> but I do know that architecture
>exists in concrete and plaster as well as verbal architectonics and that the
>mass-produced urban spaces of the city centres are as much the progeny of
>modernism as Becket's dying embers (Imagination dead imagine) _ I respect
>and at times even like Becket's writing but would not want to work or live
>in a space that physically brought to form the spirit of his work. Would
>you?
David, but what is it keeps one turning the pages of a book by Beckett?
Not the bleakness of human destiny encountered there, but the wit and
resistance of the writing. I would love a cityscape that had as much wit in
its buildings as Beckett has in his writings! I would move to that city
tomorrow. Tonight. Too late.
Beckett doesn't destroy his characters--life does that. Yes, he keeps us in
mind of the worst that can (is going to) happen to us, but invests this
worst with a humour that doesn't mock sickness, old age, dying, but rather
our evasions, the many ways we have to turn away from our carnal fate. I
believe spirit can only be reached through an acceptance of our
carnality--although to write as much already goes too far from Beckett's
tones.
Anyway, I've been reading your posts for long enough to feel you were
distracted somewhat from yourself when you compared the spirit of Beckett's
work to a cityscape produced by the profit-motive out of the wish to
dominate.
Best wishes, David
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
|