"Confronted with an apparatus, a turnstile in the Parisian metro, for example, the wrong question is: “why is it there?” and the wrong answer, in this particular case: “to prevent illicit behavior.” The correct, materialist question, the critical-metaphysical question is rather: “what exactly does the apparatus do, what operation does it perform?” The response would then be: “The apparatus singles out, removes illicit bodies from the indistinct mass of ‘users’ by forcing them to move in an easily identifiable way (jumping over the turnstile or slipping in behind a ‘legal user’). The apparatus in this way gives life to the predicate ‘fare evader,’ that is, it gives existence to a body defined as ‘a fare evader.’ The essential thing here is the as, or more exactly the way in which the apparatus naturalizes, conjures away the as. For the apparatus has a way of making itself scarce, of vanishing behind the flow of bodies passing through it; its permanence depends on the continuous renewal of bodies’ submission to it, to its settled, routine, and definitive existence. The established apparatus configures space such that the configuration itself remains in the background, as a pure given. From this it follows that what the apparatus brings into existence doesn’t appear as having been made by it. In this way, the turnstile apparatus meant to stop “fare evasion” produces the predicate “evader” rather than preventing fare evasion. THE APPARATUS MATERIALLY PRODUCES A GIVEN BODY AS THE SUBJECT OF THE DESIRED PREDICATE."

  1. queertone posted this