Re:TheAshLad - Sandbooks

producing an excess with regard to socially apparatuses and on the
other hand. that this instinctual operation becomes a practice a
transformation of. natural and social resistances limitations and
stagnations if and only if. it enters into the code of linguistic and social
communication.. What we call signifiance then is precisely this
unlimited and unbounded. generating process this unceasing operation
of the drives towards in and. through language towards in and through
the exchange system and its. protagonists the subject and his
institutions. This heterogeneous process. neither anarchic fragmented
foundation nor schizophrenic blockage is a. structuring practice a
passage to the outer boundaries of the subject and. society. Then and
only then can it be jouissance and revolution.. Some comments. what I
understand what Kristeva terms a 'practice' of 'text' amounts.
somewhat to Sondheim's 'codework' (almost literal the working of
code. coding of work). It is codework if and only if it enters into the
code of. lingustic and social communication otherwise maybe as
'workcode' it is. 'signifiance' the making meaning and crisis in the
structure of 'text'.. 'Text' is composed of signifiance and practice
which are two sides like the. working of code (signifiance) vs. coding
of work (practice).. My understanding of Eco from the earlier post. Eco
A sign is always an element of an expression plane
CONVENTIONALLY. CORRELATED to one (or several) elements of
a content plane.. A codesign is always an element of an expression
plane CODIFIED to one (or. several) elements of a content plane.. Sign
is convention codesign is interpretation or as. Signs have automatic
interpretations.. Codesigns have problematic conventions.. Codesigns
are unconventional interpreted signs.. In my understanding of Eco and
Kristeva. What Eco calls 'conventionally correlation' in the
signification is the same. as 'codify' where the conventions are
problematic interpretative it's still. the same signification process going
on but of different complexity.. And an important thing the
'conventional correlation' isn't this just the. signification process again
in case Eco is actually defining the sign. recursively loopy which would
fit in with Kristeva's notion and which was my. point to say in the
earlier Eco response that the 'sign' is purely virtual. it never takes place
the expression plane never meets the content plane the. 'conventional
correlation' is a chasm or synapse or bridge and where all. the Kristeva
shattering break in or is transmitted or runs under. Eco's sign. is never
complete the problem is the 'conventional correlation' which is the.
sign itself so it never ends. Codework and Kristeva's practice of text is.
61