File under: Say it ain't so
Jonathan Lighter
wuxxmupp2000 at GMAIL.COM
Tue Oct 26 12:28:02 UTC 2010
The fetishization of knowledge leads to the valorization of certainty.
JL
On Tue, Oct 26, 2010 at 12:25 AM, Joel S. Berson <Berson at att.net> wrote:
> ---------------------- Information from the mail header
> -----------------------
> Sender: American Dialect Society <ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
> Poster: "Joel S. Berson" <Berson at ATT.NET>
> Subject: Re: File under: Say it ain't so
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> At 10/24/2010 07:39 AM, Jonathan Lighter wrote:
> >Not sure if you mean Derrida himself for the works of Derrida or the
> >language construct Derrida-the-narrator-of-the-works-of-Derrida.
>
> I was hoping you'd clarify that also.
>
>
> >And do I detect a regressive modernist desire for certainty in your
> >request?
>
> And now I have to thank you also for naming the school of
> historiography I belong to. I think.
>
> Joel
>
>
> >"Those who say do not know. Those who 'know' do not know either."
> >
> >JL
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >On Sun, Oct 24, 2010 at 12:30 AM, Joel S. Berson <Berson at att.net> wrote:
> >
> > > ---------------------- Information from the mail header
> > > -----------------------
> > > Sender: American Dialect Society <ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
> > > Poster: "Joel S. Berson" <Berson at ATT.NET>
> > > Subject: Re: File under: Say it ain't so
> > >
> > >
> >
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > >
> > > Bravo! You've made all this, and the lit-crit school to which it
> > > belongs, all understandable to me. Now could you explain Derrida?
> > >
> > > Joel
> > >
> > > At 10/23/2010 10:21 PM, Jonathan Lighter wrote:
> > > >But don't you see? Don't you *see*? A reader knows Jane Austen only
> > > through
> > > >the mental construct of "Jane Austen," an imaginary "person" formed
> from
> > > >subjective impressions of a novel or novel said to have been written
> by
> > > >"Jane Austen."
> > > >
> > > >Prof. Sutherland's research reveals that no matter how many so-called
> > > "Jane
> > > >Austen';s" there may be, the "Jane Austen" credited with the
> "authorship"
> > > of
> > > >_Persuasion_ specifically is not Jane Austen in any definitive sense,
> but
> > > a
> > > >largely fictive "Jane Austen," who is really part Jane Austen, and
> part an
> > > >unidentified editor, presumably male and very possibly the Gifford
> > > >character. What is even more important is that it is now impossible
> for
> > > the
> > > >reader to deny responsibility for the mental construction of this
> "novel"
> > > >"Jane Austen" who corresponds to no actual person who ever lived.
> > > >
> > > >Thus, the conspiracy of Jane Austen (whom we will provisionally
> accept,
> > > >without final proof, as the actual name of an actual person who
> actually
> > > >wrote the manuscript of _Persuasion_ examined by Prof. Sutherland) and
> > > some
> > > >unknown person or persons, possibly male, to create the quite
> imaginary
> > > >persona of "Jane Austen, author of _Persuasion_, is finally exposed to
> the
> > > >light of day.
> > > >
> > > >In the latest version of the story (
> > > >http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20101022/stage_nm/us_austen), a further
> > > editor,
> > > >Robert Chapman, who is known to have been male, is quoted as having
> wished
> > > >"if only we could destroy these manuscripts because they are
> disturbing
> > > the
> > > >view of Austen that we preserve," a blatant and familiar move in the
> male
> > > >project to deny woman's authenticity in the name of an indefinable,
> > > elitist,
> > > >phallocentric "literature."
> > > >
> > > > The most crucial result of this analysis is that even though not one
> > > word
> > > >of the received, published text of _Persuasion_ has been altered, the
> > > >meaning of every word has in fact been changed by the radical
> alteration
> > > of
> > > >our understanding of the relationship of the text to the general
> > > >Enlightenment fetishization of "authorship" itself, and, moreover,
> > > >by our apprehension that the real woman named Jane Austen (1775-1817)
> may
> > > >indeed have been the unknown editor's love slave, regardless of
> gender.
> > > >
> > > >In the words of Kristeva, "If Shakespeare was Bacon, King Lear becomes
> a
> > > >figure of infinite jest."
> > > >
> > > >JL
> > > >
> > > >On Sat, Oct 23, 2010 at 8:53 PM, Laurence Horn <
> laurence.horn at yale.edu
> > > >wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > ---------------------- Information from the mail header
> > > > > -----------------------
> > > > > Sender: American Dialect Society <ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
> > > > > Poster: Laurence Horn <laurence.horn at YALE.EDU>
> > > > > Subject: Re: File under: Say it ain't so
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > >
> > > > > At 2:12 PM -0400 10/23/10, Federico Escobar wrote:
> > > > > >"Unpick" also struck me as an interesting choice of words. It was
> > > probably
> > > > > >suggested --I'm speculating gratuitously-- by the ideas of
> precision
> > > and
> > > > > >care conveyed by "picking a lock"; since the alleged precision of
> > > Austen's
> > > > > >style was "undone" by the new study (which I'm surprised it took
> 200
> > > years
> > > > > >to perform), then it was "unpicked."
> > > > >
> > > > > I wouldn't think so, at least as far as the lock-picking goes. The
> > > > > use of "unpick" for 'pick (a lock)', as a directly pleonastic
> un-verb
> > > > > of the "unloose", "unthaw", "unempty" variety, has long been
> archaic.
> > > > > The much more standard use over the last few centuries is related
> to
> > > > > sewing or knitting: to unpick a sweater or whatever is to remove
> the
> > > > > stitches. So here it's the garment Austen's prose styling
> carefully
> > > > > (or perhaps not so carefully) constructed, along with her
> reputation,
> > > > > that would be "unpicked" by this finding. Perhaps relevant is the
> > > > > first OED cite for this sense of "unpick":
> > > > >
> > > > > 1808 JANE AUSTEN Let. 7 Oct. (1932) I. 217 Your gown shall be
> unpicked.
> > > > >
> > > > > LH
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >I also noticed that the author seemed inexplicably surprised by
> the
> > > blots
> > > > > >and crossings. The explanation I supplied was that it was a way of
> > > > > opposing
> > > > > >the description of Austen's writing process offered by her
> brother:
> > > > > >that "everything
> > > > > >came finished from her pen". She probably emphasized the blots to
> > > unpick
> > > > > >people's idea of publisher-ready mansucripts flowing steadily and
> > > > > >unblotchedly from Austen's pen.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >F.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >On Sat, Oct 23, 2010 at 1:58 PM, Jonathan Lighter
> > > > > ><wuxxmupp2000 at gmail.com>wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >> ---------------------- Information from the mail header
> > > > > >> -----------------------
> > > > > >> Sender: American Dialect Society <ADS-L at LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
> >
> > > > > >> Poster: Jonathan Lighter <wuxxmupp2000 at GMAIL.COM>
> > > > > >> Subject: Re: File under: Say it ain't so
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > > > >>----------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > ---------------
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Note too Prof. Sutherland's use of "unpick" to mean "undo"
> > > (generally).
> > > > > >> (OED
> > > > > >> allows for a "fig." sense, but the below has no metaphorical
> > > context):
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> "Austen's unpublished manuscripts unpick her reputation for
> > > perfection
> > > > > in
> > > > > >> various ways: we see blots, crossings out, messiness -- we see
> > > creation
> > > > > as
> > > > > >> it happens, and in Austen's case, we discover a powerful
> > > > > >> counter-grammatical
> > > > > >> way of writing."
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Fascinating is the gratuitously defensive phrase, "a powerful
> > > > > >> counter-grammatical way of writing." All writers (with the
> famously
> > > > > alleged
> > > > > >> exception of Shakespeare) blot, cross out, etc., all the time.
> > > > > Irrespective
> > > > > >> of any later editorial improvement, that is not a weakness in
> Jane
> > > > > Austen's
> > > > > >> writing. It just shows she had no word-processor.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> BTW, a second look an hour later reveals that Yahoo has
> > > nonsexistically
> > > > > >> replaced the invidious "male editor" headline.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > > > JL
> > > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > > The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >--
> > > >"If the truth is half as bad as I think it is, you can't handle the
> > > truth."
> > > >
> > > >------------------------------------------------------------
> > > >The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org
> > >
> > > ------------------------------------------------------------
> > > The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >--
> >"If the truth is half as bad as I think it is, you can't handle the
> truth."
> >
> >------------------------------------------------------------
> >The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org
>
--
"If the truth is half as bad as I think it is, you can't handle the truth."
------------------------------------------------------------
The American Dialect Society - http://www.americandialect.org
More information about the Ads-l
mailing list