#noncommunication

“Foucault's often taken as the theorist of disciplinary societies and of their principal technology, confinement (not just in hospitals and prisons, but in schools, factories, and barracks). But he was actually one of the first to say that we're moving away from disciplinary societies, we've already left them behind. We're moving toward control societies that no longer operate by confining people but through continuous control and instant communication.  People are of course constantly talking about prisons, schools, hospitals: the institutions are breaking down. But they're breaking down because they're fighting a losing battle. New kinds of punishment, education, health care are being stealthily introduced. Open hospitals and teams providing home care have been around for some time. One can envisage education becoming less and less a closed site differentiated from the workspace as another closed site, but both disappearing and giving way to frightful continual training, to continual monitoring of worker-schoolkids or bureaucrat-students. They try to present this as a reform of the school system, but it's really its dismantling. In a control-based system nothing's left alone for long. .... One can of course see how each kind of society corresponds to a particular kind of machine—with simple mechanical machines corresponding to sovereign societies, thermo-dynamic machines to disciplinary societies, cybernetic machines and computers to control societies. But the machines don't explain anything, you have to analyze the collective arrangements of which the machines are just one component. Compared with the approaching forms of ceaseless control in open sites, we may come to see the harshest confinement as part of a wonderful happy past. The quest for "universals of communication" ought to make us shudder. It's true that, even before control societies are fully in place, forms of delinquency or resistance (two different things) are also appearing. Computer piracy and viruses, for example, will replace strikes and what the nineteenth century called "sabotage" ("clogging" the machinery) . You ask whether control or communication societies will lead to forms of resistance that might reopen the way for a communism understood as the "transversal organization of free individuals." Maybe, I don't know. But it would be nothing to do with minorities speaking out. Maybe speech and communication have been corrupted. They're thoroughly permeated by money—and not by accident but by their very nature. We've got to hijack speech. Creating has always been something different from communicating. The key thing may be to create vacuoles of noncommunication, circuit breakers, so we can elude control.” - Gilles Deleuze in conversation with Antonio Negri, “Control and Becoming.”  Futur Anterieur 1 (Spring 1990), translated by Martin Joughin.      

“Language is needed to relate to people with whom you have no love relationship.  Non-language is needed for people with whom you have a love relationship.  One has to become innocent again, like a child, and silent.  Gestures will be there - sometimes you will smile and hold hands, or sometimes you will just remain silent, looking into each other’s eyes, not doing anything, just being. The presences meet and merge, and something happens which only you will know.  Only you and to whom it has happened  - no one else will become aware, it happens in such depth.  Enjoy that silence; feel and taste and savor it, soon you will see that is has its own communication; that it is greater and higher and deeper and more profound.  And that communication is sacred; it has a purity about it.”

There's so much I want to say. But I don't know who to say it to?