Yes, Barry, I often find interviews with heavy intellectuals helps
clarify their texts. Andrew
On 27/03/2008, Barry Alpert <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> One summer I read "Of Grammatology" exclusively while walking for exercise. Also, I was lucky
> enough to hear Jacques Derrida lecture during the late nineties on perhaps 6-7 occasions at Johns
> Hopkins University in Baltimore Maryland. One of these was a very literary lecture (I'm not sure if
> it was recorded/published) on an eccentric spring day--before the university turned on the air-
> conditioning system for the campus. One observed Jacques Derrida "wilt" as the heat & humidity
> in the room became unbearable. A very humanizing experience for all. And, despite the obvious
> advance in his English speaking abilities from the days of his stint as a JHU assistant professor in
> 1968 when he only spoke French, Derrida still occasionally asked his professorial hosts (Neil
> Hertz, Michael Fried, & Richard Macksey) for the English of what he wanted to say. Eventually I'll
> retrieve the photos I was able to snap on that occasion "performing paparazzi photography". It
> was a virtually unrestrained shoot with good results.
>
> Perhaps these days a manageable introduction to his overall activity might come from reading
> around in the interview material with Jacques Derrida available online.
>
> Barry Alpert
>
>
>
> On Wed, 26 Mar 2008 12:16:34 +0100, Anny Ballardini <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> >Yes, undoubtedly. *Of Grammatology*, from the first to the last page.
> >
> >On Wed, Mar 26, 2008 at 4:03 AM, Nathan Hondros <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> >
> >> Should I bother reading Derrida? If so, which book (or which book about
> >> his
> >> ideas)? My gut feeling is that I'm better off reading a good novel, but
> >> I'm
> >> open to persuasion.....
>
> >>
> >> On Tue, Mar 25, 2008 at 11:28 PM, Douglas Barbour <
> >> [log in to unmask]>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> > A short while later, along came Derrida!
> >> >
> >> > Doug
>
>
> >> > On 24-Mar-08, at 4:29 PM, David Bircumshaw wrote:
> >> >
> >> > > Mind you, Nathan, there's a long tradition, in writing, of writers
> >> > > questioning the worth of writing (and reading!) It goes back far,
> >> > > recall the
> >> > > Phaedrus, where Plato has Socrates tell:
> >> > >
> >> > > "But when they came to letters, This, said Theuth, will make the
> >> > > Egyptians
> >> > > wiser and give them better memories; it is a specific both for the
> >> > > memory
> >> > > and for the wit. Thamus replied: O most ingenious Theuth, the parent
> >> > > or
> >> > > inventor of an art is not always the best judge of the utility or
> >> > > inutility
> >> > > of his own inventions to the users of them. And in this instance,
> >> > > you who
> >> > > are the father of letters, from a paternal love of your own children
> >> > > have
> >> > > been led to attribute to them a quality which they cannot have; for
> >> > > this
> >> > > discovery of yours will create forgetfulness in the learners' souls,
> >> > > because
> >> > > they will not use their memories; they will trust to the external
> >> > > written
> >> > > characters and not remember of themselves. The specific which you have
> >> > > discovered is an aid not to memory, but to reminiscence, and you
> >> > > give your
> >> > > disciples not truth, but only the semblance of truth; they will be
> >> > > hearers
> >> > > of many things and will have learned nothing; they will appear to be
> >> > > omniscient and will generally know nothing; they will be tiresome
> >> > > company,
> >> > > having the show of wisdom without the reality."
>
--
Andrew
http://hispirits.blogspot.com/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/aburke/
|