(no subject)
Sep. 21st, 2016 11:51 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
Our lives - not the world, not life, but ours - are too large for us, for me to have hold of. My thoughts? I think too many things. My past? What there was to it, what pasts and futures of its own it accompanied, what a morning seemed to mean - not a tithe of a grit of all this looms near enough to memory to traceably alter the lighting of what's remembered. Most of what I own is strange to me. No pound of my flesh, no matter how artfully carved, would fail to repel me if met on the bus window. It's not that things fade and fall away till we're next to nothing. It's worse. In the sublime we encounter inside us the slag from seam-burstings without. With this other, though, before our foot can touch ground it must dig and slide through a hundred crumbling, dissimilar models. It's not a second sort of sublime but it makes the first possible, since once our view's cleared the ground always proves too close to dodge, too far to not crash when we land. We take the credit for what isn't ours - ourselves. We aren't the snowglobe. Most days we're not even its smallest tinsel fragment, but rather we're water in waters too wet to know just where we end.
no subject
Date: 2016-09-22 11:22 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2016-09-22 05:24 pm (UTC)Also this reminds me of the very end of Proust.
It's great. Luckily not all one's moods are like this. Though maybe that doesn't matter.
no subject
Date: 2016-09-22 05:51 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2016-09-24 05:55 pm (UTC)Have you read Pessoa by chance?
no subject
Date: 2016-09-25 12:59 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2016-09-29 04:12 pm (UTC)Anyway, the line "We take the credit for what isn't ours - ourselves." had a distinctly Pessoan ring to me. He seems to be popping up more and more these days in book blurbs and reviewers' and essayists' asides, doesn't he? I feel like he should be more of a household name but I kind of get why he isn't. Even though he's not what I'd call a "difficult" writer like some other modernists, he's tough to explain to the average intellectually curious reader. I wrote a paper on him in a class long ago (I got to choose pretty much any topic) but it focused mostly on The Book of Disquiet and relied heavily on Zenith's scholarship, serving as little more than a cursory introduction. So I end up saying "Just read him!"
no subject
Date: 2016-09-30 02:11 am (UTC)I guess it makes sense that he'd be an uneven writer, what with having found a way to forgive himself for writing anything, but boy is he. A lot in Disquiet makes me want to smack him. I can never tell if he's great because of or in spite of his affectations.
no subject
Date: 2016-09-30 05:16 am (UTC)