Thanks, Robert for the "opinion drainage", though not everyone
whistles as softly as you on the way to information drop.
My paper is already available via Douglas's Lynx page, and a
slightly altered version is coming out in Boundary 2 sometime later
this year, but i don't know exactly when. Glad to hear that Robert's
informative paper is now avilable.
Keston's quote from Ecce Homo is very much to the point and made me
jump, though the pastoralist in me demurs at such a vexing of
creation, though it's certainly in tune with ideas of "viral"
resurgence and life as against life (see the recent book by Keith
Ansell-Pearson). And the question of "too perfect" a creation raises
issues of scarcity and abundance - clearly "too perfect" is also a
scarcity of some sort. Reminds me of something in Samuel Palmer, about
the hills and tumps in the landscape being absolutely suffocating
without God. There the divine is an horizon which lightens and
opens/empties out the material creation. In Nietzsche's version God
has no such horizon presumably, so an absolute white hole must be
subverted. It doesn't follow that the subversion is survivable. What
is it might sustain a space within/without creation which serves more
as its horizon of dedication without being its self-abundance?
Perhaps there's a useful distinction in Karl Kroeber's book on
Constable and Wordsworth where he distinguishes between Freudian
regression (a version of life against life) and Wordsworthian
retrospection which distances life from itself without resort to the
haunted compulsion of self-attack.
Peter
Peter Larkin
Philosophy & Literature Librarian
University of Warwick Library
Coventry CV4 7AL UK
Tel: 01203 528151 Fax: 01203 524211
Email: [log in to unmask]
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|