File spoon-archives/heidegger.archive/heidegger_2003/heidegger.0302, message 217


Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2003 17:40:24 +0000
Subject: Re: Topic
From: michaelP <michael-AT-sandwich-de-sign.co.uk>


> This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand
this format, some or all of this message may not be legible.

--MS_Mac_OE_3128607624_714095_MIME_Part

on 20/2/03 3:59 pm, GEVANS613-AT-aol.com at GEVANS613-AT-aol.com wrote:

Michael:
Resource: instead of speaking about 'metaphor', topicalising it, one could
instead speak metaphorically, from 'metaphor' if you like, using, employing
'metaphor'. In both cases, 'metaphor' is addressed, is central to the
speech, is brought to appearance, but in different directions.

Jud:
WRONG your flannelling Michael. If you are addressing a subject say =B3Stamp
Collecting,=B2 then that subject is the topic        [quite so, it is the
topic]       of the discussion or conversation. The fact that you employ
metaphor in relation to the topic of discussion does not mean that metaphor
is the topic         [quite so, it is the resource]       of discussion, but
merely that metaphor is employed         [quite so, it is the resource]  as
a way        [the resource]       of talking ABOUT the topic of discussion -
which is stamp collecting.

I had just employed a distinction as a topic: topic v resource; and Jud has
just said that when 'metaphor' is employed as a resource it is not a topic;
WOW! exactly!; resource is another way of addressing 'metaphor' -- in its
employment, use... rather than topic. When certain writers employ the
technique (resource) of, say, 'stream of consciousness', they are bringing
'stream of consciousness' to appearance, to presence, without making it a
topic of the writing. Is Jud, the 'Great Reader', disagreeing with the
distinction-as-distinction? Or rather employing it himself without the
self-awareness of having done so? One wonders whether he can even understand
this statement! And "fond banter", I'm afraid in this case IS insult; take
it from me!

regards

mP


--MS_Mac_OE_3128607624_714095_MIME_Part

HTML VERSION:

Re: Topic on 20/2/03 3:59 pm, GEVANS613-AT-aol.com at GEVANS613-AT-aol.com wrote:

Michael:
Resource: instead of speaking about 'metaphor', topicalising it, one could instead speak metaphorically, from 'metaphor' if you like, using, employing 'metaphor'. In both cases, 'metaphor' is addressed, is central to the speech, is brought to appearance, but in different directions.

Jud:
WRONG your flannelling Michael. If you are addressing a subject say =B3Stamp Collecting,=B2 then that subject is the topic        [quite so, it is the topic]      of the discussion or conversation. The fact that you employ metaphor in relation to the topic of discussion does not mean that metaphor is the topic         [quite so, it is the resource]      of discussion, but merely that metaphor is employed         [quite so, it is the resource] as a way        [the resource]       of talking ABOUT the topic of discussion -  which is stamp collecting.

I had just employed a distinction as a topic: topic v resource; and Jud has just said that when 'metaphor' is employed as a resource it is not a topic; WOW! exactly!; resource is another way of addressing 'metaphor' -- in its employment, use... rather than topic. When certain writers employ the technique (resource) of, say, 'stream of consciousness', they are bringing 'stream of consciousness' to appearance, to presence, without making it a topic of the writing. Is Jud, the 'Great Reader', disagreeing with the distinction-as-distinction? Or rather employing it himself without the self-awareness of having done so? One wonders whether he can even understand this statement! And "fond banter", I'm afraid in this case IS insult; take it from me!

regards

mP
--MS_Mac_OE_3128607624_714095_MIME_Part-- --- from list heidegger-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---

Driftline Main Page

 

Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005