September 2008

R.I.P. PAYMEX

is no more. I think it might have been the big Dick Sale in the previous post that did it.

The erstwhile 100% NZ-owned Paymex signed out with this letter:

Hi simon,

As at 1:45pm 17th September 2008 Paymex has unfortunately had to close it’s doors. Due to some runaway chargebacks and various legal issues we’ve been subsequently forced to stop trading.

Those of you that had money in your Paymex account will have it withdrawn automatically from our system to be scheduled for deposit into your nominated account. In saying this, it is now up to our bank (BNZ) to make payments. This may take up to a week to sort out.

We wish you all the best of luck, and also apologise for any inconveniance this has caused. [sic]

The Paymex Team

Paymex

Checked out. No more.

For over a year I’ve had several pages here soliciting for donations – in a fully transparent fashion – via paymex. They will now direct you to paypal and you can make the donations there that you failed to make to paymex, thereby failing to support our own – our own enterprise in our own dollars.

Now, who owns paypal? and who really owned paymex?

croydon
detraque

Comments (0)

Permalink

Dick Sale, Balmoral

croydon
detraque
snap

Comments (0)

Permalink

looking out for the timely and outlandish

Like all of nature, I have failed.

– Fernando Pessoa, The Book of Disquiet, p. 250

I wonder what I was thinking. Because whatever it was it has gone. Should I make an effort to reconstruct? Or make it new?

I could return to my sources. There’s Olkowski’s Ruin of Representation. There’s Deleuze’s virtual ontology, meaning there is something.

And, there’s Bergson: the past is; the present was. However, the present is insofar it is the most intense contraction of the past. It virtually is.

If the past is, were I to undertake it my effort to reconstruct would be useless. That past bears on the present. What then am I holding when I think and commit to writing that I am holding it?

I’m thinking that I ought to commit to writing what comes now of holding the whole thing. Whatever I was thinking need not be wondered at. Should I be mirror-struck?

If I ever held the whole thing it is this which I will be committing to writing as I make sense of it now: it was a prophecy, my understanding of before.

In the Abécédaire, a dialogue with Claire Parnet, filmed in 1988-9, which Deleuze insisted not be published in his lifetime – not that that makes it more or less an authentic expression -, Deleuze talks about forgetting the work he is not engaged with. He says he may be intensely engaged with it at the time but this does not translate to his remembering it after: he has to start again every time. Spinoza, however, stays in his heart.

He talks about knowing nothing and even being scared of those who know everything, like Umberto Eco. Deleuze favours knowing nothing – knowing nothing except what I am doing at the time. And engaging with that fully.

Claire Parnet asks him whether he makes an effort to go out to exhibitions and films and plays and if so what sort of an effort that is. Deleuze answers that he makes an effort to remain on the look out, to be looking out, presumably for an outside, something sufficiently strong that it would take him outside philosophy. He recognises that on his own he only has philosophy to take him outside philosophy.

He also says that he looks out for what feeds in to the work he is engaged with at the time. He looks out for what is both timely and outlandish.

As an aside, he says in this interview that he has no time for theatre generally, except for the work of Carmelo Bene and Robert Wilson.

detraque
immedia

Comments (0)

Permalink

LARGE HADRON COLLIDER – CERN scale & wonder

detraque

Comments (0)

Permalink

How prophecies work

That’s how prophecies work … They’re not about what makes sense; they’re about what will be.

– China Miéville, Un Lun Dun, Del Rey Books, NY, 2008, p. 105

– illustration by China Miéville

pique-assiettes

Comments (0)

Permalink