Quoting michaelP <michael@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> >> MichaelP:
> >> Saying no to what has passed
> >> Seems to be saying no to its passing
> >> Then, the revenge (the no-saying) being spoken, would seem to
> >> Be eternalised.
> >> The whole of the passed-not-passed-past: frozen in the
> >> Present-presented? And this
> >> Seems to be a yes-saying to the
> >> Past.
> >> So that history might come to pass?
> >> At last?
> > Allen:
> > History can be repeated,only in its "how."
> > This possibility of repetition, Heidegger
> > calls "conscience."
> > So what is passed cannot be passed over if it
> > is recognized, heard as a call.
> > The call calls interpretation to a halt,
> > saying "no," no more need be said.
> > How do we know when enough is enough?
> > Meangingfulness,or despair?
> > Silence. Nothing.
> > But when Quinn the Eskimo gets here,
> > Everybody jumps for joy!
> > How does he do it, that Quinn?
> this repetition sounds like the way music works it, rarely iterated
> identically (except in forms like rap and dance forms that employ audio
> samples, etc); the way things return is more in the form than the content
What Heidegger called the "formal indication" no? The "how" one hears
(if one's mind is free to listen, and appropriately attuned) in the iterated
tune is the how of being moved in the direction of a particular possibility.
This how of being moved in a particular way(direction)may call for thinking, if
one is so prone. Or it may call for nothing, but the silence of "no more need
be said." Or for those who seem to know something of a language of music,more
music may come of it. I have no idea how that happens; The best I can do is
think the thanking thought that it does.
> (in variations, key changes, ornamented or straight, inverted, retrograde,
> sequenced, etc); knowing when enough is enough? the best music does... the
> fading repeats at the end of Gorecki's Third Symph, perfect, making the
> silence at the end stunning and lasting forever (audiences might wait a long
> silent time to allow the silent call to make itself heard, before bringing
> the piece to an empirical end through applause)...
These apparently empirical experiences of shared ecstasy in an audience I think
are romantically enhanced by the setting, the expectations accompanying the
form, and finally the applause, the standing ovations, which connect one to
those with whom, of whom one wishes to be for the moment. And so one rises to
the occassion! Which of course, is not to say the experience is any less real
for such formal enhancements. It's just over and above the formal indication
from within the music itself.
I'll be gone for a while, but I did want to say one thing more about Jud's
insistent refusal of hermemeutical generosity-- the giving of noneself over to
the possibility of another's reported experience of meaningfulness. There I
said it! Without the willingness to hazard such a move,all that's left to do
is argue, disagree, agree and so on. Not at all what Philosophia had in mind.
This mail sent through IMP: http://horde.org/imp/
--- from list heidegger@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx ---