I agree with that.
--- Peter Montgomery <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Certainly a way of reading the poem very different
> from my own.
> For me the poem is a set of perceptions which
> resonate with
> or effect each other by their proximity, thereby
> an experience in the reader. Whatever meaning or
> intent they may
> have is that which the reader brings to them as he
> imagines the
> experiences of the poem. In effect the poem is a
> kind of spectral stone.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Dunja Seselja" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Monday, September 11, 2006 4:25 AM
> Subject: Re: Identity of the speaker in 'Preludes'
> Dear Marcin,
> Here is finally my reply to your mail...
> I like how you put it - that "both passivity and
> routine stem from the speaker's existential
> which on the epistemic level is expressed, I'd
> to say, by the sense of his/her dislocation." Could
> maybe again refer here to the Heideggerian concept
> "dislocation", i.e. the point when a Dasein looses
> ground in the world of "man", turning back to
> As for my "composition" consisting of the three
> they seem to me more interconnected (seen from the
> perspective of finiteness etc.) than the rest of the
> poems in the volume... But ok, I might be just as
> very wrong in this assumption. It would be even more
> interesting, indeed, to show this problem in the
> entire volume. (And yes, "structure" is a dreadful
> expression when we speak about poetry, but so are
> other, often inescapable, terms :)
> I completely agree with you that "passivity and
> routine, in general, are interdependent. They are
> sides of the same coin, or as Heidegger has it, they
> comprise the inauthentic response to the finitude
> the anxiety)...". I also think that the passivity of
> the speaker "may be interpreted rather as
> contemplative attentiveness, which is an experience
> far from in-activity." Don't we here have a
> o passivity-activity, dependence on the world -
> independence of it, subject - object etc.?
> You said: "I do not think that the speaker in the
> third Prelude is quite there... He/she is alone, but
> it does not follow that he/she is "back to himSELF /
> herSELF." I'd say that here we again have a
> dialectical turn: from the world - back to oneself -
> back to the world, now seen from the eyes of the
> Would do you think about that?
> But I don't think I could agree with your claim that
> "neither the speaker in Preludes, nor J.A.
> are-in-the-world (in Heideggerian sense). Neither of
> them authentically experiences time (again - in
> Heideggeran sense)." Haven't we said that exactly
> because they are in-the-world, they experience the
> routine etc.? I also don't see why they wouldn't
> "authentically" experience time, for isn't their
> awareness of their finitude exactly going in that
> direction? A sort of "guarantee" for that would be
> moment of loosing-the-ground (in the Heideggerian
> sense), which I've mentioned above.
> As for the notion of time, I must admit I'm not sure
> what exactly I should answer... On the one hand, we
> have time as an "independent" instance (both in
> Preludes and in the Love Song), i.e. as something
> and above human existence. But on the other hand,
> time receives such a status only through human
> finiteness, so that its "independence" becomes
> something highly dependent (dialectics again?).
> What would You say about the time here? And how
> you relate it to Heideggerian notion of time and/or
> time as chronos?
> Best regards!
> --- marcin ostrouch <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> > Dear Dunja
> > This is in regard to your email of Sept 5th (it
> > me some time go
> > through it, as it seemed to me pleasantly dense,
> > quite stimulating;
> > thank you).
> > >Thank you for the reply!
> > >I see the question of what is prior - passivity
> > the
> > >mundane routine - in the following way. Both
> > >can be rooted in the existential position the
> > subject
> > >finds him/herself.
> > >
> > Yes, there is no gainsaying that both passivity
> > routine stem from
> > the speaker's existentail condition, which on the
> > epistmic level is
> > expressed, I'd venture to say, by the sense of
> > his/her dislocation.
> > >It seems to me that the first three poems from
> > >"Prufrock and Other Observations" (so, The Love
> > Song,
> > >Portrait of a Lady and Preludes) might be seen in
> > the
> > >light of one bigger composition, consisting of
> > these
> > >three poems. [...]I don't know if this structure
> > makes any sense...
> > >
> > I still have to think about it, as I am rather
> > cautious about
> > multiplying "structures" (what a dreadful
> > expression, don't you think?)
> > , i.e. all the poems in the volume seem to be
> > cross-referenced in one
> > way or another...
> > >I wouldn't say routine is the source of the
> > passivity in Preludes, nor the other
> > >way around. The finiteness of human being is what
> > >seems to be, from my point o view, the main idea,
> > of
> > >which both routine and passivity are derivations.
> > >
> > I am inclined to think that passivity and routine,
> > in general, are
> > interdependent. They are two sides of the same
> > or as Heidegger has
> > it, they comprise the inauthentic response to the
> > finitude (and the
> > anxiety). Now, having said this, the speaker in
> > Preludes seems to be
> > passive in a rather curious vein. I would imagine,
> > that it is passivity
> > of someone undergoing the process of existential
> > individuation.
> > Therefore his/her 'passivity' may be interpreted
> > rather as contemplative
> > attentiveness, which is an experience far from
> > in-activity.
> > >In
> > >Preludes we have the Subject thrown-in-the-world
> > and
> > >then thrown-back-to-him(her?)self. I think that
> > >Heideggerian figure of "loosing the ground" and
> > coming
> > >back to oneself fits very well the Prelude III.
> > >Prufrock, and then, even more explicitly, in
> > Portrait
> > >of a Lady we can see the Subject's
> > "being-to-death"
> > >and indecisiveness caused by that. The same
> > >indecisiveness comes back in Preludes, this time
> > >the form of passivity, caused both by
> > >being-in-the-world and being-in-time. Thus, the
> > >meaninglessness you mention seems to be, in this
> > >reading, a consequence of these "existentials",
> > just
> > >like the meaninglessness present in The Love
=== message truncated ===
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around