Turning

We can only know one another by turning together toward the world and sharing the significance of what we perceive as relevant. When we take turns discussing ourselves – when we make ourselves the object of conversation – our personas (objective “me”) eclipse our personalities (subjective “I”). The human mind prefers the discreteness of objects to the involvement of subjects.

Intersubjectivity requires interobjectivity — an objectivity that includes the recognition that objects are always to us perceived by subjects, and that subjects perceive differently.

*

Dialogue – Middle English : from Old French dialoge, via Latin from Greek dialogos, from dialegesthai ‘converse with,’ from dia ‘through’ + legein ‘speak.’

Converse – Late Middle English (in the sense of live among, be familiar with): from Old French converser, from Latin conversari ‘keep company (with),’ from con– ‘with’ + versare, frequentative of vertere ‘to turn.’

4 thoughts on “Turning

  1. One benefits here enormously from William Empson’s brilliant, but still widely neglected, Seven Types Of Ambiguity. On the surface it may seem a superficial attempt to analyze and classify specific instances of ambiguity in poetry, but as the work is read over and over through decades a much deeper estimate is evinced.

  2. Seven Types Of Ambiguity is deceptively simple in its surface, but layered with depth that increases over time.

    After that Empson’s more crotchedy (as he was as well) The Structure Of Complex Words moves forward from the earlier work in surprising directions.

    His irony and humor are also not to be missed and very subtle.

    All this is a peculiar style that deliberately looks like it is going nowhere, or nowhere important, but which in the end arrives where it began–at elemental issues.

    1. I ordered a copy. All of what you are saying makes me believe I’ll like it.

      Have you ever read The Bow and the Lyre? I’ve had a strong impulse to read that lately.

Leave a Reply