language poets
Jon Ford
austin-ghetto-list@pairlist.net
Sun May 23 16:40:51 2004
<html><div style='background-color:'><DIV class=RTE>
<P><IMG height=2 src="http://graphics.hotmail.com/greypixel.gif" width="100%" vspace=9><IMG height=2 src="http://graphics.hotmail.com/greypixel.gif" width="100%" vspace=9>Wayne-- Everybody has different taste in poetry; it's pretty hard to say what is great and intolerable. In the 70s I hung out with the North Beach Surrealists, whose view was, as you would think, Surrealism in art is great, everything else sucks. I have used a little of their free association approach in my work, but I keep going away from it. Send me a couple of Honor's poems-- I'd like to see where she's going!</P>
<P>Jon<BR><BR></P></DIV>
<DIV></DIV>>From: "Wayne Johnson" <cadaobh@shentel.net>
<DIV></DIV>>Reply-To: austin-ghetto-list@pairlist.net
<DIV></DIV>>To: <austin-ghetto-list@pairlist.net>
<DIV></DIV>>Subject: Re: language poets
<DIV></DIV>>Date: Sat, 22 May 2004 09:51:43 -0400
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>Well, I agree that the "language poets" are something of an acquired taste. Bear in mind that most of my really favorite poets are not of that persuasion, like Robert Duncan or William Stafford or Galway Kinnell, but I tried some and I had a lot of fun doing it. Honor, on the other hand, is really into the form which entirely suits her semi-autobiographical qua historical-feminist tack.
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>wj
<DIV></DIV>> ----- Original Message -----
<DIV></DIV>> From: Jon Ford
<DIV></DIV>> To: austin-ghetto-list@pairlist.net
<DIV></DIV>> Sent: Friday, May 21, 2004 11:02 PM
<DIV></DIV>> Subject: language poets
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>> Wayne-- I never could get into the language poets. Maybe they are more fun to party with than to read. Michael Palmer is probably the most accessible, and I read a lot of his work last fall, which is uneven but clear and powerful in places. He actually feels things; it's not just about language.
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>> Jon
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>> >From: "Wayne Johnson" <cadaobh@shentel.net>
<DIV></DIV>> >Reply-To: austin-ghetto-list@pairlist.net
<DIV></DIV>> >To: <austin-ghetto-list@pairlist.net>
<DIV></DIV>> >Subject: Re: Re:Julia K.
<DIV></DIV>> >Date: Fri, 21 May 2004 07:34:42 -0400
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>> >Jon. I think the thing I like most about Kristeva is her passion for the
<DIV></DIV>> >subject. I have read around the Frog Literary scene, Barthes, Derrida,
<DIV></DIV>> >Foucault, Lacan, Levi-Strauss, Saussure, et al for about twenty years. Some
<DIV></DIV>> >write well, some reason well, some do neither, some are
<DIV></DIV>> >hysterical...actually many are hysterical. Same for many acolytes, like
<DIV></DIV>> >Jonathan Culler. But they have the advantage of not being more
<DIV></DIV>> >Harvard-Oxford clones, they are more like Socio-linguists and I like that.
<DIV></DIV>> >It is interesting that one of her major influences was Charles Sanders
<DIV></DIV>> >Pierce!!!*
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>> >Kristeva doesn't have the same "take" on French or German phenomenology
<DIV></DIV>> >(sp?); probably because she is, at heart, a Marxist. Probably why I like
<DIV></DIV>> >her. I also like Terry Eagleton, a Brit critique, for similar reasons.
<DIV></DIV>> >Derrida and Barthes, both, have amazing insights into things; but then
<DIV></DIV>> >really smart people usually do. Don't have to agree with their conclusions
<DIV></DIV>> >and I certainly can not agree with many of their "after market" conclusions
<DIV></DIV>> >pandered about by various American Literati. This is, incidentally,
<DIV></DIV>> >especially annoying in the Architecture profession, where there is more
<DIV></DIV>> >mis-understanding of French criticism than real knowledge. Roman Jacobson
<DIV></DIV>> >liked Kristeva and we all know who he spawned.
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>> >The most interesting people to work with this material were the SF "Language
<DIV></DIV>> >Poets" in SF like Carla Harryman, Michael Palmer, Barret Watten. And they
<DIV></DIV>> >weren't "slavish" either, picked and chose. Many of these people moved off
<DIV></DIV>> >to UC San Diego. Knew them, read with them, partied with them, liked them.
<DIV></DIV>> >I am probably prejudiced.
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>> >Want to read someone interesting? Read Jerry Fodor.
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>> >Cheers.
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>> >wj
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>> >* Charles Hartshorn (late...I trust...of UT) and, I think Paul
<DIV></DIV>> >Weiss....essentially stole C.S. Pierce's papers from his, literally starvig
<DIV></DIV>> >French widow. They made their academic reputations and she died in poverty.
<DIV></DIV>> >Pierce, had he known, would probably have killed them both. Hartshorn was a
<DIV></DIV>> >mumbling idiot and Weiss a fool. Personal opinion. Either way, they acted
<DIV></DIV>> >in an evil and despicable fashion toward her.
<DIV></DIV>> >----- Original Message -----
<DIV></DIV>> >From: "Jon Ford" <jonmfordster@hotmail.com>
<DIV></DIV>> >To: <austin-ghetto-list@pairlist.net>
<DIV></DIV>> >Sent: Thursday, May 20, 2004 10:51 PM
<DIV></DIV>> >Subject: Re: Re:Julia K.
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>> > >
<DIV></DIV>> > > Nothing wrong with being an old hippie-- I am in no way ageist, since I
<DIV></DIV>> > > could be called an old hippie myself. I have just begun to read Kristeva,
<DIV></DIV>> > > and I think her focus on emotion and revolt (not revolt in a specific
<DIV></DIV>> > > ideological dimension, but more as a total perspective on life, revolt as
<DIV></DIV>> > > renewal), as well as her feminist perspective that includes motherhood
<DIV></DIV>> >could
<DIV></DIV>> > > be classified as rather "old hippie." She is also decidedly
<DIV></DIV>> >anti-Freudian--
<DIV></DIV>> > > I never met a hippie yet who liked Freud. I would say she's worth reading
<DIV></DIV>> > > more than two pages before dismissing her. I intend to read more.
<DIV></DIV>> > >
<DIV></DIV>> > > Jon
<DIV></DIV>> > >
<DIV></DIV>> > >
<DIV></DIV>> > >
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt;From: &quot;Wayne Johnson&quot; &lt;cadaobh@shentel.net&gt;
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt;Reply-To: austin-ghetto-list@pairlist.net
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt;To: &lt;austin-ghetto-list@pairlist.net&gt;
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt;Subject: Re: Re:Julia K.
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt;Date: Thu, 20 May 2004 08:40:08 -0400
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt;
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt;So, Jon, are you using the phrase &quot;old hippie&quot; in a
<DIV></DIV>> >pejorative
<DIV></DIV>> > > sense?
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt;
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt;Some people, who were once &quot;young hippies&quot;, had some rather
<DIV></DIV>> > > interesting experiences and made some rather intriguing contributions to
<DIV></DIV>> >our
<DIV></DIV>> > > culture, some good, some bad. Many actually contributed a great deal to
<DIV></DIV>> > > visual and poetic arts, music, intellectual culture and, egad, computer
<DIV></DIV>> > > programming.
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt;
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt;Alas, I guess you mean aging erases all in America, leaving all
<DIV></DIV>> > > &quot;good&quot; things in the hands of.....others.
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt;
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt;wj
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt;
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt;btw. Have you actually read anything Kristeva has written?
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt; ----- Original Message -----
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt; From: Jon Ford
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt; To: austin-ghetto-list@pairlist.net
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt; Sent: Wednesday, May 19, 2004 6:24 PM
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt; Subject: Re:Julia K.
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt;
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt;
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt;
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt;
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt;
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt;
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt; Michael-- sorry you didn't get past page two, but here is an
<DIV></DIV>> > > interview with Julia which might set you right. She sounds like an old
<DIV></DIV>> > > hippie to me!
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt;
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt; JON
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt;
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt;
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt;
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt;
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt; Julia Kristeva is a world famous semiotician, feminist
<DIV></DIV>> > > theorist, psychoanalyst and at the same time an interesting creative
<DIV></DIV>> >writer.
<DIV></DIV>> > > She was born in Bulgaria in 1941, but came to Paris in 1965 where she
<DIV></DIV>> >became
<DIV></DIV>> > > immersed in Parisian intellectual life. Her acclaimed novel &quot;Les
<DIV></DIV>> > > Samouïs&quot; (1990) analyzes the Parisian intellectual avant-garde to
<DIV></DIV>> >which
<DIV></DIV>> > > she has belonged ever since. And though psychoanalysis remains one of the
<DIV></DIV>> > > major orienting and formative
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt;
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt;
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt; An Interview with Julia Kristeva
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt;
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt; by Nina Zivancevici
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt;
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt; Parisian intellectual avant-garde to which she has belonged
<DIV></DIV>> > > ever since. And though psychoanalysis remains one of the major orienting
<DIV></DIV>> >and
<DIV></DIV>> > > formative dimensions of her work, especially as regards her reflections
<DIV></DIV>> >upon
<DIV></DIV>> > > the nature of the feminine, she has also continued her research on the
<DIV></DIV>> > > nature of language and examined the processes leading to the emergence of
<DIV></DIV>> > > the work of art. As the theorist John Lechte points out, &quot; because of
<DIV></DIV>> > > the intimate link between art and the formation of subjectivity, Kristeva
<DIV></DIV>> > > has always found art to be a particularly fruitful basis for analysis.
<DIV></DIV>> > > &quot; Since the 1960s, she has
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt;
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt;
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt;
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt;
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt;
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt;
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt;
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt; been a leading force in the critique of representation and
<DIV></DIV>> >her
<DIV></DIV>> > > most recent book is a critical study of Colette's work and life, that is
<DIV></DIV>> >to
<DIV></DIV>> > > say, one of the numerous projects that she has been energetically working
<DIV></DIV>> > > on.
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt;
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt; Q: When did you start getting interested in the notion of the
<DIV></DIV>> > > &quot;feminine&quot;? Was it with the exploration of the notion of
<DIV></DIV>> >ÒchoraÓor
<DIV></DIV>> > > the female voice in linguistics and semiology? Or rather, from that point
<DIV></DIV>> >on
<DIV></DIV>> > > how have you arrived at the so-called feminist studies and writing
<DIV></DIV>> > > understood in terms of their sociological and/or aesthetic significance?
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt;
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt; J.Kristeva: It is very difficult to trace back my interest in
<DIV></DIV>> > > the &quot;feminine&quot;. I suppose that at the very moment in which I
<DIV></DIV>> > > started asking questions about myself the question of the ÒfeminineÓ had
<DIV></DIV>> > > already been formulated in my mind, so one could say perhaps it started in
<DIV></DIV>> > > the period of my adolescence when I became interested in literature which
<DIV></DIV>> > > necessarily asks questions about the sexual differences. But, you are
<DIV></DIV>> >right,
<DIV></DIV>> > > in my theoretical work, this question is raised in a more succinct manner,
<DIV></DIV>> > > perhaps also more discreet one, but which was nevertheless very intense
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt;
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt; It must be said that this question is related to the notion
<DIV></DIV>> >of
<DIV></DIV>> > > &quot;chora&quot; which directs us back to the archaic state of language .
<DIV></DIV>> > > This state is known to a child who is in a state of osmosis with his/her
<DIV></DIV>> > > mother during which language manifests itself as co-lalia , a melodic
<DIV></DIV>> > > alliteration that precedes the introduction of signs within a syntactic
<DIV></DIV>> > > order. The period during which I started developing this notion was that
<DIV></DIV>> >of
<DIV></DIV>> > > the writing of my Ph.D on the avant-garde of the 19th century (Mallarmè
<DIV></DIV>> >and
<DIV></DIV>> > > Lautreeamont) and I had understood how much of that, what we call
<DIV></DIV>> > > hermiticism in literature, is connected to the rehabilitation, more or
<DIV></DIV>> >less
<DIV></DIV>> > > conscious, of that archaic language. By the way, I was also at that time
<DIV></DIV>> > > undergoing an analysis myself, and so became convinced that what we have
<DIV></DIV>> > > discussed was really true.
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt;
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt; Q: Is it difficult to &quot;abandon&quot; or at least to set
<DIV></DIV>> > > aside one's mother tongue and write in another language ?
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt;
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt; Kristeva: No, I haven't had the impression that I had
<DIV></DIV>> >abandoned
<DIV></DIV>> > > my mother tongue by coming to France because I had learnt French when I
<DIV></DIV>> >was
<DIV></DIV>> > > four or five and had been bilingual. It is true though that the transition
<DIV></DIV>> > > from one mother tongue to the other is a real matricide particularly when
<DIV></DIV>> > > one ends up expressing himself only in this second language and oneÕs
<DIV></DIV>> > > rapport to the first one remains extremely limited, which is my case, but
<DIV></DIV>> >it
<DIV></DIV>> > > didnÕt happen with me in that era (of coming to France). It was quite a
<DIV></DIV>> > > gradual change.
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt;
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt; Q: Given the fact that you have written a lot about the
<DIV></DIV>> > > importance of the so-called &quot;sick&quot; states of mind, could you
<DIV></DIV>> >tell
<DIV></DIV>> > > us whether they are related in any way to Art ? Would you see Art as the
<DIV></DIV>> > > means of healing them or do you see it as an independent entity? Is Art a
<DIV></DIV>> > > sort of &quot;love&quot; for you (the way Freud would have it) and a sort
<DIV></DIV>> >of
<DIV></DIV>> > > human cure?
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt;
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt; Kristeva: It has always shocked commentators when I affirm my
<DIV></DIV>> > > agreement with the ancient Greeks who viewed art as catharsis or
<DIV></DIV>> > > purification and I would add that it is a sort of sublimation for the
<DIV></DIV>> > > &quot;borderline&quot; states, in the broadest sense of the term, that is,
<DIV></DIV>> > > it comprises those characterized by fragility. If we analyze contemporary
<DIV></DIV>> > > art, we get the impression that two types of fragility are examined by
<DIV></DIV>> > > contemporary artists. On one hand, we have perversion, that is, all sorts
<DIV></DIV>> >of
<DIV></DIV>> > > sexual transgressions. To this effect, it is enough to just browse through
<DIV></DIV>> > > contemporary books or simply look at the &quot;culture&quot; pages of
<DIV></DIV>> > > &quot;Libèration&quot; which review exhibitions to see that the form and
<DIV></DIV>> >the
<DIV></DIV>> > > content of the experience serve as means of overcoming these states. They
<DIV></DIV>> > > testify to the existence of these states, as well as that of a certain
<DIV></DIV>> > > desire to make them public, or even share them with others, that is, to
<DIV></DIV>> >take
<DIV></DIV>> > > them out of their closet which is! a soothing action after all despite its
<DIV></DIV>> > > commercial aspect since one turns a &quot;shameful thing&quot; into
<DIV></DIV>> > > something positive. So you see, here we have something that transcends the
<DIV></DIV>> > > notion of &quot;cure&quot; and is at times something gratifying.
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt;
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt; Q: Does contemporary art have to do with Voyeurism, as is the
<DIV></DIV>> > > case with the most recent literature nowadays which purports to describe
<DIV></DIV>> >the
<DIV></DIV>> > > most intimate states of the body and the soul ?
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt;
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt; Kristeva: Absolutely! This is ever the case with literature
<DIV></DIV>> >and
<DIV></DIV>> > > when it does not try to treat perversion, it is deals with psychotic
<DIV></DIV>> >states,
<DIV></DIV>> > > that is, the states of identity loss, the loss of language, the borderline
<DIV></DIV>> > > cases which cohabit and coexist with delirium and violence, but all of
<DIV></DIV>> >this
<DIV></DIV>> > > does not have to bear the imprint of something negative. Some think that
<DIV></DIV>> > > these works are scandal-oriented, others think that they rejoice in
<DIV></DIV>> >ugliness
<DIV></DIV>> > > , yes, certainly there are elements of such orientations in them, but, on
<DIV></DIV>> > > the other hand, the existence of these works is also a research -- often
<DIV></DIV>> >in
<DIV></DIV>> > > a very specific manner -- on the anticipation of difficulty of living. And
<DIV></DIV>> > > Art can play an important role here since it can contribute to a certain
<DIV></DIV>> > > creative assumption of such a difficulty. Nevertheless, I personally
<DIV></DIV>> >remain
<DIV></DIV>> > > a bit skeptical of a certain drift or tendency of contemporary art to
<DIV></DIV>> > > content itself with such, so I believe, feeble appropri! ations of these
<DIV></DIV>> > > traumatic states. We remain here at the level of the statement of the
<DIV></DIV>> > > clinical cases with an almost documentary style photography of these cases
<DIV></DIV>> > > wherein the investment and the effort made in the exploration of new forms
<DIV></DIV>> > > or new thoughts remains less visible. So, it is something regrettable
<DIV></DIV>> >which
<DIV></DIV>> > > every so often leaves me with the impression that when I visit museums or
<DIV></DIV>> > > read certain art books, I am looking into psychoanalytic or even
<DIV></DIV>> >psychiatric
<DIV></DIV>> > > archives. But, perhaps this is an indispensable experience.
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt;
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt; Q: But you haven't always felt this way- we remember the time
<DIV></DIV>> > > when you wrote about BelliniÉ
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt;
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt; Kristeva: That's right, I haven't always felt this way --
<DIV></DIV>> >this
<DIV></DIV>> > > is a very particular moment in art history which deepened and probed a
<DIV></DIV>> > > certain aspect of a widespread existential malaise and discontent while
<DIV></DIV>> > > neglecting the possibility of its overcoming.
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt;
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt; Q: Well, along this line, you wrote in &quot;Tales of
<DIV></DIV>> > > Love&quot; that &quot;the psychoanalytic couch is the only place where the
<DIV></DIV>> > > social contract authorizes explicitly psychoanalytic investigation, but
<DIV></DIV>> > > &quot;leaves Love out of it.&quot; However, we find this type of
<DIV></DIV>> > > investigation in literature and art as well. You have recently analyzed
<DIV></DIV>> >the
<DIV></DIV>> > > &quot;investigation&quot; of the writer Colette whose work deals
<DIV></DIV>> >extensively
<DIV></DIV>> > > with love and emotions. Why Colette ?
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt;
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt; Kristeva: Why Colette? Because in my trilogy on the feminine
<DIV></DIV>> > > genius I tried to analyze the works of two dramatic women who represent
<DIV></DIV>> >the
<DIV></DIV>> > > tragic aspect of our (20th) century, Hanna Arendt's on
<DIV></DIV>> > > &quot;Totalitarianism&quot; and Melanie Klein's on psychosis, especially
<DIV></DIV>> > > children's psychosis, and it seemed to me important (not only to me
<DIV></DIV>> > > personally but also for the sake of objectivity) to pay homage to the
<DIV></DIV>> >other
<DIV></DIV>> > > aspect of our civilization which is notably our century's source of joy,
<DIV></DIV>> > > that is, the feminist liberation and &quot;joie de vivre&quot;. And
<DIV></DIV>> >Colette
<DIV></DIV>> > > excels in that appropriation of the national language in which she
<DIV></DIV>> >delights
<DIV></DIV>> > > and leads to paroxysms of beauty that trace a path which goes beyond the
<DIV></DIV>> > > scandal of a woman who asserts her liberty and authority. So, for me, she
<DIV></DIV>> > > has become indispensable.
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt;
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt; Q: In your novel &quot;Les Samoura.s&quot; you have shown a
<DIV></DIV>> > > great literary talent and a certain sense of humor which is certainly
<DIV></DIV>> > > lacking in your analytic work. Why have you stopped your literary
<DIV></DIV>> > > production, that is to say, writing of novels ?
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt;
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt; Kristeva: Oh, I haven't stopped it for after &quot;Les
<DIV></DIV>> > > Samoura.s&quot; I wrote &quot;The old man the wolves,&quot; then
<DIV></DIV>> > > &quot;Possesions,&quot; and now I am going to write yet another thriller
<DIV></DIV>> > > which will be called, as it seems now, &quot;Our Byzantium&quot;. IÕd like
<DIV></DIV>> > > to continue writing in this polar style and with a certain political
<DIV></DIV>> > > motivation. It will be concerned with the possibility -- or the
<DIV></DIV>> > > impossibility -- of unifying Eastern Europe with Western Europe. It will
<DIV></DIV>> > > deal with the Crusades and in it the modern characters would reveal their
<DIV></DIV>> > > ancestors who had been in the Crusades, a catastrophic enterprise which
<DIV></DIV>> > > eventually failed as you know, but which has been in its essence an
<DIV></DIV>> >attempt
<DIV></DIV>> > > at unifying Europe, an unhappy attempt though. So, I am going to ask a
<DIV></DIV>> > > question about the tragedy of this Europe which is now divided, and also
<DIV></DIV>> > > this would be a way for me to visit my orthodox origins where I'd also
<DIV></DIV>> > > attempt to revive some of my childhood souvenirs.
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt;
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt; Q: That's right, the area of Eastern or Central Europe really
<DIV></DIV>> > > belongs to &quot;Byzantium&quot;.
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt;
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt; Kristeva: Yes, we are Byzantium, that is, the Balkans, and I
<DIV></DIV>> >am
<DIV></DIV>> > > very proud of the fact that I come from that region. And that's something
<DIV></DIV>> > > which is unknown to the West. While it is true that what has survived of
<DIV></DIV>> > > Byzantium is in a state of cultural decadence and terrible economic
<DIV></DIV>> >poverty
<DIV></DIV>> > > with nothing in it that could seduce the Westerners, it is indisputably
<DIV></DIV>> >the
<DIV></DIV>> > > treasure of our rich historical memory that is reflected, as far as I can
<DIV></DIV>> > > see, in the dignified sensitivity of people who donÕt ask for anything but
<DIV></DIV>> > > the minimum allowing them to continue living as the well-educated and
<DIV></DIV>> >highly
<DIV></DIV>> > > intelligent men and women who should be less exposed to mentally
<DIV></DIV>> >exhausting
<DIV></DIV>> > > pangs of melancholy and the socially debilitating impact of the economic
<DIV></DIV>> > > predominance of the mafia that is the case nowadays.
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt;
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt; Q: In your novel &quot;Possesions&quot; you started something
<DIV></DIV>> > > quite interesting, something that you stopped pursuing after having
<DIV></DIV>> >written
<DIV></DIV>> > > the first chapter though, and that particular thing is the psychoanalysis
<DIV></DIV>> >of
<DIV></DIV>> > > art which also includes that of the artists and their respective works.
<DIV></DIV>> > > Would it be possible to pursue research in this particular field, namely,
<DIV></DIV>> >an
<DIV></DIV>> > > analysis of the history of art by following different works of art from
<DIV></DIV>> > > different epochs?
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt;
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt; Kristeva: I have really enjoyed myself writing about these
<DIV></DIV>> > > different works of art, notably, on representations of decapitation, and I
<DIV></DIV>> > > believe that the novel as genre, especially thriller which is an open
<DIV></DIV>> >genre
<DIV></DIV>> > > and completely renewable allows for this type of digression in writing.
<DIV></DIV>> >But
<DIV></DIV>> > > they have severely criticized me for it and told me that the book was too
<DIV></DIV>> > > intellectual, very brainy and that the reader who wanted to know how the
<DIV></DIV>> > > crime was being developed and the murder had to suffer by having had to
<DIV></DIV>> > > wait. That was the malevolent reaction of those who have known me as an
<DIV></DIV>> > > intellectual and who did not like the fact that I was going to write
<DIV></DIV>> >novels.
<DIV></DIV>> > > So, there is a certain tendency in France, or perhaps elsewhere too, to
<DIV></DIV>> >put
<DIV></DIV>> > > labels on people- if you are a teacher, remain a teacher, and if you are a
<DIV></DIV>> > > writer, remain a writer, but the two of them at the same time- that you
<DIV></DIV>> > > cannot be! So, perhaps I will continue in that direction , that ! of novel
<DIV></DIV>> > > writing, I don't know. I have just finished the book about Colette, and my
<DIV></DIV>> > > new thriller is still in notes and scratches, it is not articulated yet,
<DIV></DIV>> >but
<DIV></DIV>> > > I am not sure that the fragments which deal with the so-called esthetic
<DIV></DIV>> > > problems are excluded from it. It is true we cannot insert a dissertation
<DIV></DIV>> >in
<DIV></DIV>> > > a novel, but perhaps we could set a basis there for it.
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt;
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt; Q: I believe that one could read your book &quot;The Intimate
<DIV></DIV>> > > Revolt&quot; in the light of your dialogue with Hannah Arendt. In fact,
<DIV></DIV>> >she
<DIV></DIV>> > > was the one who has spoken of the misery of human beings who are not
<DIV></DIV>> >allowed
<DIV></DIV>> > > to have &quot;contemplative&quot; ( read creative) life and who are thus
<DIV></DIV>> > > condemned to lead an &quot;active&quot; life, that is, to have a miserable
<DIV></DIV>> > > job. Is it the problem of our times that there exist such individuals who
<DIV></DIV>> > > revolt against the fact that they cannot realize themselves? That is, who
<DIV></DIV>> > > are angst-ridden and end up revolting against themselves?
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt;
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt; Kristeva: I believe that you were right to make such
<DIV></DIV>> > > assumptions about my eventual dialogue with Hannah Arendt -- I have been
<DIV></DIV>> > > reading her work for quite a while and I'd say, in all modesty, that a lot
<DIV></DIV>> > > of my writing, consciously or unconsciously, is tied to her thought . The
<DIV></DIV>> > > idea of &quot;revolt&quot; was an effort to put myself in relationship
<DIV></DIV>> >with
<DIV></DIV>> > > what we hear as &quot;her own thinking&quot; which, following Heidegger's,
<DIV></DIV>> > > opposes and relativizes calculative reasoning. As she was very attentive
<DIV></DIV>> >to
<DIV></DIV>> > > the work of Heidegger, she conceived of thinking as an inquiry, as an
<DIV></DIV>> > > interrogatory process and opposed herself to the calculative framework
<DIV></DIV>> >which
<DIV></DIV>> > > structures and characterizes contemporary behavior. My work has found
<DIV></DIV>> >itself
<DIV></DIV>> > > a bit within this horizon but I also derived my experience from the
<DIV></DIV>> > > psychoanalytical approach which relativizes everyone's identity as well as
<DIV></DIV>> > > his/her past. Moreover, I derived my experience from literary works, such
<DIV></DIV>> >as
<DIV></DIV>> > > Proust's &quot;Reche! rche de temps perdu;&quot; for instance, from his
<DIV></DIV>> > > flexing of language, metaphors and the syntax. I tried to rethink the
<DIV></DIV>> >mental
<DIV></DIV>> > > disposition which helps us carry on, the one which is not a mere
<DIV></DIV>> >repetition
<DIV></DIV>> > > of a cliche, something which is like an act of rebirth, that is, rebirth
<DIV></DIV>> > > which our thinking re-examines together with our interior life as well as
<DIV></DIV>> > > the very opening of the inquiry. This is what I take &quot;revolt&quot; to
<DIV></DIV>> > > be. So, it is neither an expression of simple existential anguish nor
<DIV></DIV>> > > contesting a socio-political order, but re-establishment of things which
<DIV></DIV>> >we
<DIV></DIV>> > > start again. And, in this sense, revolt which engulfs the psychic space is
<DIV></DIV>> >a
<DIV></DIV>> > > form of life, be it the state of being in love, or an act of aesthetic
<DIV></DIV>> > > creation or a project that could imply a very modest activity but which
<DIV></DIV>> > > allows you to re-examine your past, that is, to interrogate it and renew
<DIV></DIV>> >it.
<DIV></DIV>> > > And I believe that we have very few occasions in our daily lives which are
<DIV></DIV>> > > quite standardized and banalized to work in that direction. ! The work
<DIV></DIV>> >that
<DIV></DIV>> > > we do implies usually a repetition, the accomplishment o f a given task.
<DIV></DIV>> >The
<DIV></DIV>> > > type of mental functioning which I call &quot;revolt&quot; is something
<DIV></DIV>> >that
<DIV></DIV>> > > we lack and it is very dangerous because if it is lacking, we risk
<DIV></DIV>> > > confronting two prospective pitfalls: one of them is 'somatization' when
<DIV></DIV>> >the
<DIV></DIV>> > > psychic space closes itself off and the conflict manifests itself as
<DIV></DIV>> >bodily
<DIV></DIV>> > > illness or, in the other situation, we get into violence, vandalism and
<DIV></DIV>> > > wars. So, Vive la Rèvolte !
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt;
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt; Interview conducted by Nina Zivancevic, In Paris, March-April
<DIV></DIV>> > > 2001
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt;
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt;
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt;
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt;
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt;
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt;
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt;
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt;
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt;
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt; &gt;From: &quot;Michael Eisenstadt&quot;
<DIV></DIV>> >&lt;michaele@HotPOP.com&gt;
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt; &gt;Reply-To: austin-ghetto-list@pairlist.net
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt; &gt;To: &lt;austin-ghetto-list@pairlist.net&gt;
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt; &gt;Subject: Re: Win this lovely watch or left is right and right
<DIV></DIV>> >is
<DIV></DIV>> > > left
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt; &gt;Date: Wed, 19 May 2004 11:30:21 -0600
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt; &gt;
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt; &gt;Wayne wrote:
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt; &gt;
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt; &gt; &gt; Oh. Go and find thyself a New Genre, Kristeva.
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt; &gt; &gt; (One of Mike E. mostest favorite philosophers. Right,
<DIV></DIV>> > > Mike?)
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt; &gt;
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt; &gt;just to prove that i am reading your inspired spritzes i must
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt; &gt;acknowledge that i know of and have read at least 2 pages
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt; &gt;by Julia Kristeva.
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt; &gt;
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt; &gt;she is a French intellectual from Eastern Yerp and writes
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt; &gt;unreadable literary criticism some of which has unfortunately
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt; &gt;been translated into English.
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt; &gt;
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt; &gt;are you a leftie or a rightie, Wayne? wondering whether yule
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt; &gt;be wearing the Chinese mickey mouse watch on your left
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt; &gt;wrist (if a rightie) or the right (if a leftie)
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt; &gt;
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt; &gt;
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt; &gt;
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt;
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt;
<DIV></DIV>> > >
<DIV></DIV>> >&gt;------------------------------------------------------------------------
<DIV></DIV>> >------
<DIV></DIV>> > > &gt; MSN Toolbar provides one-click access to Hotmail from any Web
<DIV></DIV>> >page -
<DIV></DIV>> > > FREE download!
<DIV></DIV>> > >
<DIV></DIV>> > > _________________________________________________________________
<DIV></DIV>> > > Get 200+ ad-free, high-fidelity stations and LIVE Major League Baseball
<DIV></DIV>> > > Gameday Audio! http://radio.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200491ave/direct/01/
<DIV></DIV>> > >
<DIV></DIV>> > >
<DIV></DIV>> > >
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>> >
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>
<DIV></DIV>>------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<DIV></DIV>> Is your PC infected? Get a FREE online computer virus scan from McAfee® Security.
<DIV></DIV></div><br clear=all><hr> <a href="http://g.msn.com/8HMBENUS/2731??PS=47575">MSN Toolbar provides one-click access to Hotmail from any Web page – FREE download!</a> </html>