File spoon-archives/blanchot.archive/blanchot_2000/blanchot.0007, message 15


Date: Sat, 08 Jul 2000 01:03:12 -0700
From: Christophe Wall-Romana <kitocwr-AT-uclink4.berkeley.edu>
Subject: MB: Re: being and neuter


Dear Reg--
I do feel like slipping into a triple-layered Catweasel anti-IS suit 
(tm), because of your somewhat disciplinary wielding of the argument of 
being qua copula, which makes it a purely formal argument (one it will 
take Catweasel a lot more firepower to crack, though!), and this 
interests me very little... unless the question becomes, closer to 
Blanchot, how come language or consciousness seem endowed with a 
negative capability, perhaps as our exchange shows, to find 
discrepancies between intuited being on one hand and generated 
intuitions about being through writing on the other.
My knowledge of Hegel and Heidegger is very limited, but I'd be 
interested to hear more about how Heidegger's thinking about being (I 
guess post B&T) may shed light on Blanchot's neuter, or what in Hegel's 
maddenlingly precise Phenomenology as, foremost, writing may have 
inspired Blanchot as writer.
Reg, I am attuned to Blanchot's idea that literature is weird, 
in its ontological dimension, that its claim to being is remarkably 
weak or even false, that its inspiration isn't reducible to 
philosophical problems, that its language practice seeks some 
possibilities in time, composition, experience, that plays havoc with 
doctrines of being, and precisely because they do.
Thanks for the Gasche ref.
Best,
Christophe


   

Driftline Main Page

 

Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005