RE: bad poetry? No just vandalised.

John O appeals to evidence your honor, you mean evidence without political
motives, without interpretation, without power with no desire about it? Why
John O your world has no such phantom, it excludes it out of hand. A world
where a beg bug and a man are the same thing and that absurdity is not
absurd can never have the evidence you demand. But hey, I think you know
what I mean if not I'll loan you some meaning. Luke's world has you despite
your desire for a self subsisting freedom, the same world that stopped
Nietzsche's mouth and pen in the end. The stopping is placed on an altar
and worshipped, with offerings of art to keep it away. If that icon were to
fall you couldn't live without your pain and death, why there would be no
existance, and then what is left ? That really is the rub, Luke's world
places demands that are intolerable, oh for a little humanity and Divinty.
Daniel

Subject: Re: bad poetry?

This afternoon, Luke writes about:

"the objective truth of what a quote means or what a speaker is saying"

as "distinct" from:

"political motives in interpretation."

He also writes about:

"the objective content of the arguments at hand"

as opposed to:

"the subjective interpretations of those arguments that the speakers
might have."

He also mentions:

"Politically-motivated interpretation..."

And implies that there other, more harmonious sorts of "debate
structures" that are somehow, I suppose, not political, not about power,
not enmeshed in rhetorics of desire, but harmonious because they are
objective and denote a "common human experience."

I want to live in Luke's world.

All the best,

--John

-
* Unsubscribing? Mail majordomo@roughdraft.org with the message
* UNSUBSCRIBE BANANAFISH
Received on Sat Jul 12 23:40:26 2003