5/20/07

the moose and the gerbil and the confused manatee

[this 'piece' can be read in issue 1 of 'absence']

6 Comments:

Blogger Marco said...

I suppose I'm safe in assuming that readers of this site are familiar with deMan's claim that, on the level of narrative and critical practice, we're still living in a long post-romanticism that often relapses into some half-life form of romanticism (this is an extrapolated, hurried paraphrase of several essays, none of which are before me or even in the near vicinity as I type (My estranged post-orals brain believes the claim occurs explicitly in the essay introducing the "Rhetoric of Romanticism."). So, to get it over with: are the worst kinds of culture and celebrity blogging what happens when we've all become formal ironists like Schlegel but refuse to relinquish our more culturally determined distrust of the absolute? Or, put more simply, is the detection of cant for its own sake or even say, in the name of an illusory "freedom" from bullshit and pretension bound to create a climate of pervasive anti-intellectualism in which ignorance is strength?

1:03 PM  
Blogger Mazie Louise Montgomery said...

But what about the Bear?

1:21 PM  
Blogger adam said...

Dear marco and others:

Scroll down to the last paragraph if you don't want to read my pedantry.

As I see it, one cannot be entirely free from judgments. What one considers "meaningful" is not necessarily invalidated by someone else considering it "meaningless." I can like the Left Behind books, for example, because I find meaning in their interpretation of Revelations, because their characters seem to fulfill archetypes I find satisfying, or even because I have an idea of the symbolism of the typeface or paper stock used in its printing. Or I can dislike them because I think the Christianity espoused causes cruelty in a concrete way by encouraging people to disregard environmental and human concerns in favor of the spiritual, or I find the characters flat and unbelievable, or the cover image makes me think of a heavy metal album I don't like.

Both perspectives are based on ideas and are themselves simply larger ideas constructed from smaller ones. As thought and expressed, they do not necessarily affect anyone. Ideas by themselves do not compel behavior, though other ideas may be constructed in response to exposure to ideas. If acted upon, or expressed in a pedantic way, they move from the realm of ideas to concrete action.

I do not take from de Man's work that because there is no meaning that must necessarily be taken from writing labeled as fiction, the writing means nothing. As I see it, that itself is an absolute statement of meaning and therefore fails a basic logical test, Just because we're talking about "fiction" doesn't mean we can't change the topic to "non-fiction," since "non-fiction" is subjective as well by being written by one or several people with their own perspectives that cannot match everyone's perspective on a concrete event. (Even atheists think that a force governs the universe; it's science, not a deity, but it's still an idea, more or less.)

Summed up for people who don't want to read my pedantry:

I can like or not like ideas. I can have reasons for liking or not liking them. I cannot say something is absolutely good or bad. I think this still allows for expression, though-- more so than trying to make absolute decisions about what should and shouldn't be expressed.

1:53 PM  
Blogger The Man Who Couldn't Blog said...

The bear is sad. The cobra, though, is happy.

4:26 PM  
Blogger Guy said...

moist towelettes

2:26 PM  
Anonymous bearfish said...

damn, you're right about the beautifully-proportioned body and head

2:11 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home

older posts / newer posts