Friday, April 15, 2011

life, world, text

literary living (through a glass lightly)
revised and expanded August 25, 2017

My reflectively exploratory interest isn’t exactly psychoanalytic, but that’s pertinent, in a generic sense (not a therapeutic sense) that’s as philological or literary (writerly) as psychological. My psychological interests are generally drawn by appeals of self expansiveness (not egoistic self possession) for the sake of self enrichment.

Calling a venture psychoenhancive might be apt for much that goes on in academic rhetoric, e.g., Kaja Silverman, World Spectators, which allegedly pursues “a profound and vital erotic investment by a human being in the cosmic surround [...and] demonstrates the inseparability of philosophy and psychoanalysis” in terms of “visual culture, art history, and literary and film studies.” She was a professor in the Department of Rhetoric, UC at Berkeley, when she wrote her book. The idea captures a good sense of “literary” engagement beyond “Literature” (or “English”), which I want from a notion of “literary” studies.

Friday, April 1, 2011


No joke. I did some revision to the second half of “playing for keeps,” which makes it more complementary to “a validating frame of mind,” which has been honed alot. There’s now much more cogency to the road.

My primary interest there is not (yet) accessibility, though most of what I write, I believe, is accessible, with difficult passages. If I were writing to clarify what I’m doing, the clarity would be very evident. But difficult concepts don’t become less difficult, just better understood.