“Was not their mistake once more bred of the life of slavery that they had been living?—a life which was always looking upon everything, except mankind, animate and inanimate—‘nature,’ as people used to call it—as one thing, and mankind as another, it was natural to people thinking in this way, that they should try to make ‘nature’ their slave, since they thought ‘nature’ was something outside them” — William Morris


Monday, July 29, 2024

diacritics Interview

 ...with Robert Oventile. I've written for diacritics and grew up with them as a young scholar. I like the interview a lot. It's the first one I did on the book Hell. 

1 comment:

Robert Collinson said...

Dear Tim,

Are you up for a back and forth? I read the interview. It covers a lot of ground. You are a nice person. You give space in your discussions for possibilities. So am I (I think). But... my art tutors at UAL and Falmouth MA programs all rave about you.... they worship you in fact. But I think while OOO is probably morally wealthy, it seems philosophically, or perhaps ontologically bankrupt. I would be delighted to discover how and why I am wrong. How does the discrete existence of objects that you postulate ontologically reconcile with their ambiguity of label and perception that you rely upon for their unique self-nature? Maybe I'm misreading things.

Can I interview you or email you rather than ruining your beautiful blog with my chatter?

In cordial frienship

Robert Collinson