From: gvcarter-AT-purdue.edu Date: Thu, 1 May 2003 20:37:36 -0500 Subject: Re: love and difference - feeling, reacting Hugh, Don, All, Your mention of "Grief is the price we pay for love" reminds me of Charles M. Schultz, the creator of Peanuts. Charlie, his zig-zagged shirt loopy haired boy, often exclaims, "Good Grief." This pairing, this grief, this gravity is, perhaps, the most innocent of profanities--more innocent than any innocence in a Levinasian sense, or, perhaps, in a Baudrillardian sense a hyper-innocence, a more innocent-than-innocent that causes a complete re-reading of Peanuts. Who was the distinguished person? What caused this person to speak out on behalf of the extinguished? Why couldn't they be included? What did the person's non-presence contribute to the murmur that shot through the re- presentation of "Good Grief"? "Good grief." Good-God grief. God grief. Grieving God. Grieving gods. Good grief, Charlie Brown, we love you, your zig-zagged sweater, and you missed football kicks (though we also love Lucy and her pulling such footballs away and your swirling fall.) Good grief = Love, the sincerity of the approach, the intent of the pulling away, the vortex of the swirl, the fall, and the picking up again... "Good grief, Charlie Brown" = Love = "Repetition is a form of change" g Quoting hbone <hbone-AT-optonline.net>: > Don/All, > > Someone present at a memorial service for victims of 9/11, which was held at > St. Thomas Church in New York, recalls that a letter read from a > distinguished person > who couldn't be there, included the words: > > "Grief is the price we pay for love". > > That caused a sensation to run through the audience, and afterward they > seemed to feel better > > Hugh.. > > >
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005