Date: Tue, 27 Feb 1996 21:24:33 -0500 (EST)
Subject: Re: MB: 2-things


 All of this has simply _no_
>parallel in Blanchot, who has never used the notions of "re-presentation"
>or even of "metonymy" in his discourse.  Actually, he hasn't talked about
>Lacan at all, and viceversa - at least not in his major, published works -
>and I am quite convinced that the discourse of psychoanalysis is quite
>foreign to his theory of literature.



On the contrary, Blanchot's theorization of literature is intimately bound
up with the discourse of psychoanalysis.

In Blanchot's major work - The Infinite Conversation - he communicates
directly with Lacan for several pages ("The Speech of Analysis"), but in
addition, the whole book - indeed Blanchot's whole life's work - is
completely bound to the literary/psychoanalytic conversation and
exploration undertaken by he and his friends Bataille, Klossowski, and
Lacan who had already begun to fold a moebius strip through inner
experience, psychoanalysis, and social practice before Deleuze and Guattari
entered the scene and raised the stakes.