Update: I think Kvond’s idea of « bad poetry » and « essentialising bestiary » corresponds to what I have called OOO’s « counter-factuation » and de-concepting ». A very illuminating recent example is when a low-level OOOxian saw fit to publish a « storified » version of my exchange with him, omitting his personal provocations and removing all conceptual content. This is how dialogical adversaries are « framed » in certain debates.
Kvond on » the usual bestiary of essentializations directed at those who critique OOO. « I suppose it is interesting when the people you critique start to fantasize about you, either turning you into monsters or persona of every stripe ».
Harman makes a note of the criticism no doubt someone has directed towards his writing:
Another example is when people accuse a philosophical text of degenerating into “bad poetry” (this is a popular one). The people who use this phrase would be no more supportive of good poetry than of bad; they simply want to exclude all poetry from philosophical work. Yet they can’t say: “But that’s poetry!”
I have to say this certainly isn’t a criticism I have leveled at Harman’s writing, though I have been very cautious in aesthetically judging the quality of his sometimes profuse use of adjectives and sensuous illustrations. Honestly at times the verge on the edge of « bad poetry », and Harman himself has laughed at some of the phrasing he uses in the Vicarious Causation essay. As a poet and a fiction writer I would never exclude the poetic from the expression of a…
Voir l’article original 330 mots de plus
AGENT SWARM 