Joy operates by means of a mechanism of experience, a process, a way in which the relation between world and oneself can always be changed. There is no such thing as solitary joy. Solitary joy is the joy of saints, but in Milan the people where not saints-- they only experianced the world together. There was total immanence: it was an experiance made, lived, wished for. The sharing of this experience is liberty. All this is what the Greeks called Bios, which is to say life in its entirety. Wages are not more important than struggle, nor family more important than community, nor intellectual life more important than care of the body: the absolutely revolutionary thing was just this-- to want to live the totality of human experience.
Joy is a way of linking us to the world-- it is insepearable from the common, from immanent life. All this I call bios: the anticipation of transformation and the concept of the future. Thought requires time. Developing a conception of the future requires time. 1968 will never be repeated, but it is nevertheless an irreversible event; nothing will ever again be as it once was. In the last thirty years the concept of lived experience has radically changed: henceforth the intellectual life can no longer be seperated from the life of the passions; the different parts of man [sic.] have once again been united. We have in our hands the promise of a fearless society. This is what Spinoza said-- and what has been rediscovered by feminists, workers, students, and all those who hoped and wished that something would change in 1968, four centuries after Spinoza. Something has changed: life has been reassembled in a new way.
Joy is an expression that finds a response, an act that is added to another, that connects. Even when it comes to joy one can never be mystical. For me mysticism is the worst thing there is, because there is a negative foundation that one thinks one is escaping, only to fall back into it. In mysticism, joy is the disapperance of suffering; but for me it can't simply be defined as as a lack of something, because joy is also something full, something positive. Joy is the power to create-- overabundance, excess. In fact, is the only definition of God that I am prepared to admit: overabundance, excess, and joy are the only forms through which God can be defined.
Therefore we are able to participate in it from time to time?
The problem is not one of participation but of construction. One participates to the extent that one constructs something in common. Joy is directly related to the preception of this "common"-- to its power. At the same time there is nothing transcendent in any of this.