Subject: Re: The -Gaard(en) of un-Earthly, The Garden of The Dead
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1998 17:17:11 -0400 (EDT)



My confusion has not let up. Following up on threads suggested by the
narrator of _CUP_, Johannes Climacus, lead me to picking up on his
reference to Schelling in the note to Pg. 134 where the question of
beginning which Hegelian speculation, or the approximation process that
derrida would call a reappropiation, denegation, and a production where
the limit or philosphy's outside is transgressed in a hearing oneself
speak, in a discursive accumulation of propositions that J.C. brings
under a "comic apprehension" by calling it "twaddle";-- operates in a
similar manner to "intellectual intuition". A beginning is that which
can constantly be reaffirmed as a thoughtful, or pregnant action that
can't be recuperated by the operations of the understanding. Such a
decision without delay would be a making from nothing which is why
Schelling writes that "the beginning of all knowledge lies in the
recognition of one's ignorance" (_The Ages of The World_ pg 223 in the
manuscript pagination). A decision is a crisis, a dividing separation,
a cut in the rotary motion of visible nature characteristic of an
"alternating movement [] of the eternal contraction and eternal
expansion, of the universal ebb and flow", a whirlwind motion that
supplements the closure of speculative philosophy with baroque spirals
and therfore as a matter of the working over of language, effectuates a
vanishing of the objective point of view... Derrida gives us to
"understand" in _Tympan_ that the violent puncturing of philosophy's
field of listening comes about with the use of a dyonisian hammer that
luxates the philosophical ear taken it by surprise, in an oblique
manner, or taking it with what Kierkegaard would call "indirect
communication". Not to smooth out the differences, it is interesting to
note that for Derrrida, it is a question of delay and undecidability, a
postponement of any decision making process. He holds hard to
skepticism, much like Johannes Climacus who is an ancient skeptic. The
effect of this practice is "to increase the surface of impression and
hence the capacity of vibration" ( _Tympan_ in _Margins_ pg. xv). In
other-words, the spacing of the screen increases. A qualitative leap
occurs as an event of writing that makes room for what can't be
recuparated by quantitative approximation, the lurking element as
future and other intervenes in all discursivity, and silence and
sightleness is heard and seen. One could say in various ways, that
language has no tongue and no eyes and is in the mo(ve)ment of becoming
a BwO. No longer is there the coherence of a voluminous body that would
constitute the meaningful intentions of an author(ity) on whatever
topic. There are various reference for learned ignorance aside from
Socrates. One can look at Nicolas de Cusa, Pascal, or Schopenhauer
which for Nietzsche represents the highest expression of Western
nihilism. 

...


--