************* A Friend of Foucault speaks************
I thought it was quite clear thatinthe discourse that F. was
thinking through in thelast works thathe was not too far a step from
the moment of admission.After all, wait let me quailifythat statement,
Admission into a step whichhe had not foreseen.The realization that his
own memory did have room for the discourse of eternal damnation.
Especially after his disillusionment withthe Iranian revolution one sees a
turn in the epistemological centre that makes the process of faith by
damnation a new choice in the dispersion of dialetic and undoing the
cognitive process of the old Descartian ego. Whichhe had struggled
againstso fiercely and intelligently. However how could he not but
reverto the notion of perdition without having had the moment of limit
experience that happened to him in california where he saw for a moment a
flash that was not to happen again, that as he left his body the limits of
the Ratio, long seen and know already by others like Artaud who had had
no rational descartiansto beat out but demons to tread and fight,that yes,
there was more than the puny boring rational limits ofthe body here and
now and that this was a legitimateconsolation inthe face of life's
adversities, miseries, tragedies and irredeemable murders massacres and
pains, so that yes, pain, hell or pain of desire which endured forever
that is to say outside ofthe chronological and rational did not seem that
unusal. Especially after Michel had gone to be with Saint Augustine, and
learned to say Burning Burning Burning Burning O Lord O Lord thou pluckest
me THou pluckest me out Beauty long have I loved thee but learned so late
to Love thee. TO quote a fantasy and a lovelyfragment of Augustine. Of
course I only speak as a friend of Michel, a female at that, so perhaps I
am wrong.
She turns to me with a smile as I turn the tape-recorder off.
Later:
Okay why such rage at Derrida? Why the need to assert his own
authority over all other thinkers? Well, you know Derrida and Sartre both
attacked Michel. He did not start that quarrel, which does not mean he had
to fight with Jacques Derrida the way he did, that was not strictly
rational. One man like that with such great beauty of mind and face and
the other a homosexual well, perhaps, but no I don't know if it made a
difference. Maybe someone like Michel could explain that if he were here.
Or someone like Genet could explain it, you knowthe dynamics among these
people can bemore complex. sometimes....
She looks at me with her big brown eyes, and says, My name is
Claire Parnet, I was the lover of all these men. I must go, I am ill. I
will speak later. Later.
She leaves me in the smoke filled room of her death and lungs left
over hurt in the air . Of her.
*******************************
CD - have faith might travel.
I thought it was quite clear thatinthe discourse that F. was
thinking through in thelast works thathe was not too far a step from
the moment of admission.After all, wait let me quailifythat statement,
Admission into a step whichhe had not foreseen.The realization that his
own memory did have room for the discourse of eternal damnation.
Especially after his disillusionment withthe Iranian revolution one sees a
turn in the epistemological centre that makes the process of faith by
damnation a new choice in the dispersion of dialetic and undoing the
cognitive process of the old Descartian ego. Whichhe had struggled
againstso fiercely and intelligently. However how could he not but
reverto the notion of perdition without having had the moment of limit
experience that happened to him in california where he saw for a moment a
flash that was not to happen again, that as he left his body the limits of
the Ratio, long seen and know already by others like Artaud who had had
no rational descartiansto beat out but demons to tread and fight,that yes,
there was more than the puny boring rational limits ofthe body here and
now and that this was a legitimateconsolation inthe face of life's
adversities, miseries, tragedies and irredeemable murders massacres and
pains, so that yes, pain, hell or pain of desire which endured forever
that is to say outside ofthe chronological and rational did not seem that
unusal. Especially after Michel had gone to be with Saint Augustine, and
learned to say Burning Burning Burning Burning O Lord O Lord thou pluckest
me THou pluckest me out Beauty long have I loved thee but learned so late
to Love thee. TO quote a fantasy and a lovelyfragment of Augustine. Of
course I only speak as a friend of Michel, a female at that, so perhaps I
am wrong.
She turns to me with a smile as I turn the tape-recorder off.
Later:
Okay why such rage at Derrida? Why the need to assert his own
authority over all other thinkers? Well, you know Derrida and Sartre both
attacked Michel. He did not start that quarrel, which does not mean he had
to fight with Jacques Derrida the way he did, that was not strictly
rational. One man like that with such great beauty of mind and face and
the other a homosexual well, perhaps, but no I don't know if it made a
difference. Maybe someone like Michel could explain that if he were here.
Or someone like Genet could explain it, you knowthe dynamics among these
people can bemore complex. sometimes....
She looks at me with her big brown eyes, and says, My name is
Claire Parnet, I was the lover of all these men. I must go, I am ill. I
will speak later. Later.
She leaves me in the smoke filled room of her death and lungs left
over hurt in the air . Of her.
*******************************
CD - have faith might travel.