Once again, the coincidence of reading from the original manuscript and the recording of The Dead Zone, in studio north of WRHU (Radio Hofstra University). As I say in my pre-reading commentary, all of this is part of my ongoing experiment in 'making' philosophy in such fashion that it is all learning, or a taking up of the possibility/potentiality offered to me aka taking up and doing something with my freedom! One might describe this a using my poetic license, perhaps in a fast and furious manner, and I wouldn't dispute this at all. Indeed, the overlapping of my work here in the studios at WRHU and the studio of my study and the studio of the seminar room is only becoming more intensely intentional and I would also say purposeful. To get a sense of this, one should check out the Musings session with my colleague Sam Rocha: Musings: Professor Iguana with Sam Rocha
There's more coming on that in the coming months, specifically when I join Sam and his musicians in the making of the album 'Late to Love.'
Back to PPM43! This is an important meditation for several reasons. First, because I'm gearing up for a very slow and careful reading of Plato's "Allegory," and do so by positioning my reading through Heidegger, whose essay on the same piece is the frame for my own. And so the key fragment that I drop into the pond is the following from Heidegger, who writes, about his approach to Plato's 'Allegory': "According to our interpretation, which is made necessary from out of a future need, the 'allegory' not only illustrates the essence of education but at the same time opens our eyes to a transformation in the essence of 'truth.' If the 'allegory' can show both, must it not be the case that an essential relation holds between 'education' and 'truth'? This relation does, in fact, obtain. And it consists in the fact that the essence of truth and sort of transformation it undergoes here first makes possible 'education' in its basic structures." To say this is a significant fragment is to grossly undervalue, understate and underestimate what it yield for the reading I will make of Plato's 'Allegory' in view of the work I have done thus far in my phenomenology of Being and Learning. But we have moved, or passed, underground, and into the cave, so perhaps whatever I say will be heard as somehow 'under'?
Second, PPM43 is important because it is here that I indicate the 'political' implications of the Learning, and I discuss this in my post-reading commentary, where I return to Hegel's tripartite distinction (Family, Civil Society, State) and suggest that the learning community that arises from the (dialogic) practice of philosophy is a wandering along the threshold that persists between the private sphere of the family and the public sphere of civil society. Here I am leaning heavily on Arendt, and have made this point in an article I published in Teachers College Record, that can be downloaded by going to my academic.edu page:Eduardo Duarte Academia Edu Page
What's key, then, is that through Heidegger, I am able to build on the work I have done thus far to show how the fundamental ontological situation of Being and Learning (presencing as an offering of freedom) is a transformational experience with truth. Learning is that transformational experience with truth, now identified as freedom. The matter becomes somewhat complicated, because freedom is what is offered, and thus carries the dynamic force (power) of Being's presencing as pure potentiality. But 'truth' is, after all, a human construct, or the name for the fundamental perception of Being, or the way Being discloses before us. So to say we are transformed by a transformational force that prompts us to be transformative does not strike me a tautology (not that I'm awfully concerned about that anyway, given my phenomenological approach!).
Finally, PPM43 is important because it sets the strategy of reading Plato's "Allegory" within the parameters established thus far in the work, and so the piece is read, or rather heard, "as a tale of transformation, and as a transforming tale, both as a tale that has the evocative power to transform the listeners, and as a tale that transforms or changes in the telling. To be open to the novel hearing of the 'Allegory' is to hear the truly novelistic, narrative quality of this tale, a quality that expresses novelty, improvisation, spontaneity."
There's more coming on that in the coming months, specifically when I join Sam and his musicians in the making of the album 'Late to Love.'
Back to PPM43! This is an important meditation for several reasons. First, because I'm gearing up for a very slow and careful reading of Plato's "Allegory," and do so by positioning my reading through Heidegger, whose essay on the same piece is the frame for my own. And so the key fragment that I drop into the pond is the following from Heidegger, who writes, about his approach to Plato's 'Allegory': "According to our interpretation, which is made necessary from out of a future need, the 'allegory' not only illustrates the essence of education but at the same time opens our eyes to a transformation in the essence of 'truth.' If the 'allegory' can show both, must it not be the case that an essential relation holds between 'education' and 'truth'? This relation does, in fact, obtain. And it consists in the fact that the essence of truth and sort of transformation it undergoes here first makes possible 'education' in its basic structures." To say this is a significant fragment is to grossly undervalue, understate and underestimate what it yield for the reading I will make of Plato's 'Allegory' in view of the work I have done thus far in my phenomenology of Being and Learning. But we have moved, or passed, underground, and into the cave, so perhaps whatever I say will be heard as somehow 'under'?
Second, PPM43 is important because it is here that I indicate the 'political' implications of the Learning, and I discuss this in my post-reading commentary, where I return to Hegel's tripartite distinction (Family, Civil Society, State) and suggest that the learning community that arises from the (dialogic) practice of philosophy is a wandering along the threshold that persists between the private sphere of the family and the public sphere of civil society. Here I am leaning heavily on Arendt, and have made this point in an article I published in Teachers College Record, that can be downloaded by going to my academic.edu page:Eduardo Duarte Academia Edu Page
What's key, then, is that through Heidegger, I am able to build on the work I have done thus far to show how the fundamental ontological situation of Being and Learning (presencing as an offering of freedom) is a transformational experience with truth. Learning is that transformational experience with truth, now identified as freedom. The matter becomes somewhat complicated, because freedom is what is offered, and thus carries the dynamic force (power) of Being's presencing as pure potentiality. But 'truth' is, after all, a human construct, or the name for the fundamental perception of Being, or the way Being discloses before us. So to say we are transformed by a transformational force that prompts us to be transformative does not strike me a tautology (not that I'm awfully concerned about that anyway, given my phenomenological approach!).
Finally, PPM43 is important because it sets the strategy of reading Plato's "Allegory" within the parameters established thus far in the work, and so the piece is read, or rather heard, "as a tale of transformation, and as a transforming tale, both as a tale that has the evocative power to transform the listeners, and as a tale that transforms or changes in the telling. To be open to the novel hearing of the 'Allegory' is to hear the truly novelistic, narrative quality of this tale, a quality that expresses novelty, improvisation, spontaneity."
Jumping in on 3/27/19, the 15th anniversary of the original meditation: what strikes me as significant is the repetition of the word 'studio,' not to mention the recording of the daily reading in the old studio north at WRHU. WRHU has just recently (in the past few months of 2019) undergone a major reconstruction, so this recording is a bit of a historical recording. But, more importantly, the repetition of 'studio' is significant because it identifies (names) the place where poetic praxis is undertaken: the studio. Much work has been done by my colleagues on 'study' but, to my knowledge, they have yet to trace the link between 'study' and 'studio'. I ought to take this up! Since returning from PES Richmond I have a renewed sense of purpose with the poetic praxis project, which continues now with my writing on Jean-Luc Nancy's work on listening, and the formative power of music. That has lead me to wonder more deeply about how my radio work is a form of poetic practice?
ReplyDelete3.0 - there is so much in the 2.0 commentary, and the excess from 5 years ago (I find interesting that this is the second time I "discover" these in-between commentaries), not to mention the original meditation from this day! I'm not sure how to begin this 20/10 year commentary, but would have to begin by noting that Plato's "Allegory of the Cave" is the single most important piece of philosophical writing in my academic journey. It appeared as the central text when I was writing my grad school applications (I described walking up and down Fordham Road, back and forth to Rose Hill, and over to the Botanical Gardens as akin to the liberated prisoner's discovery of what was 'beyond' his usual habitat), I used it in a class in a high school in Harlem when I was a guest teacher for a few weeks during grad school at the New School, I have taught it almost every semester for the past 30 years, and during the pandemic finally wrote a longish exegesis on Heidegger's essay on it. It is truly a work of philosophy insofar as it is inexhaustible! And because there will be many days forthcoming that will allow me to take up some of the original meditations on the allegory, I want to reserve today's 3.0 commentary to respond to 2.0, and 2.5. Reading back to 2014, I'm reminded of the frenetic energy of that year which lead to PES Memphis 2015, the most audacious and notorious project I've ever pulled off! The Camino Mafioso indeed!! The studio, WRHU, the Dead Zone (and a killer Scarlet B's playing in the background): (a) the video makes me nostalgic for the time when I recorded at WRHU, but I'm proud of my home studio, The Turkey Studios; (b) the theme of "the studio," is one I let slip by, although from project's point of view I would say the Dead Zone has become more intentionally a work of poetic praxis, and what for the past year now I've been describing as cultural education. Nevertheless I was somewhat unnerved when I met with Tyson in Salt Lake and he told me about his book on the studio. I know it's related to his work on study, not to mention his work in the arts and arts education, but knowing his propensity to "borrow" ideas discussed with colleagues, I almost spoke from the place of proprietary rights! :-) I had a similar feeling when I heard my colleague's paper on contemplative reading, only in the sense that knew that this project had covered so much of that territory, albeit not in the exact manner as my colleague. And that's the take away: better to have excellent work published by kindred spirit that you can respond to, then to be writing from an island.
ReplyDelete3.0b - I do indeed feel this particular part of the project, that is, the original meditations and "Being and Learning," has a bit of the castaway voice. And perhaps the blog is my Wilson or was it Spaulding? I have that feeling with the Dead Zone, which I put out over the airwaves every Sunday without caring whether or not I have 1 or 100 listeners. So, indeed, the studio! I will be picking up that theme, albeit not that intensely, in the Routledge book when I explore and trace the study/studio pair in reading, writing, and dialogue. Then there is the historical cataloging happening in 2.0: the video recording in WRHU, the mention of going into the studio with Rocha for the "Late to Lave" session (that was also documented somewhere, and of course my Palabras piece was published with the album, and is yet another example of poetic praxis), the mention fo the publication of the TCR paper on Arendt (which will be guiding my the Intro of the Routledge book), and then the 2.5 mention of the writing on Nancy, which just this week is getting reading to be put into galleys! (below I will post the abstract of that piece that was written by Megan and Sophie). And then the last coincidence (a phenomenon that has become much too frequent) is the 2.0 video commentary on Hegel's "Philosophy of Right," which Scott B. and I were just texting about this morning (he submitting a law school paper on Hege's POR). So lots of continuity, to say the least, and that's a good thing! 3.0 is turning out to be an affirming experience. Perhaps not a philosophically creative and speculative as the original or even 2.0, but serving an important purpose in helping me gather myself in anticipation of writing the Routledge book, both in terms of the daily practice of writing, and the content of said book. But on that I will say I recognize in anticipation of that writing that I am not at the moment doing the kind of ontology and first philosophy that motivated the original project. Rather, as I've been writing this past week in 3.0, I can work from the assumption that the ontological work has been done, and represents a kind of foundation for the ongoing work in poetic praxis. I suppose that is how the truly great thinkers, to paraphrase Heidegger, were able to complete a systemic work and then move on to the next one. In other words, I can write in a relative straightforward manner (did so when I woke up at 3.45am and cranked out the revised paper in Salt Lake), and presume the ontological foundation.
ReplyDelete3.0c - Abstract for my paper on Nancy (prepared by Megan and Sophie), which will be published in Education Theory as part of a special issue: "Eduardo Duarte, like Haroutunian-Gordon and Laverty, takes up the topic of listening in his article, “‘To be all ears’ [être à l’écoute], to be listening”: Listening to Music with Jean-Luc Nancy (parts a, b, e).” He asks: “Where are we when music takes us away?” by which he means: Where are we when the experience of listening to music takes us completely away from our intentions and conscious preoccupations? He argues that Nancy’s Listening “offers an attempt to describe a ‘listening subject,’ . . .an alternative to the ‘philosophical subject’ [presented by Descartes]”. Like Arcilla and Higgins, Duarte maintains that Nancy offers a “first philosophy” that does not begin with the individual quest for certainty. Rather, the “listening subject” is one who seeks to hear, not to prove or persuade. “Musical listening calls for the willing of non-willing, a letting-go of ‘my existence’ (ego, identity), a momentary living without why” (xx here). Thus, as Duarte reads Nancy, the “moment when music takes us away” is the moment when “the self-identifying I is evacuated. . . .a letting be of the movement of sound, the work of music” (xx here). As Duarte reads Nancy, listening to music can occur only when one gives up the quest for certainty and lets the sounds take one away."
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteafter my failed attempt at posting the links to the GD shows with the killer late 90's Scarlet B's that are examples of and may be the one playing in the video above
Delete3.0d - It may be in the WRHU archives, and somewhere there is a notebook with the pre-archived DZ set lists, but I suspect the Scarlet B's playing in the background during the 2.0 reading is this one from either GD 3.23.1995 Charlotte, NC. https://archive.org/details/gd95-03-23.sbd.miller.25273.sbeok.flacf/gd95-03-23d2t02.flac or from GD 3.16.1994 Rosemont Horizon, Illinois https://archive.org/details/gd94-03-16.sbd.ladner.7778.sbeok.shnf/gd94-03-16d1t10.shn
ReplyDelete