From: dmwri1-AT-student.monash.edu.au
Date: Thu, 20 Nov 1997 12:58:29 +1000
Subject: Re: ~Re: Who We Are


Hugh Bone wrote:
 
> Hi, Darren; remember you from the olden days of a zillion words on
> "paralogy" which I never understood, did you?  
>
Not my bag, really.
  
> Poetry was not my intent, as I explained to the critic you quote. 
> I guess a true poet might be more interested in what we might become,
> less interested in who we are.   
>
I think all the poets have hived off to the Deleuze and Guattari list 
(also Spoon Collective run), where becomings are very big.
  
> I've read posts, (one from another list) from two people who have heard 
> Lyotard speak; both made rather disparaging remarks about him.  He is
> supposed to be at Emory, in Georgia, but was not listed on their
> faculty.
> In hiding? Seclusion? Composing a profound new work?
> 
> A mystery!  
>
Afraid of being confused with the reputation of the post-modern.
 
> Searching the Web, I have found a lot of interest in Philosophy at
> Universities in Australia.  Maybe you know of someone who has studied
> "Le Differend".
 
Lyotard is not all that huge over here, by and large. You'll find 
lots who know Deleuze, Derrida, Irigaray, Nietzsche, some Heidegger 
people, and lots of analytic philosophers (as in the Anglo-American 
variety). The sense I get is that Lyotard has done his dash in 
Australia, being viewed as not serious enough a philosopher and a bit 
passe in terms of cultural criticism. Paul James, who you may or may 
not know (_Nation Formation_ etc) used to teach a bit of Lyotard as 
part of a course on Australia and Post-Modernity, but that was far 
from teaching Lyotard and he doesn't really think Lyotard has much to 
offer. Note that the above is my observation, not my position, and I 
think Lyotard has suffered from the Kristeva syndrome of being 
discarded too early.

Darren.