I am not acquainted with this writer's thought, Dom, but have just
googled an interesting quote: >Anyway, the crucible in which what will
become a work of art and thought burns is brimful with nameless
impurities; it comprises obsessions, beliefs, infantile puzzles, various
perversions, undivulgeable memories, haphazard reading, and quite a few
idiocies and chimeras. Analyzing this alchemy is of little use.<
Nicely expressed, but I disagree - it is the process of becoming that
involves us, even in art or thought, even if as Yeats provocatively
points out "A starlit or a moonlit dome disdains/All that man is,/All
mere complexities,/The fury and the mire of human veins." His words
engage equally with both, but the stanza ends with, thus stresses, the
desperation of becoming. In fact, most of the notes supplied by learned
scholars to literary works help us to understand even more closely the
way "obsessions etc" have fused in the alembic before cohobation. Over
to you - doubtless I have missed something or, indeed, everything.
mj
Dominic Fox wrote:
> Badiou is of course the only important philosopher, like, ever.
>
> I have a set-theoretic proof of this, but it is too long to fit into
> the margins of this email.
>
> Dominic
>
|