wordcrush

I'm so thoroughly intrigued and annoyed by Mike Love's Genaology of Western Thought cause, yeah, Plato influenced Aristotle influenced Descartes, but who was it that gave Plato his onions and chicken-kebabs? The idea that geneaologies of thought could be graphed in this way is itself Platonic, in that it separates the Mind from the body (in much the way the humanities do when they fail to meet the real world): all the while ignoring the genealogy of agricultural production, slave trading, pants-making (togas, whatever). The bearers of (cultural) literacy -- that great homotextual tradition -- are the ones who get remembered, writing their names on the backs of others.

I know I should be resigned to this, but my annoyance stems from the fact that literary theorists (no names) have gone so far as to tout the Death of the Author (offering, in the author's absence, power to the common reader). Nobody knows or cares about this besides litrerary theorists. So, weirdly, I'm arguing against the problematic separation of Mind and body, by refrring to a theory that is only academically transmitted (i.e. one that separates academic Minds from the broader cultural body). I'm replicating Plato. I am Plato.

Oh, but wait, I'm doing it on a blag (I like that mispelling). That means I'm reaching out beyond the ivory tower, right? Meeting the real world? Bah! Mental masturbation is not a political action. Looping thoughts inside of thoughts to the point where they become meaningless is, however, a fun pastime. As is snacking on the limbs of dead philosophers.

If anyone has any ideas (ha!) on how to break this vicious, viscous cycle, be my guest.

# posted by Lintropy @ 10:48 AM