Succeeds in its mission of seducing readers into reading Bataille. The animating theory Noys develops concerning the assimilation and expelling of foreign/alien thought, which uses Bataille to diagnose the failure to engage with difference that characterises both his enthusiasts and detractors, is essential for any theory that wishes to embrace the porous nature of desire.
-Second Thoughts-
Noys cites a striking image from the Visions of Excess and Encyclopedia Acephalica respectively:
"Like the dictionary, science divides up the world into discrete units, trying to impose ‘a mathematical frock coat’ (VE, 31) on the world. Philosophy, on the other hand, tries to contain these forces within metaphysical wholes. What remains is the leftover, the remainder, which cannot be assimilated. The event of eruption is like ‘a fly on an orator’s nose’ (EA, 102), whose comic effect of ‘acute perturbation’ mocks the discourses of knowledge."
The reaction provoked by this fly is a good example of Bataille's non-dialectical negation. If reading Bataille is like an addiction, as Noys suggests in the conclusion, how might we wean ourselves from this passion for self-destruction without falling into the twin traps of division (the frock coat) and assimilation/containment (the fly)?
-Third Thoughts-
Having now read Bataille's little novella, I am prepared to fully endorse Ben's interpretation. Unlike Nick Land, Noys sees clearly the arbitrariness of Bataille's construction. Contingency is very sexy; sexiness doesn't suffice to guarantee conceptual rigor.
Happily, the situation is salvageable. The market makes us cum, but reason teaches us that some orgasms feel good, and others feel exploitative. Land's Bataille can't distinguish between the feedback loops induced by the life and death drives. Noys' Bataille can.