Date: Fri, 23 Oct 1998 23:12:46 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: Re: MB: Literature and the Right to Death (clad t' be of swerve)


Claire Dinsmore wrote:


>>Blanchot group space nontheless somehow engenders it. by the way what
>                                   is
>>the relationship between Blanchot and Surrealism? zero? null? not even
>>                                cousins?
>>
>>  Yes, in a way, I think you're correct, following Blanchot's dictum of
>>   ""The speech relation in which the unknown articulates itself is a
>> relation of infinity."  Those words could, indeed, have sprung from the
>> very mouth/mind and heart of Breton.  Nonetheless, I was not referring
>> to the stylistic tendencies evinced, my reference was to the matter of
>> content.  The above phrase illustrates Blanchot's love of the word (or
>>at least the act) and is quite positive, to it in simple terms, but such
>>  a flavour, as it were, is not, in my experience at least, Blanchot's
>>  general tendency.  The surrealistic inclination with/towards words is
>> one of play - of humour, lightness, often filled with joy;  Blanchot's
>>  relation to the word and the written act often lays emphasis upon the
>> negative aspects of such - not that the act is 'bad' in itself per se,
>>  but it is wrought with an insurmountable distance between the creator
>>(writer) and the creation itself.  Then there is the thematic obsession,
>>I would say, in Blanchot's work with darkness, the darkness and void one
>>    necessarily encounters via the act of creation and the attempt at
>>  expression.  The surrealist inclination towards darkness as a subject
>>    is, shall we say, aesthetic, it is a matter of intrigue - again,
>>generally, filled with joy. Blanchot's inclination towards the extremely
>> prevalent theme of darkness (in his work) is not a celebration it seems
>>   to me, it is one of, well, desperation we shall say (for lack of a
>>       better word): it is filled with pain: the pain of truth, of
>> realization.  Rarely will you find pain explored at it's true depths in
>>                              surrealism.
>

thanks so much for ample response which at this moment I shall not be able
to respond to. that said....


first off who is that an image of?


for now just some darts flashes impressions pointillisms etc.

     darkness in the open play nontheless though comes across different


   so dark so terribly paralyzingly dark...thus the play, constantly in a
kind of letter-word flight...musical ocean of notes rhythms harmonies
fleeting momentary and yet a theme, a thread, some underlying something,
wonderful and horrible...true terror, true bliss...the highest the lowest,
increasing in either direction...often so great the tension, pain and joy,
pleasure and torture/anguish despondency/delight that all there is to do is
sing paint dance play murder love be killed be delivered...the leap off
into it into the drink...immediately the currents...something dying living
for synthesis...believe it's in the work of these folks but I'd be the last
to say that I know for certain because of my glancing familiarty with the
texts, but nonetheless is there not a
synthesis/symbiosissynergy/levitation/chaos/complexity/simplicity/holism/
holography/anarchism/(free associationalism) knocking at our doors? haven't
we all been wound up quite too tight...or is it just me? don't groups like
these cry in some perhaps unconscious way for a kind of beautiful letting
go of the strict category expertise department compartment...some way the
very knowedgeable needing the less knowledgeable, the playful the less
playful etc.? like convection and voltage potential differences differences
among stations functions locations cultures hues minds personalities highs
lows lefts rights systematics asystematics, all importantly
interfunctioning mutually attractive relatives?

shall respond more fully as soon as can

Daniel