Talk:Paul Virilio

message: I've made a start to this but there are some blank spaces in 'Key Concepts' and I also haven't had time to do the Bibliography. Can anyone fill in some of the concepts? Suggest others? --bookgirl 12:36, 26 Apr 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Untitled

message: Thanks for getting this underway. The Integral accident as documented in Virilio's book seems to me to be an explanatory concept of enormous potency and predictive worth. He uses Chernobyl as his key example, but it would apply to BSE and Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease (CJD); the serious and widespread outbreak of Foot and Mouth disease, etc.  I do not believe there is any serious  question of Virilio's general importance. Jeffrey Newman 10:12, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Excellent article 

message: Yes, the integral accident has enormous potential.  And the predictive value of his ideas (and the integral accident in particular) places Virilio on a special plateau, in my mind.  However, his ideas are difficult and sometimes the way he expresses them does not make them any more accessible.  Might it help to include a list of people who have been influenced by Virilio?  The breadth of his ideas, the way they cut through many disciplines, and cultures of knowledge, in a coherent and insightful way places him on some shortlist somewhere I feel sure.
Sokal and Bricmont, do deserve coverage, perhaps in article on anti-intellectualism?  I wouldn't be against describing Virilio as a sometime target of such folks, perhaps with a link to their article from this article.  I don't want to censure other views, but I think we can all agree that this article is about Virilio, and I really want it to exude clarity.  The ideas are powerful, all they need is clarity to make this article sing.  It isn't there yet. enigma_foundry 05:55, 26 July 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: doubleplusgood start, but needs work

message: Whether or not one finds Sokal and Bricmont's arguments persuasive or relevant to Virilio's work, a mention of the debate itself is certainly relevant to an encyclopedia article on Virilio.--Birdmessenger 11:30, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: No, no, no! It's relevant to a discussion of Sokal and Bricmont's work.  Just because Virilio appears in the bibliography of some other book (or even is discussed there slightly more—though still in that case by people who admit to not actually reading Virilio) doesn't make that other book relevant to this article.  It's known as "special pleading" to try to include an endorsement of one odd ball passing mention of Virilio, while excluding the hundreds or thousands of other citations/discussions of him. (and no, the article need not include hundreds of people who put Virilio in their bibliography). Lulu of the Lotus-Eaters 19:13, 31 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  the notability of Fashionable Nonsense 

message: I find the style of this article unduly flowery, over the top, and obtuse if not verging on the pretentious.  Is the line about the fractal meteorite with an impact prepared in the propitious darkness from his work?  It's really not something that lends to a greater understanding of the subject.  If it's a quote, can we have the reference, otherwise, I'd prefer it if the writing style was toned down a little in favour of actually explaining the meat of what is going on.
 157.161.173.24 12:34, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree.  I expected the worst, but this is a surprisingly good article.  I do think the "propitious darkness" phrase would be better as a quote, or replaced by a quote, but overall this is a good stab at explaining Virilio.KD Tries Again 14:51, 21 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Style 

message: This is a list of ideas that should be added to the article in some sense. They are perhaps important theoretical notions, paradigms, or frameworks that Virilio has created in his work and have entered into disciplines' bodies of theory (i.e. there exist references and uses of such ideas). 
*The concept of the "vector"
**Which includes the concept of the "vector field"
**Virilio's concepts are cited by McKenzie Wark in "Virtual Geography: Living with Global Media Events"
Knowledge is power. (talk) 01:00, 23 January 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Important notions to add, topics to be covered in this article 

message: While one might need to refer to a specific edition and translation in notes to the article, the bibliography would be much more useful the books were in order of publication and had the original date of publication.  The current version misleadingly suggests that works produced years apart were more or less contemporaneous, suggests early works were much later than they in fact were - and contrary to WP convention (policy?) the chronology is backwards.  Anyone disagree?  (If it's worth preserving the publication information, we could keep it under a subheading like "English Language Editions")KD Tries Again (talk) 21:28, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  Bibliography 

message: The quotation at the end of the "Integral Accident" section on Hurricane Katrina is not cited and I cannot find it anywhere. Also, I doubt that it is from an article given the informal character of the French and the "rough" translation. I think that someone should either cite this or it should be removed.
--Climagiste (talk) 17:41, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
replies: text: In Hurricane Katrina and the disastrous events that followed,  Virilio sees a good example of his integral accident concept, which brought the eyes of the world upon a single nexus of time and place.  From his article on Katrina, "Ah oui, ce méchant vent, vent qui siffle, siffle.  Tout le monde regarde, c'est sur toutes les chaînes, c'est l'émission dont le monde parle.  Et c'est tellement, tellement mouillé la bas."  Roughly translated, "Oh yeah, that evil wind, wind that blows, blows.  The whole world is watching, it's on every station, it's the program the world is talking about.  And it's so, so soggy, down there."
The large number of titles by this author makes hunting for the source challenging. — Rgdboer (talk) 02:50, 22 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Quotation about Hurricane Katrina 

message: Virilio claims multiple times not to be a philosopher, and indeed distances himself from the label in interviews with Lotringer (collected in English in "The Accident of Art"). Is it still valuable to call him one? He's often called a "philosopher", however, is this an appropriate label for him? He's never held any positions relating to the teaching of philosophy. "Essayist", as used in the opening line of the French version of the article seems a more appropriate way of describing him.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pure-impure (talk • contribs) 14:29, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  Virilio as a philosopher 

message: For the infobox — Rgdboer (talk) 20:00, 3 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Request photo