiebt, verdichtet, entstellt. Konzis arbeitet Inspektor Sem auf dem Strich vor dem Gesetz. Telquel die Bannmeile Europa, Sucht und Seuche, Wissenschaft und Wahrheit, Mikroben, Gene, Spuren zur Autobiographie Sem Schauns.
Dieser Grenzgang durch die Felder von Literatur, Theorie, Informatik, Wissenschaft, Philosophie und Sprachen arbeitet in und mit allen Überlieferungen des Orients, des alten Europa, der neuzeitlichen Wissenschaften und Literaturen, sowie der postmodernen Theorie.
Gerhard-Anna Concic-Kaucic, geboren 1959, Schriftsteller, Wien.
Gerhard Anna Cončić-Kaučić
S/E/M/EI/O/N/ /A/OR/IST/I/CON I
oder zur Autobiographie Sem Schauns
Reihe Passagen Literaturprogramm
/S/E/M/EI/ON/ /A/OR/IST/I/CON/ ist ein siebenbändiger Großtext, eine disseminative Lekritüre, dessen erster Band der Dekonstruktion von Religionen und Mythologien gewidmet ist. Große Literatur ist nicht einfach nur Sprache, die bis zur Grenze des Möglichen mit Sinn geladen ist, wie Ezra Pound meinte, James Joyce verwirklichte, Arno Schmidt und Hans Wollschläger fortführten, sondern sie ist Schrift im Sinne Jacques Derridas, die diese Grenze ständig verschiebt, verdichtet, entstellt.
Dieser Text schreibt in sich einen Roman, ein Gedicht, ein Epos auch. Die Geschichte ist ein Krimi rund um den Helden Sam. Eine Geschichte ein Ro man zum letzten Helden, zum ersten Helden.
„Es“ ist „Ain Traum Booch“ – wie der „Unter-Titel“ sagt. Dieser Grenzgang durch die Felder von Literatur, Theorie, Informatik, Wissenschaft, Philosophie und Sprachen arbeitet in und mit allen Überlieferungen des Orients, des alten Europa, der neuzeitlichen Wissenschaften und Literaturen sowie der postmodernen Theorie.
Gerhard-Anna Concic-Kaucic, geboren 1959, Schriftsteller, Wien.
Gerhard Anna Cončić-Kaučić
S/E/M/EI/O/N/ /A/OR/IST/I/CON IV
oder zur Autobiographie Sem Schauns
Reihe Passagen Literaturprogramm
/S/E/M/EI/ON/ /A/OR/IST/I/CON ist ein siebenbändiger Großtext, eine disseminative Lekritüre, dessen vierter Band der Dekonstruktion von Sexualität und Sexualisationsprozessen gewidmet ist. Große Literatur ist nicht einfach nur Sprache, die bis zur Grenze des Möglichen mit Sinn geladen ist, wie Ezra Pound meinte, James Joyce verwirklichte, Arno Schmidt, Hans Wollschläger und Oswald Wiener fortführten, sondern sie ist eine Schrift im Sinne Jacques Derridas, die diese Grenze ständig verschiebt, verdichtet und entstellt.
Inspektor Sem dekonstruiert Rhetoriken, Sexualanthropologien, Psychagogien, erfindet Schnittstellen, Codes von Liebesrelationen, Liebesmodellen, Geschlechterbeziehungen, decouvriert Paradigmen von Geschlechterdifferenz. Differenz zwischen Liebe und Tod.
Dieser Grenzgang durch die Felder von Literatur, Theorie, Informatik, Wissenschaft, Philosophie und Sprachen arbeitet in und mit Überlieferungen des Orients, des alten Europa, der neuzeitlichen Wissenschaften und Literaturen sowie der postmodernen Theorie.
Gerhard-Anna Concic-Kaucic, geboren 1959, Schriftsteller, Wien.
Gerhard Anna Cončić-Kaučić
/S/E/M/EI/ON/ /A/OR/IST/I/CON V
oder zur Autobiographie Sem Schauns
Reihe Passagen Literaturprogramm
Mit dem fünften Band von ‚S/E/M/EI/ON/ /A/OR/IST/I/CON/ oder zur Autobiographie Sem Schauns‘ erscheint ein weiterer Text in der Reihe zur Autobiographie des Agenten Sem. Sem, Privatdetektiv, Inspektor, Geheimagent, ist Akteur im System Sprache. Die Schrift im Sinne Jacques Derridas ist sein Medium und auszuspionierendes geheimdienstliches Operationsfeld. Das „Echelon-Projekt“ repräsentiert als Ergebnis die Matrix eines großen Lauschangriffs auf das Humanum schlechthin: Identität, Körper, Reproduktion, Sexualität, Macht, Gewalt, Repräsentation, Sprache, Semiotik, Gedächtnis, Wissen, Archiv. Zugleich ist dieser Text vielleicht die Erfüllung der Forderung von Helmut Heissenbüttl nach einer Literatur für intellektuelle LeserInnen und eine Liebeserklärung an Jacques Derrida.
Gerhard-Anna Concic-Kaucic, geboren 1959, Schriftsteller, Wien.
In English:
CORONA WHEELING CROWNING
Covidity Virality Virtuality Mediality Metahumanoidity ?!
The leap. Leaving the book. The production, the emancipation, the liberation of writing.
……………………. Semeion Aoristicon oder zur Autobiographie Sem Schauns …………………..
……. THE SENTENCE ………. the jump ……… the set ……. the leap o f ….
The LEAVING of
the BOOK ……….. ?!
/S/E/M/EI/ON/ /A/OR/IST/I/CON/
I ask if Sem VI is not my / our blog composition !?!
I ask (me / us) if Sem VII is not my / our blog.
I ask if my/our blog will not be Sem VI and Sem VII?
And shall be!
Or must be?
Already is, will be or even must be and will have to be !?!
The set. The leaving of the book.
The production, the emancipation, the liberation of the writing.
Semeion Aoristicon or to the autobiography of Sem Schauns
……. THE SET …….. THE LEAVING OF THE BOOK …….. !?
/S/E/M/EI/ON/ /A/OR/IST/I/CON/
Psychoanalyse, Sprachanalytische Philosophie, das Unbewußte
Die Sprache, das Sprechen, das Unbewußte (Ubw)
Der Satz und die Philosophie
Falls Sie interessiert sind an einer PP mit mir/uns, bitte nur unter dieser E-mail einen Termin reservieren: To contact me/us, please use only this email: g.kaucic[at]chello.at
If you are interested in a PP (Philosophical Practice) with me, please reserve an appointment only under this email: To contact us, please use only this email: gack[at]chello.at
Philosophers, Writers, Philosophical Practitioners, Mediators, Translators, Feminists, Freeriders, (Wild) Camping Enthusiasts, Survivors Vienna
Philosophical Practice weltweit … rund um die Uhr … rund um die Welt, … „face à face“, … confidential one-to-one conversation, … around the clock … around the world
Grammatologische Philosophische Praxis Dr. Gerhard Kaucic / Djay PhilPrax ( geb. 1959, Autor, Philosoph, PP seit 1989 ) Gespräch, Analyse, Diskurs, Problematisierung, Identitätsdislokation, Subjektivierung, Formalisierung, Fältelung, Komplizierung, Aporie, Dekonstruktion
Öffnungszeiten / Hours of opening: Mo – Do: 11 – 20 Uhr
Honorar nach Vereinbarung / Charge by arrangement
Gespräche outdoor/indoor: Grammatologien, Kontextualisierungen, Analysen, Komplizierungen, Plurivalenzen, Dependenzen, Interdependenzen, Grammatiken, Aporien, Dekonstruktion…rund um die Uhr…rund um die Welt…
…around the clock …around the world…
GESPRÄCHE sind EREIGNISSE als TEXT
cf. Jacques Derrida, Signatur Ereignis Kontext, – in: Randgänge der Philosophie, Wien 1988, S. 291-314 ( Französische Originalausgabe: Marges de la philosophie, Paris 1972 )
Philosophical Practice Vienna 1989 ff. Analysis Complication Aporia Identity Dislocation Meta-thesis Deconstruction
Cf. list of publications at: https://scholar.google.at/citations?user=wNUSN64AAAAJ&hl=de
To contact us, please use only these emails:
g.kaucic[at]chello[dot]at or gack[at]chello.at
Projekte / Projects (1989 – 2025 ff.) 36 Jahre Philosophische Praxis Wien GK & ALH
Mehr dazu siehe unseren Teaser und unseren Footer sowie die übrigen Postings im Blogspot-Blog 2014 ff.
