 |
 |
I have just started reading the Desert Island article and it is a hallmark of great writers that they are able to address a wide range of readers, from lets say those new to ideas to those who are veteran readers of Kant as this article demonstrates and without imposing limits and still offer a freshness in the writings. Deleuze expresses such in this article. Of course, there will always be those who stand opposed and in ignorance as if proclaiming themselves to be The New Human God and in the emptiness of abject noise still demand a return to Kant albeit in a dishonest discourse demonstrating their own dishonest claims of having read Kant by a demonstrated ignorance of even Kant's first book on reason where is demonstrated an immanent critique of reason and as such proclaiming themselves as first The New Human God who knows all and is now as a martyr which is now the New Jesus Christ as again the New Human God repeating again abject ignorance of which they remain ignorant of an Eternal Return which makes of destruction a new creation and they hence remain in the finite closure of a circle opposed to poetics and the writing of poetry which is a writing for truth and life against the logic of death and suicide which is (as already known in the Kantian sense) a logic of Hitler's Nazi Gas Chambers as the solution to life as death but yet to which in dishonest noise and ignorance a demand to return to Kant is made. Again, this is a sad repeat of noisy ignorance against poetics and the writing of poetry as truth. Better to be dishonest and accept death then to write a true poetry for life: this is the sadness of such an ignorant discourse. To add to this dishonesty is the demand that poets write poems in their name! My next book has the title of: The New Human God. I thank the list providers for providing such wonderful empirical research material. (PS. My reference to the abject line also has thanks to Julia Kristeva's book on the abject Kantian sublime line.)