(no subject)

[proximoception]

Do we study it:

1. To prove that it is nothing until we study it.

2. To prove that we don't need to study it.
2b. To prove that we cannot study it.
2c. To prove that we should not study it.

3. To prove that there is no it.

4. To prove that it bears out what we said it would, just like everything does.

5. To grind it up into itty-bitty pieces.

1-5. To prove we're better than it.

Comments

[thelican.livejournal.com]

To continue to be actively conscious of it?

[grashupfer.livejournal.com]

I bet we could find a critic to match each number.

[wolodymyr.livejournal.com]

I had a sudden epiphany while at Harvard that I and all my fellow undergraduates loved only flawed things - things that were great when properly understood, meaning, which required us to explain them. We loved things that needed us to love them.

I think I had my epiphany the weekend that communal love for Pulp Fiction had gotten so strong, you could hear it coming out of various dorm windows, and my suspicion was that people playing it realized that they weren't the only ones playing it, that they were suddenly merely fans, connected by their fan love to people they didn't know, didn't critically approve of, and the...dunno, wanton promiscuity of that was horrific, and in any event by the end of the weekend you couldn't find a person who didn't revile Quentin Tarantino.

Reviling him required analysis and explanation, and self-differentiation. Sweet relief!