Have you found the spot in Girard where he talks about, say, Davidson's -first- girlfriend? I've read a bit of Deceit, Desire as well as his talks with Cayley and me and a bud had a hard time finding how he explained the initial desire, ended up in a chicken/egg cyclone.
In other words, Pete's indifference to fame and/or women is what Kardashian cites as what spurred her to want him, as well as 'hearing about' him, more or less (probably testament to the notion of his being an 'object that others have had and that she would probably want')—but — but...
I guess I think about the death of his father a lot. And I think about this guy from Montana I knew who went to a bar and was in the worst of places and could care less about the world, and told me later he got more attention on that night than on any subsequent night, in the same setting.
Not setting out to disprove anything about Girard. I think his notions of mimesis are very interesting and highly applicable, but if we're out to dig up the core of Pete's undeniable magnetism, I'd wonder at those early days before he was moving from famous lady to famous lady too.
You have chosen a silly purple example that has no desire element.
I see others imitating each other by wearing purple, there are others that do not have that desire to imitate- so what does mimetic theory say about that group ?
The scientific method.
Observation, measurement, modeling and making general statements - you have a theory and if you cases that do not fit the theory - you need refinement about your original hypothesis
Girard models on a class/group of people imitating each other - like in the social media space.
However he does not model or say anything about people that don't bother trying to imitate or lead an independent life.
So the theory is not complete and has for want of a better word has "holes in it" BECAUSE it does not explain everything
In science theories like that are aggressively critiqued until a better one is formulated and stands intense scrutiny
No arrogance or entitlement, using Logic, and the scientific method.
I preferred the twist to the rest of the writing; which did not make one ounce of sense to me.
what are you exactly saying ? you do not understand the appeal of Davidson and then invented a long winded narrative that goes nowhere.
However, you invented a new narrative form - Hilarious but amazing literary writing that reveals nothing for the reader. Encore !
Why don't you simply say that some people have extraordinary likeability -- but who really cares and why bother - see I am anti mimetic, which shoots holes in Girard theories
Always enjoy a story with a good twist.
Oh my god the plot twist!!!!
Btw perfect read for my future Emrata piece forthcoming probably tmrw
Love this. I will have to go find a copy of Zuleika Dobson now. Preferably a Modern Library edition, as I also covet them.
New to your stack. LOVE your writing.
I'd try Valmouth. If you have a Kindle, Amazon sells it for under 2 bucks (in Canadian $).
Have you found the spot in Girard where he talks about, say, Davidson's -first- girlfriend? I've read a bit of Deceit, Desire as well as his talks with Cayley and me and a bud had a hard time finding how he explained the initial desire, ended up in a chicken/egg cyclone.
In other words, Pete's indifference to fame and/or women is what Kardashian cites as what spurred her to want him, as well as 'hearing about' him, more or less (probably testament to the notion of his being an 'object that others have had and that she would probably want')—but — but...
I guess I think about the death of his father a lot. And I think about this guy from Montana I knew who went to a bar and was in the worst of places and could care less about the world, and told me later he got more attention on that night than on any subsequent night, in the same setting.
Not setting out to disprove anything about Girard. I think his notions of mimesis are very interesting and highly applicable, but if we're out to dig up the core of Pete's undeniable magnetism, I'd wonder at those early days before he was moving from famous lady to famous lady too.
You have chosen a silly purple example that has no desire element.
I see others imitating each other by wearing purple, there are others that do not have that desire to imitate- so what does mimetic theory say about that group ?
The scientific method.
Observation, measurement, modeling and making general statements - you have a theory and if you cases that do not fit the theory - you need refinement about your original hypothesis
Girard models on a class/group of people imitating each other - like in the social media space.
However he does not model or say anything about people that don't bother trying to imitate or lead an independent life.
So the theory is not complete and has for want of a better word has "holes in it" BECAUSE it does not explain everything
In science theories like that are aggressively critiqued until a better one is formulated and stands intense scrutiny
No arrogance or entitlement, using Logic, and the scientific method.
If you liked Beerbohm, you might like Ronald Firbank too.
I preferred the twist to the rest of the writing; which did not make one ounce of sense to me.
what are you exactly saying ? you do not understand the appeal of Davidson and then invented a long winded narrative that goes nowhere.
However, you invented a new narrative form - Hilarious but amazing literary writing that reveals nothing for the reader. Encore !
Why don't you simply say that some people have extraordinary likeability -- but who really cares and why bother - see I am anti mimetic, which shoots holes in Girard theories