Recently, I was struck by your post concerning Han-nah Arendt, which led me to your other posts de-voted to The Kindly Ones. It is those posts which prompted my contacting you, at this time. I am wondering what your opin-ion, would be behind the “why” of Mr Littell mak-ing his main character both a Homosexual and Incestuous?
Regarding your imagery, I am wondering
why you choose, to white-out, what I
perceive to be full-frontal nudity?
Is it because it would alter the ac-
cessibility, of your Blog?
From time to time we all receive queries, but with some it is tempting to publish an answer. Here a reader invites one to claim exemptions, pos-sibly in the most gener-ously charitable way, from implicating infer-ences he draws from his readings here. One can't accept the offer to shape publications, ex post facto, to evade ambiguity or incompleteness, where a creative alternative to eyewitness experience is sometimes intended.
It is ironic (at best) to publish an answer to a private note, but what I would like this reader to know, I would like any to know. This is a publica-tion of artifice, not a diary under a pseudonym, despite inevitable refer-ences to information I possess. His questions were born there.
Some time back, the blogger at Little Augury zeroed in on one's dilemma in balancing a baring with an anatomis-ing of a consistent perspective, even of the subconscious, in an invented voice. The problem of sustainability, is an everyday imponderable of its own.
Whether Littell, then, created Sebastian Aue to be as emotionally menacing as he was emotionally menaced, to hammer home as Melville did with Ahab, this could be you, with all the awe the Whale could muster, I do not know. Equally telling, is that it was for his matricide that he was hunted, for all his culpabilities, which made it all the more horrible.
Tidal nudity, at the same time, is still so unfam-iliar in our discourse as to represent too great a risk of misfire of one's intentions, and too un-stable an ally for rhet-oric. I have adopted a "block" to highlight the paradox, if the image is evocatively articulate.
Long ago, I detached the optional followers block from the template adopted here, so that readers could keep abreast of rmbl without seeming to be its subjects. The exploitation of the comment option plummeted, but a readership persisted, with whom I am aware of being interested in things, if not face to face, so to speak. This corres-pondent raised basic questions, on the representation of questions, and it would have been a loss to have buried them beneath a comment bar. Let us sustain the questions.
No comments:
Post a Comment