why it appeals to me to write in a mode thatmight appear frivolous or ignorant, for Pete
December 7th, 2006, search relatedRelated posts :: why it appeals to me to write in a mode that might appear frivolous or ignorant, for Pete :: why it appeals to me to write in a mode thatmight appear frivo :: Early Greek Thinking :: why it appeals to me to write in a mode thatmight appear fr…
on 12/6/06 11:49 AM, That Pete at that_pete at yahoo.com wrote:
>— Philip Baker wrote:
>>— ME scribed
>>>A raft from a shipwreck is drifting without anchor and
>>>without direction on the high seas. To have sense is to
>>>take a direction.
>>
>>I’ve always thought that the raft of the Medusa is a great metaphor for
>>human life in general.
>
>The Medusa itself may be drifting, but the shipwrecked have spotted a
>ship on the horizon.
>
>”[A]s long as they only drift in the wind of a decision that comes
>from afar, thinking in the crossing dare not eschew the dearth of
>preparatory differentiations and elucidations. Only the chill of the
>boldness of thinking and the night of errancy of questioning lend
>glow and light to the fire of beyng.”
>
>CtP, S 259 {paraphrasing, the (not here) translated}
>
>
>
>
>______________________________________________________________________________
>______
>Do you Yahoo!?
>Everyone is raving about the all-new Yahoo! Mail beta.
>http://new.mail.yahoo.com
>_______________________________________________
>heidegger mailing list
>heidegger@soca.ecu.edu.au
>http://www.soca.ecu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/heidegger
>http://heidegger.an-archos.com/
yes,yes,yes, pretty cool. To cool for school. In my original post the word
“drifter” juxtaposed against the superstructure of this Heidegger/
Phenomenology list (was meant to be) is an obvious ’signpost/representum’ -
an open invitation for writing a meta-discourse whose ‘meaning’ would be
like the wave topography for an endless sea. So the raft metaphor fits all
too nicely. All a I ask from anyone who reads my posts is that they don’t
dismiss them out of hand, simply because I’m using a literary device to
introduce what is basically an open invitation to comment. Believe me I’ve
got no wheel-barrow to push, no ordered agenda, so I’m just asking for a bit
of tolerance (re: moving away from the conventions of philosophical
writing). Basically, if at first glance one of my posts seems frivolous or
without fore-thought, then sometimes your missing out on the
meaning/understanding of what’s been said. Mediocrity is the locus of the
post-modern (I know this word has fallen into disrepute but I mean it just
in situating a certain philosophical epoch). That’s why it appeals to me to
write in a mode that might appear frivolous or ignorant. But sometimes my
posts are actually just ignorant or frivolous- that’s what makes it
interesting.
regards peter k
A literary device that is horrible peter, can I call you Pirate? An
appearance is probably as bad as frivolity and ignorance on a philosophy
list concerned with the truth which after all does not tolerate the
non-fictional. It’s an accident waiting to happen, a work of fortune more
than necessity. Much like Breton’s ultimate surrealist action;–that of
descending on a crowd and shooting at random. I kind of prefer a more jazzy
reading of spontaneity but I am a bit of a pussy. My tests show that I could
be more assertive although maybe you wouldn’t know it by the way I write
sometimes. Yourwave topography is giving me an oceanic feeling so I am
commenting with a stream going I don’t where at this moment. It’s just going
I guess like a plant flowering without a why. Anyway I am a philosopher so
this is not very natural to me in fact it gives me the creeps. Ruins seem
like too much of a violent image kind of like the proliferating of
apocalyptic prognostications which is good when it is me or the writer going
to pieces but I doubt that it is an internal expression of pain rather than
an avoidance of said pain by seeing it as outside oneself that is being
expressed. I have to admit I like wrecking things and starting all over;–
again and again. The period is a good ending for me in this regard. It makes
me forget what just happen as if I was getting shocked into another domain
of thinking where I find myself standing by a fictional fountain of youth
out of which emerges my Persephone. That is physis man, it wakes me up and
gives me a rush. It’s vital and a little measure of happiness that makes my
feet light. I was getting depressed but now I feel much better. I am
reminded of Petrarch’s understanding of writing as therapy. It brings me
closer to a smooth topography that calms the stormy seas and gathers my
thought around the infinite not because I am having a complete and whole
idea but because I am looking forward to another that I cannot make out or
as yet understand. The cursor is blinking and all I am aware of is my own
breath. I have come to from the heart of my imagination. I am a philospher
again. Spinoza would admire my close call with dammnation, with an
imaginative thought.
thank you,
Tympan
