You come across them once in a while. In their own eyes, they are the most radical, revolutionary reformers. You think um... sorry but that's really not radical at all. They can't hear it. Or they understand themselves as the most understanding, loving people on the planet, they're "genuine" and "caring". You think that, at the end of the day, that isn't very loving. They don't hear it. They have arrived, there is no drive, no longing.
Or rather yes, there is that tiny bit of longing, a titillating something that keeps their lives interesing, that keeps them moving forward, supposedly. What the hell is "a tiny bit of longing" anyway? Longing is always enormous, it's always unmanageable, it's always too much to handle.
Or rather yes, there is that tiny bit of longing, a titillating something that keeps their lives interesing, that keeps them moving forward, supposedly. What the hell is "a tiny bit of longing" anyway? Longing is always enormous, it's always unmanageable, it's always too much to handle.
2 comments:
Reading Augustine?
I've gravitated away from employing 'radical' language (despite its worthwhile etymology). Hence, I only used the word once in my paper on the Church and capitalism, and that was in a quotation from Zizek.
Essentially, I think that the language is unnecessary. It is too intimately linked with image and self-branding. Besides, I don't think there is anything 'radical' about the trajectory that I (and others) aspire to follow. It seems to me a better word would be 'natural' or 'appropriate.'
Come to Vancouver already. Frig.
"It seems to me a better word would be 'natural'". Um, that is the best, most constructive comment I've read in a while.
Post a Comment