Grab our RSS Feed

Book Review: Radical Imaginings

by Abe Walker


Imag­i­nal Machines by Stevphen Shukaitis. Autono­me­dia (2009).

At every level, Imag­i­nal Machines is a sub­ver­sive text. Against the ris­ing tide of com­pla­cency, Stephven Shukaitis sketches out new pos­si­bil­i­ties for polit­i­cal engage­ment that are at once sedi­tious and savvy. Res­olutely anti-disciplinarian (in both senses of the word), he leaps reck­lessly from phi­los­o­phy to art crit­i­cism to social move­ment stud­ies. In the book’s open­ing pages, Shukaitis promises to “con­nect Sur­re­al­ism with migrant work­ers, the Indus­trial Work­ers of the World with Dadaism, and back again.” Against all odds, he does so, and with great aplomb. From its non-linear orga­ni­za­tion to its whim­si­cal type­face, Imag­i­nal Machines coura­geously defies con­ven­tion. Throw­ing cau­tion to the wind, the book explodes the lim­its of both what can be said and how it might be said.

Styl­is­ti­cally, Imag­i­nal Machines is both enter­tain­ing and ter­rif­i­cally com­plex. The text over­flows with pre­scient metaphors, digres­sions, in-jokes, and par­en­thet­i­cal obser­va­tions. But these quips and asides are not merely adjunct to the pri­mary text but rather rival the “main” nar­ra­tive for atten­tion. The sub­text quickly becomes the sur­face, and in an affront to neo-positivist ways of know­ing, Shukaitis bends his lyri­cal prose side­ways and back­wards, with­out ever com­pro­mis­ing lucid­ity. Reflect­ing the uncer­tainty of post­mod­ern times, nearly every declar­a­tive state­ment comes paired with a qual­i­fier or a caveat. The result is a text that folds in upon itself with mul­ti­ple lev­els of meaning.

The body of the text is cen­tered around a series of case stud­ies (though the notion of a case doesn’t align with the author’s method). Shukaitis takes us on a whirl­wind tour of what oth­ers have called “alter­na­tive insti­tu­tions” (sev­eral of which he was involved in per­son­ally) and offers a prob­ing intro­spec­tive analy­sis. Yet unlike other recent assess­ments of the global Left “scene,” which tend to be opti­mistic to the point of absur­dity (for exam­ple, We Are Every­where, Now­Topia, Real Utopia), Shukaitis main­tains his (self-)critical edge through­out. Indeed, Shukaitis is keenly aware that — by most mea­sures of suc­cess — the Left is los­ing badly. For exam­ple, in a chap­ter on worker self-management (WSM), Shukaitis describes his four-year-long involve­ment with a worker-owned record label in vivid detail. But ulti­mately, he con­cludes that WSM may have lim­ited rad­i­cal poten­tial (though his argu­ment is sig­nif­i­cantly more com­plex), and in the process offers the type of deep self-critique that is painfully absent in most
Left circles.

The term Imag­i­nal Machines mer­its some expla­na­tion. As Shukaitis notes, his title is bor­rowed from a term coined by Peter Lam­born Wil­son (aka Hakim Bey), itself a deriv­a­tive of Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari’s desiring-machine. So the imag­i­nal machine is “a par­tic­u­lar arrange­ment or com­po­si­tion of desires and cre­ativ­ity as ter­ri­to­ri­al­ized through and by rela­tions between bod­ies in motion.” The idea of outer space fig­ures promi­nently here. For Shukaitis, the metaphor of space is rela­vant pre­cisely because it rep­re­sents that which can­not be (entirely) known. In sci­ence fic­tion film, the music of Sun-Ra, and the pop­u­lar imag­i­na­tion, space func­tions as a zone of lim­it­less pos­si­bil­ity. Shukaitis sug­gests that a pol­i­tics bounded by the coor­di­nates of the known world is hope­lessly con­strained. Instead, “an imag­i­nal land­scape is a pre­con­di­tion for actu­ally find­ing a north­west pas­sage in the phys­i­cal world.” Whether or not space is oper­at­ing at the level of metaphor here, it is a pow­er­ful heuris­tic device.

Imag­i­nal Machines is often remark­able for what it doesn’t do. Though the con­cept of “rad­i­cal imag­i­na­tion” emerges as a dom­i­nant theme, Shukaitis self-consciously refuses to men­tion C. Wright Mills, whose Soci­o­log­i­cal Imag­i­na­tion is usu­ally con­sid­ered among the most impor­tant con­tri­bu­tions to the con­cept. For a tra­di­tional social sci­en­tist to write a book on the “imag­i­na­tion” with­out explic­itly invok­ing Mills would approach blas­phemy. But Shukaitis is no tra­di­tional social sci­en­tist (though he may be a blas­phe­mer). Like­wise, Karl Marx appears mainly through his metaphors (the archi­tect and the bee, the old mole, “storm­ing heaven”). Yet Marx lurks in the deep crevices of Imag­i­nal Machines’ pages and his influ­ence is never far from the sur­face. Though the book is, in part, a crit­i­cal encounter (ren­con­tre) between auton­o­mist Marx­ism and post­struc­tural­ist the­ory, this is not Shuaki­tis’ main intel­lec­tual project.

While it adheres to some extent to tra­di­tional book-publishing con­ven­tions, Imag­i­nal Machines strives to be a rhi­zomatic text with no begin­ning and no end — only a bound­less mid­dle. Char­ac­ter­is­ti­cally, most of the book’s con­clu­sions arise from the embed­ded case stud­ies, while the book’s final chap­ter (the “actual” con­clu­sion) opens up far more ques­tions than it pro­vides answers to. In the sec­tion on work and self-management, Shukaitis at one point rec­om­mends a pol­i­tics based on “the con­stant imma­nent shap­ing and cre­ativ­ity that will not allow itself to ever be totally bound in a fixed form.” There is a sense here that Shukaitis is com­ment­ing on the very text he is pro­duc­ing — or bet­ter yet, the “work” of book-writing. If there is an enemy in Imag­i­nal Machines, it is the idea of clo­sure—that strug­gle should at some point cease, that the rev­o­lu­tion should be con­tained, that orga­ni­za­tions should seek per­ma­nence.
This opens the ques­tion of fail­ure, another major theme in the book. For the post-9/11 Left, most of the last decade has been char­ac­ter­ized by moods that don’t trans­late well into Eng­lish—malaise, ennui, schae­den­freude, and melan­cho­lia. Large street protests seem to have qui­eted down, while, at the same time, the ever-resilient late cap­i­tal­ist state has demon­strated a unique abil­ity to co-opt dis­si­dent move­ments. Of course, as Shukaitis reminds us, this is noth­ing new. thirty years ago, the threat of worker mil­i­tancy and fac­tory occu­pa­tions famously por­tended the rise of worker par­tic­i­pa­tion com­mit­tees, qual­ity cir­cles, and the team con­cept — a blow from which most unions have yet to recover. More recently, in con­ti­nen­tal Europe, wide­spread protests around (against?) pre­car­i­ous work were “answered” in the form of “flex­i­cu­rity” (flex­i­ble secu­rity) regimes — a Phyrric vic­tory at best. Yet accel­er­ated cycles of recu­per­a­tion — defeat via com­pro­mise — may well be a unique fea­ture of post-Fordism. The task then becomes devis­ing a pol­i­tics that can resist the over­ar­ch­ing ten­dency toward cap­ture — even temporarily.

Here, Shakaitis draws heav­ily on the notion of infrapol­i­tics, as posited by James Scott and pop­u­lar­ized by the cul­tural his­to­rian Robin Kel­ley. Much like Deleuze’s minor pol­i­tics, Kelley’s infrapol­i­tics sug­gest a “hid­den tran­script of power…or a space that is some­what encoded or oth­er­wise made less com­pre­hen­si­ble to those in power.” Shukaitis argues that in order to avoid recu­per­a­tion, resis­tance must oper­ate largely in the sphere of infrapol­i­tics — beyond the watch­ful gaze of the state — and speak in ways that defy under­stand­ing. Per­haps the answer to Guy­a­tri Spivak’s pre­scient ques­tion “Can the Sub­al­tern Speak?” is a defin­i­tive “yes” — but not in ways that are uni­ver­sally intelligible.

The audi­ence for Imag­i­nal Machines is sure to be broad. On the one hand, the book is writ­ten by a move­ment insider with exten­sive knowl­edge of the con­tem­po­rary Amer­i­can Left and is grounded in real polit­i­cal strug­gles. On the other, Imag­i­nal Machines is a sophis­ti­cated endeavor, deeply informed by high the­ory (espe­cially of the Ital­ian auton­o­mist and the French post­struc­tural­ist vari­ety). Yet Imag­i­nal Machines is not just another “social move­ment study” by an aca­d­e­mic from the dis­tant per­spec­tive of a “neu­tral” observer. Shukaitis con­stantly reminds us that actually-existing polit­i­cal prac­tice is already immersed inthe­o­ret­i­cal pre­sup­po­si­tions, just as good the­ory emerges from real strug­gles. But Shukaitis tran­scends and ulti­mately dis­penses with the clas­sic binary between “the­ory” and “prac­tice” by mas­ter­fully weav­ing both into a seam­less nar­ra­tive. The result is the rare aca­d­e­mic book that is cer­tain to appeal to activists and orga­niz­ers, but does not com­pro­mise its schol­arly integrity in so doing.

This is a unique and extra­or­di­nary text that deserves wide atten­tion. Just as Baruch Spin­oza famously posed the ques­tion “What can a body do?” Shukaitis seems to ask “What can a book do?” The answer, it appears, is far more than we think.

Posted by Abe Walker on Feb 25th, 2010 and filed under Book Reviews. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. You can leave a response by filling following comment form or trackback to this entry from your site

Leave a Reply