Posted by: HAT | September 3, 2009

Question

Here’s a question: Why in Leland de la Durantaye’s brilliant and erudite Giorgio Agamben: A Critical Introduction does the section on The Open run a scant 11 pages, fewer than half the pages devoted to any other single work? And why does the discussion there omit any mention of Benjamin’s evidently significant “densest aphorism,” with which Agamben closes the chapter on Benjamin, and in which he seems to treat Benjamin’s comments as a specific antidote to the Heideggerian approach to the problem of the articulation of humanitas and animalitas, with its recapitulation of the “anthropological machine” and its “tightening knot”? Why, furthermore, in the comments on désoeuvrement, would it be impossible to know that they are made with specific reference to a critical appraisal of Titian’s Nymph and Shepherd, the subject matter of which Agamben treats as specifically significant?

Taking the method of indirection seriously, maybe this needs to be understood as purposive, and profoundly so.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Categories

%d bloggers like this: