|
AntigoneDreamsOfTomorrow
|
read my profile
sign my guestbook
Metro: Woodland
Interests: Poetry, Prose, Posey, Philosophy, Printers, People (from a safe distance), Alliteration and Caffeine are my more substantial interests.Particularly Caffeine. Expertise: Scaling the divided line of being and knowing Occupation: Student "The ri Industry: Slave to the Ivory Tower
Message: message me
Member Since:
5/10/2005
|
|
| The Garden of Love
 I went to the Garden of Love, And saw what I never had seen: A Chapel was built in the midst, Where I used to play on the green. And the gates of this Chapel were shut, And Thou Shalt Not writ over the door; So I turn'd to the Garden of Love That so many sweet flowers bore. And I saw it was filled with graves, And tomb-stones where flowers should be; And Priests in black growns were walking their rounds, And binding with briars, my joys & desires. -William Blake, Songs of Experience _________________________ I wrote a very long entrty in a fit of passion the other day, but when I re-read it I thought it was far too personal to trust to such a public forum. I may post with some modification, but I want to let it rest for some time lest I should post something rashly. In the mean time, though this is not Blake's best poem, it contains enough of my feeling for me to post it temporarily in lieu of my other piece. | | |
| I like to think my mind is a terrible thing to waste.I am reminded once again why great thinkers generally come
from the leisure classes. I am back to working 50-60 hour weeks of menial labor
where my greatest mental challenge is filling coffee and enduring the casual
sexism and mild sexual harassment in the work place. When I get home I am
irritable, exhausted. I realized the other day when I found myself at a
register buying a Queen CD, I am also probably depressed.* And I know
exactly why.
I understand now more than ever the terrible addictive
agitation Sherlock Holmes experienced between cases. Though I am not likely to
resort to a seven percent solution to my inoccupation, I understand the
desperate need to escape, to throw myself into some kind of enigma, some
engaging problem. To mentally stagnate is like death to me.
I am updating quickly, because I need to get back into the
habit of writing to work myself back into a routine of which will keep
my brain working. The following is a list of goals for this summer which I hope
will not be lost in the atrophy and apathy which has descended upon me from the
dark long hours I spend working in the service industry:
- Submit
my article “The Child and the King: Solomon and Ernesto in Duras’ Summer Rain” for publication
- Study for
the GREs
- Teach myself
more Greek
- Listen
to audio courses on
- Theory
of Mind
- Systems
of Argumentation
- Earn enough
money to return to university
- Write
more on Xanga
- Visit
as many cemeteries as possible
- Write
something creative
- Research
schools in South Africa
for next Spring term
- Read
some Levinas
- Get a bloody date (finally)
If I achieve any 5 of these this summer, I will almost certainly
have elevated myself from these intellectual doldrums. But I anticipate an
excellent term this fall. My courses are:
- The Philosophy
of Wittgenstein: Text Seminar
- Historical
Fictions, Fictional Histories: Honors Projects Class
- Dante’s
Inferno
- Human
Rights
- Culture
and Method: Theory and Interpretation
And to satiate my compulsive desire to list things, the
contents of my satchel are the following:
- A crumpled
copy of last Thursday’s newspaper
- A
packet of pens (I am terrified of opening them. I lose pens and these pens are far too good for anything I am likely to
write—it would be like using a Rolls Royce to run to the town dump.)
- A
distressed paperback copy of C.S. Lewis’ A Grief Observed
- A copy
of Chinua Achebe’s Things Fall Apart
with 100-odd post it notes scrawled with inane comments in my
handwriting
- At
least six dollars worth of sticky nickels and pennies
- My
student ID
- More
post its with notes from Human, All
Too Human
- A mechanical
pencil with no lead
- A tea
bag
- A
ticket stub from Indiana Jones
- A
thumb tack (ouch)
- Oh
yes. And The Best of Queen
Better writing always lies on my horizon. I
will post again before long, though heaven forbid it be more lists. Yours, Rebekah
______________________________________
* Not being prone to depression, I often do not recognize
it. One sure sign, however, is a predilection for purchasing Queen CDs. Which
is strange, since I cannot bear to listen to Queen when I am depressed, but I
never buy them when I am cheerful. An odd cycle.
| | |
| A RANT: Why is everything so damn interconnected?!My Problems With Introductions A Rant in One Part Warning: This is a Rant. There is very little to take away from it save that the writer of said rant is frustrated with her writing and has decided to take it out on her blog rather than, say, the nearest human being. This entry has a dangerously low content of, well, content. It also contains an absolutely inexcusable and completely unwarranted allusion to Aristotle. Proceed with caution and low expectations.I am absolutely terrible at beginnings. Always have been.
Sometimes it seems I’ve not moved much past the days when I’d begin my papers
by bluntly stating my ideas as fact before tersely rehearsing my argument and
finishing with a re-statement of my first sentence (often the same words,
different word order). Nor have I escaped that later phase when every
paper started with a statement about the Human Condition and meandered its way to the main point by whatever road presented itself to my digressive mind.
From my earliest days playing with different written voices
and forms, my introductions have either been abrupt, matter-of-fact and artless
or self-indulgently irrelevant. The former method left my readers reeling and
disoriented—perhaps, I flatter myself, they even felt betrayed. If you will
forgive me the vulgar analogy, beginning my introductions so abruptly was like
trying to have sex without any foreplay whatsoever: it was unpleasant for all
involved and largely ineffective. My second method was not much better. To begin with an
impossibly broad and bland statement (as I mentioned earlier, usually about the
Human Condition, Human Nature, or Knowledge) and from there to wend my leisurely
and circuitous way to what my paper was actually about dragged my readers behind me in a bewildering, pathless jungle of hackneyed and
over-generalized sentiments.
The virtue of an introduction lies in the mean between the
two. I imagine I can hear Aristotle now. “Virtue is practice,” he seems to say.
“By practice, your character is formed and, by avoiding both excess and
senseless deprivation, you surely will become an excellent Writer of Introductions.”
I am not a virtuous Writer of Introductions, I fear, regardless
of how religiously or wildly I veer from extreme to extreme. Or this is the
conclusion I am forced to draw as I reread the articles, essays and creative
pieces I have made in the last year. A good beginning is hard to come by, but
at the same time it seems the most important part of a work: it calibrates the
reader’s expectations.
So why this problem with introductions? I think its because
everything I write is related to everything else I have ever written. My brain is a veritable croc-pot of stewing, soupy ideas. Thoughts are mushy and run into one another indescriminately.
Perhaps a better analogy is in order (and when an analogy is wanting, comparing the mind to a web never fails).
Every
idea is joined by invisible but indissoluble threads. Anywhere I cut to make
one of these ideas into a self-contained piece of writing seems equally
arbitrary to me, though this severance is necessary if I am to give these
thoughts to another.
Which means that introductions are yet another instance in
which I must say, in the words of my friend in computational
linguistics:
“Language and communications are all rot and I shall have nothing to do with them if at all possible." | | |
| The Words of the Dark Angel: A Poem and Meditations “There is nothing to
know above the pillars of the earthWhere the airy spirits
stagnate:No holy wind kisses
their blind brows;They neither come nor
go,And with insensible
eyesThey watch the same
skies,Unseeing, still, in a
holy embryo.Only fallen angels
have wings.”
A truth haunts the fundamental ontology of Being and Time, a truth perhaps even
deeper for Dasein, the human being, than any of the structures which Heidegger
gives a concrete presence in his book. The shadow of this truth is revealed when
he discusses equipment. We take a tool (or a piece of equipment) and measure
its weight, fancying that weight is the objective aspect of the hammer while
its use to us is somehow a tertiary, incidental and projected reality.
Weight itself is projected—even subjective, in a sense. Heidegger
shatters our precious dreams of objectivity, teaches us that science only
reveals the world around us in light of the kinds of beings that we are. Every
human activity, even the “objective” sciences, paints an unrecognized and uncanny
self-portrait of humanity. The sciences are a mirror in which we fancy we
behold nature as it simply exists, when what it reveals are those parts of
nature which concern us, those entities which appear in light of our projects.
We only know a hammer as “weight” because a hammer can be too heavy or too
light for us. All weight, in fact, is only known because we are frail and
fragile beings, struggling in a world that resists us: a world in which thorns
choke out our crops, a world in which we are vulnerable to harm, a world in
which other human beings can deny us.
Our tender vulnerability and impotent mortality may seem
tragedy enough, but this is but the satellite of a stronger, greater truth, a
truth rooted in the brute fact of being what we are: Dasein, or Being-there.
Only because of the possibility of no longer being there do we understand
ourselves—only in the “possibility of the impossibility of our being,” which
ordinary mortal terror has named, simply, “death,” is knowledge of ourselves
even possible.
“Follow me into the
valley of the shadow of death:Plunging from grace
you will see,Will look at me with
eyes full of knowledge;New-born wonder will
fall from your tongue,Your lips, your voice.The winds of heaven
will stream through your hairAnd the tears of god
will stream from your eyesOnly as you fall.”
Human knowledge is built upon this morbid foundation; this
is our paradox and our tragedy. When knowledge is granted, human beings realize
of the futility of all their endeavors, including the pursuit of knowledge
itself. Knowledge, like a human embryo, contains the secret not only its own
flourishing but also of its own death. This is the truth of Solomon, who became
so wise there has never been anyone else like him. What glory did his knowledge
bring him? Did not the eyes of the queen of Sheba
or the adulation of the ancient world bring Solomon joy in his wisdom? No, he became
the tormented teacher of Ecclesiastes, and cries, “In much wisdom is much
grief: and he that increaseth knowledge increaseth sorrow.”* Solomon was
brought not into wholeness but into fissure, into destruction—the path of human
knowledge. The original break in the human wholeness, the first temptation, was
to knowledge, the knowledge of good and evil.
Only without knowledge is
innocence possible.
“Those who have never
known holiness, will never know sin; Only those who have
fallen Have perfect knowledge: Knowledge of good and
evil, Knowledge of the god.”
The serpent in Eden
did not lie—Eve’s eyes were indeed opened, and she saw herself for the first
time through the possibility of no longer being, of her “ownmost possibility,”
her death. Her immortality was consumed, and from its ashes arose corrupted knowledge,
mortal potentiality—a shattered kind of freedom. In truth, we have more in
common with the fallen than with angels or with gods. This is the truth Crazy
Jane twisted to the Bishop when she raved, “Love has pitched his mansion in the
seat of excrement . . . /Nothing can be sole or whole/That has not been rent.”**
She echoes and distorts this truth: “Nothing can be known as whole/That you
have not already rent.”
The prosaic cliché, “You don’t know what you have until its
gone,” contains the DNA of the entire human tragedy. Consult your own heart to
see if it be true: only in parting do you truly know what a person means to
you; only when you are broken do you realize what it is to be whole; only in
abandonment do you realize your own dependence. All these are tributary,
ontical facts that lead back to the spring of original, ontological truth: only
because you can conceive of your death, that greatest breakdown of the human
world, can you think of being who and what you are. Everything we human beings
know appears in the light of a dying sun, a flame that consumes what it
reveals.
We hold our courts in temples of shattered glass, and our
crowns are won at the expense of paradise.
“Those who never knew
sanctity, cannot guess at desecration, Only a worm cannot
fall,” The dark angel said
with an ancient smile An apple resting in The palm of his hand.

* Ecclesiastes 1:18, KJV ** “Crazy Jane talks to the Bishop,” by William Butler
Yeats.
Endnotes: -The lines in italics are my own. -This essay is a short version of a lengthier piece. It is
my attempt to encapsulate in brief, lyrical writing thoughts which have been
plaguing me in my studies this term. The longer version contains more
Heidegger, a riff about language and the mystical, and references to Moby Dick. Feedback is, as always,
cherished. Oh, and I apologize for the Heidegger; I tried to make the essay not
presuppose any prior knowledge of this particularly difficult philosopher. -I would like thoughts on my use of images. They were a
last-minute addition, and I am generally ambivalent about merging image and
text without careful thought. Do they add to the entry or are they distracting?
Do they telegraph my meaning or do they have a meaningful relationship with the
text? -You may notice a motif of the Garden of Eden running
through my blog for awhile. Blame my re-reading Good Omens, my fixation on German philosophy and my general
addiction to biblical cadence, if you must. | | |
| Doctors of Philosophy say the Darnest Things . . .This semester is coming crashing to a close, and I have finally found enough time to decipher the quotes I have scrawled in the margins of my notebooks. These quotes come directly from the mouths of various professors and scholars for your reading pleasure.
Because these quotes have been taken surreptitiously in seminars, at lectures or at lunch, out of courtesy I have protected this post. If you are not on the list and would like to read them, send me a message. Otherwise, I have a few drafts on my laptop which I will post when I am a human being again. If I am feeling particularly sadistic, I may post an excerpt of my thesis.
| | |
|