From: Unleesh-AT-aol.com
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1999 23:11:40 EST
Subject: Re:  Re : Re: no filters


"what if Unleesh would rephrase, staying more with his experience, something
like: "I was so impressed that I wanted to know her world; I wanted her  to
invite me to dance with her way of perceiving the world; but she didn't seem
impressed by my world or wanting to discover it"  [could you say that
Unleesh?]"

Actually, she and I grokked on many levels. She was simply hesitant to
classify the experience or want to separate it out into filters. At that time
I was on my extended sleep-deprivation destratifying derive, and I can tell
you that all the normal separations don't apply in that state ... it becomes
one delirium where all the separated terms interpenetrate ; dream and waking,
this and that, clarity and fogginess all partake of each other.

I was in fact more interested in tasting of her world, of her take on the
experience. She was interested in my world/me, but not in connecting that to
books or academic categories of any sort. She wasn't interested in
intellectualizing the experience.

As to where this incredibly sharp, powerful, nomadic woman is now I haven't a
clue.

However, this entire experience on this list has convinced me that she was
essentially correct, and that phenomenologically, "those who know will
understand", those who don't know I couldn't even begin to tell you. If you
want to know what an orange tastes like, taste it. No talk on my part about
how an orange tastes is really going to help. It's like the blind men and the
elephant. Each man argues that the section he's touching isn't part of an
elephant but actually something else, but those who have the experience of
seeing the elephant know. Or the ridiculous way they tried to convince the
jury in Simi Valley that Rodney King wasn't really being beaten by nitpicking
frame by frame the video, when you just watched it you could clearly see what
was going on. If people aren't open to an experience or a style, anything that
results is not going to be productive but merely scholastic polemics ... in a
sense, it's just men's way of being really bitchy ... in fact, I am convinced
that most of our traditional ideas about intellectual forums and debates are
structured ways for men to be catty & bitchy with each other ; that is, when
it's not structured in an out-and-out sports manner of open competition and
warfare ... those who think that scholasticism and academia aren't
traditionally men's fields should look for example at the composition of the
university or even of those participating in political debates in the media
.... so regarding this Great Stylization of the Bitchy and Catty ... I have no
desire to bring this woman from the powwow into that ; she deserves better,
and so I withdraw this communication.