22 of 70 the complete apocalypse the words of joyce
-
Upload
michael-bolerjack -
Category
Documents
-
view
215 -
download
2
description
Transcript of 22 of 70 the complete apocalypse the words of joyce
THE WORDS OF JOYCE
MICHAEL BOLERJACK
THE YES
To be Tolled in fragments: To take back the ringing yes from Derrida for Joyce, redeem it, not as
example but as the unexampled, the unprecedented, unique, unrepeatable Yes.
But, first the notes of the introduction leading to the redemption of affirmation:
A BB C BB A
Absolute
Father
Son
Holy Spirit
Son
Father
Absolute
Deconstructing the deconstruction to fulfill the deconstruction contrary to the truth of
contradiction without contradicting the truth Complete
Transcendent GOD
Mediation church
God
Church
World
I
World
Church
God
Aaron parents and grandparents
Burl
Bo
Charlotte
Bo
Burl
Aaron
Law prophets writings prophets law
Gospel/acts epistles revelation epistles gospel/acts
Love faith hope insight hope faith love
The book contains the text not the text contains the book
Zig zag
Mystical flower
Cross cross cross
Mystical flower
I am
He is
You are
I am
You are
He is
I am
Autobiography effracts
Epic drama fiction drama epic
Eternal time spacing time eternal
Exterior circular open effraction circular exterior
Myth drama critical fiction drama myth
Transcendent mediation immediate mediation transcendent
Truth / truth of contradiction / contradiction / contradiction of truth / truth
Nothing becoming being becoming nothing
Square circle effraction circle square
Necessity fantasy
Freedom reality
Necessity fantasy, vicious circle, effraction by love and work
Making free real
Absolute act
Possibility which is not
Impossible which really is
+ -
-- ++
Act de
De of de act
How does de prevent de of de?
How does deconstruction keep from deconstructing itself?
It always already is deconstructed
It starts out deconstructed
Not with act
Divided origin
Immemorial origin
No actual origin
Post retro active projection changes the past into de
De cannot be deconstructed from within
What of synthesis?
Making dialectic de
Making de dialectic
Nothing but
Must be effracted.
Possibility of impossibility
Equals
Impossibility of possibility
How to contradict the contradiction?
All goes through the I
As if the truth never was
As if the Jews did not die
Both did and did not
Neither did nor did not
Remains.
The b/a/n/n [both and neither nor]
Eliminates the either/or
Dialectic both / and
Leads to deconstruction
No choice.
Jump levels
Silence effracts
Accurate, he said
If you can say either this or that then there is choice, free
And the b/a/n/n [both and neither nor] is impossible
Choice destroys deconstruction
Deconstruction destroys choice
Total-talitarian
Either choice or non-choice
Must not choose non-choice
Choosing to choose, open
Choosing not to choose, defer, is to allow de
Two cities meta/para
If we eliminate choice we eliminate our freedom
Freedom is the thing itself, made impossible by de
Possible made impossible, impossible made possible [disaster]
Outside text is the context
If there is a context there is difference choice freedom
If all context is already text then no either/or
If I am the context, in god-church-world, then I effract it, I choose to be
Against the text, I am the standard of measure, I bind it, delimit the text
Explain it, not it me
The reader is the way the text arrives.
Text to weave
If there are folds
There are implications
And explications
An either/or
Exemplify complication
Simplify complication
Supplicate
A fold is a fold of something
Examples
Case in point
Show
Embody
Typical
Eximere- to take out-
Replication---
Reply, fold back, plaintiff’s reply, echo, copy
Answer, reply, rejoinder.
Law suit, dialogue
Either plaintiff or defendant, choice
Redeem---
Re-emire, redeem, take back, not example, take out
One steals by example or one is redeemed by taking back to original
Either / or in replication---rejoinder reply or copy, you choose, are free
Law means contradiction e/o [either/or] decision justice choice
Complication implication
Replication explication
Structure of ‘plication’
Either/or chooses one or other
b/a/n/n [both/and/neither/nor] chooses all
A-thesis before thesis, amoral before moral, no good / evil t/f [true, false] impossible
Since complication only implications pli selon pli
Since has been illusion explication is only illusion
Always plus one
Derrida seems to be bringing a unity into the text by yes+yes affirmation in Joyce
Molly Bloom’s final statement:
YES I SAID YES I WILL YES
Meanings of YES
1. Used as a function word to express assent or agreement
2. Used as a function word to introduce correction or contradiction of a negative assertion or
direction
3. Used as a function word to introduce a more emphatic or ex-plicit phrase
4. Used as a function word to indicate uncertainty or possible interest or attentiveness
5. Exclamation of jubilation
Yes
Said I
I Will
Yes
Perfect ringing of yes
4 words
7 times
12 letters
Perfect proof of Metasignification
Joyce knew the Ultrastructure well
Bloom asks Molly to choose
She chose
Decision, choice
An either him / or another
Free / the deconstruction cut off / by a decision
She does not defer but decides
Yes
She will
Desire inclination disposed a testament
To order to direct
To choose
As well him as another
I thought as well him as another
Indifference
And yet, yes.
Parse
Yes/I said yes I will/Yes.
Yes---three times
I said
I will 4 words
Again / the Ultrastructure
Yes three letters / will four / said four / I one, numbers, numbers, mystical forms.
The final YES is the explication of all the rest Penultimate yes is choice
Ante-penultimate is used to introduce a more emphatic or explicit phrase
Penultimate emphatic agreement
Ultimate the explicit, the explication still ringing.
Yes: Janus at door looking back on the first three fictions and forward to the Wake:
Dubliners said / Portrait will / Ulysses yeses I effraction / Wake is effracted text after I:
Dubliners god / Portrait church / Ulysses world---Moral, rebellion, epic/simony, paralysis,
gnomon/yes is the bit making the rest a gnomon---Text of god-church-world effracted by I
saying yes.---In order to complete the three at step/decision, in order to arrive at four, in order to
reach the all in all at Wake. Everything hinges on the Yes. It is dialectic that affirms and cancels.
What takes place after the YES is a different order of things, meta / not para. Each step by Joyce
goes further, and is never parallel, but at last fully meta. Beyond, the meta-novel, not anti-
Anything but completely free, pure, the joy felt after the act of faith: YES. Derrida’s YES/YES
does not quite catch it, as if there were always one more yes to be said. What ULYSSES showed
is that in making a final explicit YES, one affirms as in an act of faith and makes oneself free,
Molly made her decision, Joyce his, and freed herself/ himself. It is the finality of the Yes that is
important, not the possible indefinite addition. The final YES is more than any of the four
meanings given, it is a meta-static-yes. It is final, but it structurally cannot stop being said, at
once final and infinite, but never indefinite. It is not like a total count in the making, plus one,
but at once all numbers combined, a symbol for God in a book both profane and, yes, sacred.
I have shown the ringing of the YES, circular in structure and as Ultrastructure,
But what of the b/a/n/n the both/and/neither/nor?
What of the banns? Of marriage. Wedding ring, a banding, binding.
The banns of Derrida impossibly bans the wedding, anti-banns, It makes the
I DO
Impossible.
It makes the YES of decision impossible, allowing only the meaning of a kind of inattentiveness.
Derrida’s YES is the opposite of Joyce’s. It does not explicate, does not choose, is not emphatic,
neither does it assert the contrary, but rather like a manager will murmur to an employee yes, yes
while never intending action.
The last seven words of Molly recall her decision to marry, wedding banns, that ban the
Derridean appropriation before-hand. She chooses one, not all. Just Bloom. And re-affirms her
choice. Renewal. Of the Banns.
To say this YES is always to choose the faithfulness, though we have been unfaithful. It is a kind
of repentance, a YES that turns, that brings back, that redeems.
Derrida takes it out of context, examples it, rejects the redemption, the supplicatory aspect of the
final Yes in Ulysses. That YES does not replicate, does not implicate, and though it is in a
position to explicate does not, and is supremely simple, not complicated.
The YES is a supplication. It does not supplement itself, it prays. It is neither folded nor
unfolded, for it has never been enfolded. It is a plea, not a pli. The YES simplifies the matter. It
is not pliable, but resolution itself, resolving the work, and as much as you can bear, or hear, in
the context of your readership. But perhaps that is the “reply” of yes implied by Derrida, that
when we hear Molly’s YES we reply yes again and again. Qui, qui. If that is the case he may be
exonerated, but I believe his YES is too complex and is like his messiah unable to affirm because
it cannot stop repeating itself. It would have been better then to say a simple NO than to
endlessly entangle Joyce’s ACT in an endless deferral.
In the end Derrida turns the YES into a YET. Eventually, yes, yes, but not yet. Not never, just
not yet, not now, decision is impossible, too much difference: hesitating at the altar:
Yet, I could not say, yet I will not, yet neither nor will, not Yet. Yet I said Yet I will Yet. No one
can say YES to that. Say Yes to Yes itself, as Derrida quotes Blanchot in Living On, but not that.
Joyce said in the Wake that PATIENCE is the great thing. That means to wait. As you wait
repeat to yourself yes I must yes I will yes, I will wait, right now I am waiting, not deferring, not
hesitating, not passively waiting but affirming the awaited. In that one may be able to arrive at
the hour the bridegroom comes. It is then we may make an exclamation of jubilation, that in the
modern world Molly Bloom was the first to make, which now every sports fan makes when their
team wins, YES! What was the giving of assent or the making of an affirmation became near the
end of the world an act of the expression of joy at the outcome.
Finnegans Wake The end of this book, which really does not end, implies something that is there and not there at the same, a kind of prayer. I have shown the supplicatory aspect of the Yes at the end of Ulysses and now would like to de-monstrate the conclusion of the Wake as the perfection of this prayer. The last lines of the book can be read so many ways. Usually one says the final “the” is referring to the opening riverrun, to circle things back. I think it does this and something else as well. Joyce proclaims that the keys to are given. He has said Finn, again. He has said Till thous-endsthee. Now I think that this ends thee. The “the” of the end is to be said not as slack “the,” definite but open, but precisely THEE. The Keys to. Given! Given to whom, but to THEE. Not a way a lone a last a loved a long a…but the, because you are it, I AM IT, we are it, as the auditors of Prospero in the epilogue of Shakespeare’s final act, his prayer for forgiveness. Given? Key? It is the forgiveness of THEE. to. then. endsthee. Lps {please} long the […] long thee, he longs but for THEE, to then ends, THEE. Thou, ends, thee. It ends with us, we are the one for whom and in whom the work arrives and Joyce affirms not one definitely but all infinitely. It is a way of saying YOU and YES at once: the THEE. THEE I said THEE I Will THEE, then you and I are in truth the arrival of the text, that the secret is that it is we who hold the keys, keys of Peter, keys of the see, to forgive, to forgive all good thieves, whom writers to write must be, saying, But softly, thee, remember me, till thou ends thee, that we never ending be, as love does not end, for thee given, never ending, thou art the key, the text is thee (se). The text is these, thee’s, the signature effect is here comes everybody, and all along HCE was THEE, was all of us, it was written to you and you and you and yes to thee. Michael Bolerjack