My comments on Bonnefoy were unexpectedly brief and garbled due to the
person from IT arriving. Thanks to those of you who responded. Peter
Peter Larkin remembers Anti-Platon - a very early work from 1947, when
YB had not broken with the surrealists. Even here you could question
why he did not choose a modern philosopher, or one whose relevance had
been discovered, or established, by the surrealists. He was already
looking for a classical unity, a Oneness directly descended from Plato.
He uses mainly generic words, which he will later call his `mots
essentiels'. To use Derrida's term, Bonnefoy inhabits a logocentric
universe in which the signifier becomes a hotline to the One. This is a
simplification and there are aspects of surrealist theory and poetics
which Bonnefoy retains - such as the dialectic and the disjunctive
image. So I can understand why Paul MacKintosh still finds him `a
useful point of departure'.
If the library system still works you cd obtain my M Phil thesis `Yves
Bonnefoy and the poetics of unity' Univ of East Anglia, 1986.
p.s. in defence of the TLS there was an excellent article on the Bonobo
monkeys in the last issue, whose patterns of behaviour might will be a
model for a bulletin board.
love, Frances
--
Francis Presley
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|