Re: Fwd: Buzz off!
Veronica Makowsky (makowsky@UCONNVM.UCONN.EDU)
Sun, 9 Mar 1997 09:59:11 -0500
James Woods wrote:
>
> I should not like Mr. Manier's statement that I refuse to engage in
> "meaningful human conversation" to have 'legs" so to speak. Mr. Manier
> contacted me directly following my second reply to notes. I did engage in
> what I believed to be 'meaningful human conversation' of what I believe to
> have been a triadic kind. Ordinarily, I would not post a private note to the
> board but in this instance it seems necessary to correct the impression that
> Mr. Manier has left with the board.
>
> << Date: 97-03-06 07:26:42 EST
> From: TrlBlzrOne
> To: A.E.Manier.1@nd.edu
>
> In a message dated 97-03-05 16:08:54 EST, you write:
>
> > Listen jerk, if you want me to think you know something about Heidegger
> or
> >Hegel I don't, put something in writing.
> > EZ
>
> Sure, we can do that...
>
> Unbeknownst to Hegel and Heidegger, the Eckhardian nihilo essentially
> delivers the self to the reifying alienation of the impersonal operations of
> the biogenic and dialectical syntheis, which is itself compromised by the
> further erosion precipitated by materialistic reductionism, producing the
> ontic surd as the only realistic alternative to the self; notwithstanding
> this movement toward the ontic surd, the emergence of self-negating
> genealogical subjectivity and irrationalism gives rise to pseudo-scientistic
> objectification of entropic dynamism in turn producing axiomatic
> transactional change in the original Eckhardian nihilo, thereby creating a
> negative noosphere in which the alienated triadic signifyer confronts, not
> the comfort of the ontic surd, but the even more fundamental phenomenon of
> the isochastic digital sign as the ironic end point.*
>
> I hope this is helpful....
>
> *references furnished on request
>
> Jim
>
> >>
>
> ---------------------
> Forwarded message:
> Subj: Fwd: Buzz off!
> Date: 97-03-09 07:02:55 EST
> From: TrlBlzrOne
> To: Matthias.Staab@dm.krinfo.ch
>
> In a message dated 97-03-06 07:26:42 EST, TrlBlzrOne writes:
>
> << Subj: Re: Buzz off!
> Matthias:
>
> I mentioned in my last post that I had sent a piece which I hoped would be
> understood as an ironic spoof in reply to Professor Manier. I did send such
> a note, but in reviewing my mailbox to get rid of stuff, I note that my reply
> was to a note which he sent to me privately, not to the board...at least it
> appears that way--can you tell me if the piece below did appear on the board
> or not?
>
> Date: 97-03-06 07:26:42 EST
> From: TrlBlzrOne
> To: A.E.Manier.1@nd.edu
>
> In a message dated 97-03-05 16:08:54 EST, you write:
>
> > Listen jerk, if you want me to think you know something about Heidegger or
> >Hegel I don't, put something in writing.
> > EZ
>
> Sure, we can do that...
>
> Unbeknownst to Hegel and Heidegger, the Eckhardian nihilo essentially
> delivers the self to the reifying alienation of the impersonal operations of
> the biogenic and dialectical syntheis, which is itself compromised by the
> further erosion precipitated by materialistic reductionism, producing the
> ontic surd as the only realistic alternative to the self; notwithstanding
> this movement toward the ontic surd, the emergence of self-negating
> genealogical subjectivity and irrationalism gives rise to pseudo-scientistic
> objectification of entropic dynamism in turn producing axiomatic
> transactional change in the original Eckhardian nihilo, thereby creating a
> negative noosphere in which the alienated triadic signifyer confronts, not
> the comfort of the ontic surd, but the even more fundamental phenomenon of
> the isochastic digital sign as the ironic end point.*
>
> I hope this is helpful....
>
> *references furnished on request
>
> Jim
>
> ---------------------
> Forwarded message:
> Subj: Re: Buzz off!
> Date: 97-03-06 07:26:42 EST
> From: TrlBlzrOne
> To: A.E.Manier.1@nd.edu
>
> In a message dated 97-03-05 16:08:54 EST, you write:
>
> > Listen jerk, if you want me to think you know something about Heidegger or
> >Hegel I don't, put something in writing.
> > EZ
>
> Sure, we can do that...
>
> Unbeknownst to Hegel and Heidegger, the Eckhardian nihilo essentially
> delivers the self to the reifying alienation of the impersonal operations of
> the biogenic and dialectical syntheis, which is itself compromised by the
> further erosion precipitated by materialistic reductionism, producing the
> ontic surd as the only realistic alternative to the self; notwithstanding
> this movement toward the ontic surd, the emergence of self-negating
> genealogical subjectivity and irrationalism gives rise to pseudo-scientistic
> objectification of entropic dynamism in turn producing axiomatic
> transactional change in the original Eckhardian nihilo, thereby creating a
> negative noosphere in which the alienated triadic signifyer confronts, not
> the comfort of the ontic surd, but the even more fundamental phenomenon of
> the isochastic digital sign as the ironic end point.*
>
> I hope this is helpful....
>
> *references furnished on request
>
> Jim
>
> Jim
Dear Fellow Members of the Walker Percy List:
In the light of recent exchanges, I would like to see us
re-focus our attention on Percy and his works.
Does anyone have any commentary on recent works published about
Percy or his recently published correspondence with Shelby Foote?
Or on another topic, I have been teaching some Catholic (or
Anglo-Catholic)-convert poets like Allen Tate, T.S. Eliot, and, for a
while, Robert Lowell. I know that he knew Tate personally, but did WP
read any of these poets? Were they important for this life or fiction?
Does anyone have any comments on Percy and poetry in any other aspects?
Does anybody have any other queries?
Happy Spring!
Veronica Makowsky