 |
 |
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] %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%