philosophical conversations

R.j. Hollingdale, who'd have thought it a scholar with wit! - The first thing a reader of this aphorism will notice, even before he/she notices what is being said, is the manner of saying it: or rather, the excess of parody. This aphorism takes a victory Inxs. That this is the most forgivable of victories doesn't change the fact that it is a victory. As it happens, excess is the one fault no Immoralist would impute to Nietzsche's 'Thus Spoke': its concision, brevity, directness of statement are present to a degree never to be approximated by any other narrator. It will become clear that parody is something I am impelled to, mastered and became a child... the fountain of words, metaphors, figures and dancing will cause an eruption of feeling. It is my job, perhaps a little here, to demonstrate why this eruption of feeling has become necessary, and why just this time (today)and not yesterday or the day before, thus will you understand better what this great task is really about.

Something Goethe knew about budding poets and Shakespeare, is something you, Gary, see in Bataille. It takes a couple of broad forms, but as with Bataille and your own writing (more when florishing - there is something else to this though...)read Nietzsche over and over and as you know you pick up a certain tempo and turn of phrase. But unlike you, Bataille has absolutely no intellectual conscience whatsoever, nor does he have the right to Immoralism - which you do not understand, nor many other things about Nietzsche I've peeked at. But you seem very much as if you are searching for the heights and your wisdom, where it occurs, and especially the smell of your work speaks of an ennoblement that goes beyond the natural progression of a man in his thirties? (a camel by the way). Thus being a man looking for companions with which to speak of unheard of things, I speak to you now. Of course you perhaps are suspicious? So as I may be here entering society for the first time I challenge you to a dual, but of course let us conduct it as gentleman of knowledge: a big fat round question! For instance the answer to philosophy and staying alive, you call it the problem of philosophy and labour, is praise be a moderate poverty. Oh and like the French you speak of who were influenced by Nietzsche's works but nothing to do with what he said, Freud very, very much so. He stinks of it infact, both types but mainly not the one discussed here, but he denied it - to make a shallow point - to the extent of placing, chronologically as it were, his 'reason' for Nietzsche not having dominated him, as he did Hitler (the crucified... Churchill being the Dionysian of that battle) in one main (not obvious) way, in such a way as only his 'disciples' would not have been aware of his statement's contradiction of itself.

Indeed a question for you: what are the important facets pertaining to the exchange below that highlight Churchill's Dionysian nature in this quotation: 'Every man has the right to pronounce foreign words as he chooses'.

Now if I haven't grated on you too much and we are amenable to one another, or to be blunter, you being of the right stuff, I own the title deeds to a web name, not registered to me by the way Sherlock, and all being well we could do very great things with it and this sight. The urban myth may take its route here...