Hi Keston,
you are obviously trying to raise interesting questions about 'play'.
But how would you, not Nietzshe, today define 'play'? What is it play in
relation to or with? Does that 'play' embrace the carnivalesque? Does
it have intent? What states of attention does 'play' mobilise?
If, for example 'play' is carnivalesque in respct of present habits (which
will be many and various among and between niche communities), then how is
that decadent? Might it also not be an agency of cultural mobilisation?
Might it not be a necessary instrument of boundary interrogations, of
crosscultural dialogue and translocal negotiation. Humane good humour,
rather than grim posturing?
Of course one's assumptions in respect of such a question will be stained
by positions in respect of 'decline'. Do you feel that this is an age of
decline and if so in what ways? Declines from what?
It seems awkwards using Nietzsche both retroactively and proactively in
the same sweep. Surely you can say what you want without recourse to an
arguably higher authority. You don't need to hide behind such validations.
Then we could talk without barriers of potentially hermetic reference.
Now, that would be sharp.
looking forward to hearing more and having an open discussion. You know it
goes both ways. Nobody is 'right' either
love and love
cris
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|