<!doctype html public "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN">
<html>
<head>
<style type="text/css"><!--
blockquote, dl, ul, ol, li { margin-top: 0 ; margin-bottom: 0 }
--></style>
<title>
Re: Heidegger Is No Hero
</title>
</head>
<body>
<div><br></div>
<div>Michael P. wrote:</div>
<div><br></div>
<div><font color="#0000FF">Later on, the mystified Strenski claims a
kind of boredom:<br>
<br>
</font>"... like me, are at best indifferent to and wearied by
Heidegger's thought ..."</div>
<div><br></div>
<blockquote type="cite" cite>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font color="#0000FF">One must ask why
anyone should take seriously the thoughts of one who is
"indifferent and wearied" to/by the subject he
tackles.</font></blockquote>
</blockquote>
<div><br></div>
<div><br></div>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font color="#0000FF">Allen
responded:</font></blockquote>
<div><br></div>
<div><br></div>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font color="#0000FF">Couldn't agree
more. ( or maybe I could!) This kind of thing ( I didn't mean
to be writing in blue. Your font must be contagious!) smells
almost as bad as whatever was polluting Rene's corner of the
room. Why come to the party, if you're only going to criticize
people for getting stoned?</font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font
color="#0000FF"><br></font></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><font color="#0000FF">I once
worked for what was called a "Jewish Defense</font>
Organization." I used to go to meetings where people shared news
of all the grave threats to being Jewish and developed strategies for
dealing with them. It was one of the most depressing jobs I
ever had. There was no joy in it! Why "be
Jewish" together for the sheer misery of remembering the
holocaust and practicing paranoia?</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><br></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite>The only reason for communicating your
experience in public is to more deeply appreciate it as a possibility
of existence. Those who man the battle stations of
"critique" always strike me as practicing the most joyless
and uninteresting sort of nihilism.</blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite><br></blockquote>
<blockquote type="cite" cite>Allen</blockquote>
<div><br></div>
<div>and, applying it here to Strenski's disappointment with
Heidegger's book and as approving Allen's above comment on critique,
Deleuze wrote:</div>
<div><br></div>
<div><font color="#0000FF">And we can comment, and interpret, and ask
for explainations, we can write about the book and so on endlessly.
Or the other way: we consider the book a small a-signifying machine;
the only problem is "Does it work and how does it work? How does
it work for you?" If it doesn't function, if nothing happens,
take another book. This other way of reading is based on intensities:
something happens or doesn't happen. There is nothing to explain,
nothing to understand, nothing to interpret. It can be compared to an
electrical connection. A body without organs: I know uneducated
people who understood this immediately, thanks to their own
"habits." This other way of reading goes against the
preceeding insofar as it immediately refers a book to Exteriority. A
book is a small cog in a much more complex, external machinery.
Writing is a flow among others; it enjoys no special privilege and
enters into relationships of current and countercurrent, of back-wash
with other flows</font></div>
<div><br></div>
<div><br></div>
<div><br></div>
<div><br></div>
<div>x<br>
</div>
</body>
</html>
--- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---
