For your quick or leisurely perusal, the compilation of Long Sunday's recent symposium on Mario Tronti's "The Strategy of the Refusal", and some remarks. The multitudinous, but alphabetised, contributions:
»Jon
Beasley-Murray, The
new barbarians
»Eric
Beck, Minor
refusals
»George Ciccariello-Maher,
Class
and subalternity
»Jodi Dean, Two
questions on Tronti [follow-up]
»Roger Gathman Fantasy
sites and the conquistadors of the planet
»Nate
Hawthorne, Notes
on "The Strategy of the Refusal"
»John
Holloway, Adorno
meets Tronti
»Doug
Johnson, Intellectuals,
the refusal of power, office workers' unions
»Brian
Lamb, I
would prefer not to bore you
»Craig
McFarlane, Refusing
to engage
»David
McInerney, Tronti
and Althusser
»Angela
Mitropoulos, When
will this labour end?
»Brett Neilson, Five
theses on Tronti
»Stephen
Squibb, Strategy
of refusal of strategy
»Keith
Tilford, How
no can you go? Part I [Part
II]
The preamble to the Long Sunday symposium, which includes links to related texts. The relevant essay by Tronti is here, and a quick link to Long Sunday's Tronti folder.
There were also a number of related posts elsewhere: Destructive Creation, Northanger, Going Somewhere, Philosophy.com, pas au-delà, Attitude Adjustor. (Those are the most directly related to the discussion, though I wouldn't be surprised if I've missed some.) And, not least, there is always the ongoing reading at Leggiamo Tronti.
My immense gratitude to all those who contributed their writings, readings and questions - those who simply took the time to read along with, and specifically those, such as Matt, who spent much time coding and uploading.
Already, Jon has the ball rolling for another reading, and I'm hoping that blogweaving continues, mutates and grows. Not only because it creates a shared conversation that cuts across various blogs without converging along the one line, but also because - in ways that have yet to be fully explored - it marks an autonomy of writing, reading and research from the university that, particularly in times such as these, becomes an imperative. Needless to say, what we read and write is related to how we read and write, no less than it is to the diificult questions of who, how and why this 'we' might appear, in that process.
Many thanks for the adventure.