Vague, really? Um...well...I don't know what to say, um, kind of thingy...
Something and then something else as distinct from something and then more
of the same. The distinction is itself the referent. It doesn't correspond
to any *thing*, but to the possibility of things rather than Thing, if you
see what I mean.
What is interesting, given that we allegedly occupy a holistic reality in
which everything is interconnected and overlapping, is that separation and
difference are possible: that I can die while you remain alive, for
instance; or that no-one will ever know what I dreamed about last night, not
even me. That it is possible to be ignorant of the location of something, as
the toddler who hides things must have begun to conjecture about her
parents. That if a domestic appliance goes on the blink, I'm better off
calling in a domestic-appliance-repair-man or an electrician rather than,
say, a Feng Shui expert who will offer to restore it to harmonious
functioning by placing it in a different corner of the room.
With sexual difference it is a question of libidinal economics, the
incompatibility or incompossibility of pleasures. Some people would give a
lot to be rid of it, as they would like to be rid of all incompossibilities;
hence the noble dream of the comprehensive school, which will only truly
exist when nothing else does.
Dom
----- Original Message -----
From: "Erminia Passannanti" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2001 4:55 PM
Subject: Re: Is this real. . .
> On Thu, 13 Dec 2001 09:06:00 -0500, Mairead Byrne <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:
>
>
> >> I don't know whether there will always be men and women, but I suspect
> there
> >> will always be something and then again something else.
> >>
>
> too vague..., what exactly this something and this other something
> else stand for, figs and carrots, or what?
>
|