Michael Bolerjack After Reading Roland Barthes

Four Directions:

Inward/Outward/Forward/Up (Plato and Aristotle, again) spatial and temporal (at once)

Is the Kingdom Within or Among? solitary/solidarity Moral/Mystical [prayer] the meta Public/Exhibitions [politics] the para

metabolic hierarchy overriding the parabolic open-endedness Life/Death/Otherwise The pleasure of the text and the bliss of Barthes

is neither moral (inward) nor mystical (up) but without love projected forward in time (written narrativity)

prayer and politics are not on the same page: one implicates one supplicates there/you is a site not a destination in/up is E turnity E ever explicates moral inwardness establishes the parameters PM political exhibitionism obliterates pleasure/bliss is sex w/o love religion is love w/o sex [sublime vs. sublimation: needs sublation] to repent denying/affirming at once is the turning: away from the para-modern

Barthes states the premise of never making a denial and of the logical crux of contradiction, along with the necessity of the Impossible, that it is

and outward in space (the possible reader) moral inward conflict (as opposed to difference) and mystical elation out of, over and above, conflict the dialectical outcome of conflict depend on love love is the reason for the conquering of self in the moral conflict and the abandonment of self in mystic height the going forward and going outward involves no turning but the inward and outward require it turning metanoia is at heart opposed to all of the parameters of PM (not post- but para-modern)

I, on the other hand, but not otherwise, see the necessity of denial as the only basis of affirmation: there is yes if and only if there is no while accepting the truth of contradiction in the logic of the Impossible and the abandonment of the need for consistency: which is to say, all things are possible: the Impossible is impossible.