Best of luck! And you're definitely not walking through hell alone.

hmm, seems like a problem of one, judgement, two lack of empathy and sympathy for other's. Maybe you are too focused on yourself.

@@logia7 Yeah, I'm thinking that's it. I seriously have to work on myself.

@@logia7 Grammar, baby

@@jasminegold6890 i think we all feel the same way. Some don’t realize it, some do.

$60 for such a thin book is so expensive, but I don’t know… you just can’t beat a physical book! I’d buy the physical over the online any day!!

One of my teachers told us a story about how egyptologists discovered some hieroglyphics by and author who lamented that everything worth writing has always been written. What’s important to remember about writing is that it’s hard to be “original” and that there’s a lot of problems with the attempt. Writing is a method of conveying thoughts and ideas between people in a nonverbal or visual format, right? Well, what’s always been the problem with the flip side, reading? Interpretation. If we both read the same book then I it’s going to be quite possible that I interpret it differently from you based on a lot of variables such as life experience, age, even how we executed the act of reading can change the way we interpret things, and so much more. The reason why these differences matter is because that’s an issue writers face every time they put pen to paper. So when it comes to writing the idea that’s never been thought, there’s the fundamental problem of portraying that in a way that readers won’t get lost or confused. Another issues is that humans are built to look for patterns. That’s why we see faces everywhere, our brain is just wired to find patterns. This poses a problem when it comes to interpretation because it means that everybody is going to recognize patterns found within the story. For example, is Agatha Christie’s series on Hercule Poirot and original idea? Has the whole detective with a doctor side kick thing been done before the 30s or so? You might be saying, “Well of course! Haven’t you heard of Sherlock Holmes? The greatest detective to ever detect?” He’s truly an original work of fiction, right? Wrong… Well, kinda. Conan Doyle wrote Holmes as fanfiction. He’s completely based off of a character written by Edgar Allan Poe. DuPont, if I remember correctly. “There!” You may say, “then Poe is definitely an author who came up with an original idea! Mystery stories!” But is that really true? Yes, Poe has been accredited with being the daddy of detective fiction but there’s things to be said about it. Some scholars believe that Poe took inspiration, purposefully or not, from the urban legend stories that were very popular at the time and the only reason why he ended up writing DuPont is because he wanted to BE DuPont (which I mean same). My phone is glitching out so I’m going to wrap it up by saying that original ideas are in the eye of the beholder. You have to explain what you think an original idea is and why it’s original because we are programmed to not be and even if we are, we take from real life experiences in order help us write and we take from stories that we’ve seen or heard.

I think the most difficult part is breaking through his writing style, and eventually the way he writes makes complete sense because he’s using the very tool he’s trying to deconstruct. Quite fascinating. I’m currently digging through The Post Card and it’s both an infuriating and fascinating read.

I love your topic and the connections you are making. Good luck with your thesis!

@@OddPisceanPoet thxxxx 💛

Bescherelle is every French student’s nightmare. 🥲

Good luck you can do this! :D

So I heard. 😂

On a first reading I only highlight excerpts I find beautiful (and yes, a good novel is supposed to take you on a journey), and if I'm writing a paper on the novel I'll use those highlighted excerpts as anchor points to derive themes and points of analysis. Hope it helped.

@@RCWaldun thank you!

Best of luck with your thesis! Searle vs Derrida is such a fascinating field of debate in language philosophy and I can’t wait to see what you produce. My area is mainly in literary criticism and the recent movement called: postcritique. The basic idea is that scholars in the anglophone tend to dismiss Derrida and reduce him to “deconstruction”, however after a few close readings of Derrida’s work (in the original French) it’s obvious that Derrida never intended to put forth “deconstruction” as a method. The thesis will point out this discrepancy and challenge the anglophone’s common misreadings. Again, best of luck “digital partner”!

@@RCWaldun thanks a lot, best wishes for you, my „digital partner“, as well! :) I highly recommend you his text „mes chances“ that resumes his way of thinking (literature and language) well. Working myself through it really forced my understanding of Derrida.

I’m actually going to make a video about this idea (not in terms of politics but in terms of how we can use ideas to better ourselves). Specifically: how much do we need to read to live a good life? Thanks Bill. :)

@@RCWaldun You do that, and I'll be right there to catch your insights. You've sent me down a rabbit trail, and I like the challenge.

@@roguefaustus Do you mean the difference between reasoned and experienced? A priori versus a posteriori? I'm not sure. I'm torn between the idea of doing to accomplish something and the notion of just conceptualizing something to accomplish it. Am I missing something?

Great point! And this relates directly to Kant’s idea of Reason, where he believed that reason grounds both practical actions and pure speculations. Since he provided a good synthesis between empiricism and rationalism, we can apply the same insight to theory/practice.

Why not?

Absolutely fascinating.

@@RCWaldunbecause it might destroy your world view and offer no substitutions. At least that is what Of Grammatology did to me