Subject: Re: Aetheological Summa
Date: Sun, 9 Jan 2000 14:08:19 -0500 (EST)


> 
> Bataille and Mysticism: A "Dazzling Dissolution" 
> 
> Amy Hollywood 
> 
> 
> Within Georges Bataille's texts of the late 1930s and 1940s, in particular
> those later brought together in the tripartite Atheological Summa, he
> repeatedly suggests that his primary models for writing and experience are
> the texts of the Christian and non-Western mystical traditions (often
> represented, in Bataille, by women's writings) and those of Friedrich
> Nietzsche. 1 Inner Experience opens with evocations of Nietzsche, and the
> final volume of the trilogy, On Nietzsche, is "devoted" to his work.
> References to mystical writings occur throughout Inner Experience and
> Guilty, and significant portions of both texts can be read as providing
> "guides" for inner experience analogous to the "itineraries" of Angela of
> Foligno (d. 1309) and Teresa of Avila (d. 1582) or as spiritual daybooks
> like those of Mechthild of Magdeburg (d. ca. 1275). These models are, I
> think, the key to understanding Bataille's own writing strategies in the
> Atheological Summa. 2 Despite their apparent divergence, moreover, Bataille
> insists that mystical and Nietzschean texts reflect and are constitutive of
> the same experience and writing practice. 
> 
  yes, excatly the style I wrote on in the heidegger  list. See John
for me, this all then links back  to  our  thread on Certeau(the 
mystic fable) and  the story  of  a founding where "the mother is she
by whom the  spoken  word arrives  and becomes  a  body of discourse"
(p.135). Communication  arises from  an unnamable fecundity, a maternal 
indeterminate implying a  suspension in nothingness which  is the  a 
priori  of  the possibility  of communication happening but  the
impossibility of a clearly  articulable language  that would lend
itself to interpretation  which is why  Bataille indicates a language
that is based on crying and  laughter, noise over signal  so  to speak,
a murmur, a  rustling, 'prophecy'. Certau writes that the  oxymoron
refers  to something beyond language. it is  a  deictic and shows  what
it does not say, the ineffable, all  the raised fingers of our baroque
paintings... read the  chapter on manners  of speaking  again. For  us
John, it's  not about hermeneutics, it's about style, rhetoric, to put 
it the  sharp  manner that  Certeau puts it in.

Ariosto


--