I’m sorry its been so long since my last post. A lot has happened in our course since mid-semester. Now that you have completed your “widesites,” you are faced with the task of reflection. Here’s my example of what you mght do, though you’ll probably want to quote directly from Ulmer’s text (I don’t have mine in front of me right now). I’m going to use the three steps for reflection used by Ulmer’s students and discussed in the textbook: mood, worldview, and morality. Mood: what is the mood of my wide emblem? I suppose you could call it insouicance (i.e. blithe unconcern, nonchalance). My creative impulse is to take risks, to let the work go where it may. This would be connected to Nietzche’s idea of free action, to which Ulmer alludes at the end of the book. Rather than tying myself to resentment and guilt, I declare, after Deleuze, “I have nothing to admit.” Worldview: what is the view of the world/cosmos suggested by this image and mood? Existential in the sense that the world has no inherent meaning in the human sense (and what other sense would we have?). Topological in that the cosmos is open to radical mutation and deformation. Morality: what morality evolves from this worldview? A multiplicity of morality. The task here is to be done with judgment. Once again, I return to Deleuze and his first collaborative work with Felix Guattari, titled Anti-Oedipus, which Michel Foucault (the famous French philosopher) called a “Guide to Anti-Fascist Living.” Morality here is anti-fascist and anti-judgment; in its place is a code of possibility and experimentation. A code that is more like a computer code than a moral code; a launch point for generating activity.