[ilds] Selfhood

Jacob Riley jtriley at unca.edu
Tue Oct 6 12:30:35 PDT 2009


I wonder if takling about the "self" is different from talking about the
"ego". Can the self be composed of many different selves? Durrell has
already pronounced upon the death of the discrete ego in the Avignon Quintet
and in certain interviews. I'm just not sure if the self and the ego are the
same things for Durrell.

On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 3:00 PM, <ilds-request at lists.uvic.ca> wrote:

> Send ILDS mailing list submissions to
>        ilds at lists.uvic.ca
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>        https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>        ilds-request at lists.uvic.ca
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>        ilds-owner at lists.uvic.ca
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of ILDS digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>   1. Selfhood (Bruce Redwine)
>   2. Re: Selfhood (Godshalk, William (godshawl))
>   3. Re: Selfhood (Bruce Redwine)
>   4. Selfhood, Durrell, Pater (Charles Sligh)
>   5. Re: Selfhood, Durrell, Pater (Charles Sligh)
>   6. (no subject) (Ozlem Ince)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2009 07:00:22 -0700
> From: Bruce Redwine <bredwine1968 at earthlink.net>
> Subject: [ilds] Selfhood
> To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca
> Cc: Bruce Redwine <bredwine1968 at earthlink.net>
> Message-ID: <4CBCF4FF-C540-4054-9725-6B179409797A at earthlink.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed; delsp=yes
>
> Bill, by muddling along, I assume.  Durrell's idea of "selfhood" seems
> to me one big muddle or a muddle of a muddle.  If not continuous, then
> how did he recognize that same person with a boyhood in India and old
> age in Province?
>
>
> Bruce
>
>
> On Oct 4, 2009, at 5:48 PM, Godshalk, William (godshawl) wrote:
>
> > I think that Durrell  would have no truck with the idea that we have
> > a central core of selfhood. He at least seems to believe in a
> > fragmented self, one that is not at all continuous.
> >
> > But how can we live in a distorted way?
> >
> > Bill
> >
> > W. L. Godshalk *
> > Department of English    *           *
> > University of Cincinnati*   * Stellar Disorder  *
> > OH 45221-0069 *  *
> > ________________________________________
> > From: ilds-bounces at lists.uvic.ca [ilds-bounces at lists.uvic.ca] On
> > Behalf Of Bruce Redwine [bredwine1968 at earthlink.net]
> > Sent: Sunday, October 04, 2009 2:18 PM
> > To: marcpiel at interdesign.fr; ilds at lists.uvic.ca
> > Cc: Bruce Redwine
> > Subject: Re: [ilds] Selected Fictions
> >
> > Yes.  Most of us, perhaps all.
> >
> >
> > On Oct 4, 2009, at 4:41 AM, Marc Piel wrote:
> >
> >> There is a central core, but most of us live it in
> >> a distorted way.
> >> Look up the "Enneargram" !
> >> @+
> >> Marc
> >>
> >> Bruce Redwine a ?crit :
> >>> I opt for question two and answer in the affirmative.  We do have a
> >>> "central core of self."  And that answer Durrell himself gives.  A
> >>> deathbed conversion?  Read one of his last poems, "Le cercle
> >>> referm?."  I hear one voice, not multiple, from the beginning of his
> >>> life in India to the end in Provence:
> >>>
> >>> With lunar leanings, I was crafty in loving,
> >>> Or jaunty as a god of the bullfrogs,
> >>> The uncanny promptings of the human I.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Bruce
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Oct 3, 2009, at 3:50 PM, Godshalk, William (godshawl) wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Because we do diverse things with our bodies and mind, are we
> >>>> different selves when we do different things? Or do we have a
> >>>> central core of self that was there when we were born and will be
> >>>> there as we die?
> >>>>
> >>>> Bill
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2009 20:37:41 -0400
> From: "Godshalk, William (godshawl)" <godshawl at ucmail.uc.edu>
> Subject: Re: [ilds] Selfhood
> To: "ilds at lists.uvic.ca" <ilds at lists.uvic.ca>
> Message-ID:
>        <94B18F18BF859846A11A82A6166B6C42017B437ABF2C at UCMAILBE2.ad.uc.edu>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
> Too bad old D is not here to give an answer. I wonder what he would say.
> Laugh and say that he had already written upon that subject? Refer us to the
> WORD?
>
> Bo;;
>
>
> W. L. Godshalk *
> Department of English    *           *
> University of Cincinnati*   * Stellar Disorder  *
> OH 45221-0069 *  *
> ________________________________________
> From: ilds-bounces at lists.uvic.ca [ilds-bounces at lists.uvic.ca] On Behalf Of
> Bruce Redwine [bredwine1968 at earthlink.net]
> Sent: Monday, October 05, 2009 10:00 AM
> To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca
> Cc: Bruce Redwine
> Subject: [ilds] Selfhood
>
> Bill, by muddling along, I assume.  Durrell's idea of "selfhood" seems
> to me one big muddle or a muddle of a muddle.  If not continuous, then
> how did he recognize that same person with a boyhood in India and old
> age in Province?
>
>
> Bruce
>
>
> On Oct 4, 2009, at 5:48 PM, Godshalk, William (godshawl) wrote:
>
> > I think that Durrell  would have no truck with the idea that we have
> > a central core of selfhood. He at least seems to believe in a
> > fragmented self, one that is not at all continuous.
> >
> > But how can we live in a distorted way?
> >
> > Bill
> >
> > W. L. Godshalk *
> > Department of English    *           *
> > University of Cincinnati*   * Stellar Disorder  *
> > OH 45221-0069 *  *
> > ________________________________________
> > From: ilds-bounces at lists.uvic.ca [ilds-bounces at lists.uvic.ca] On
> > Behalf Of Bruce Redwine [bredwine1968 at earthlink.net]
> > Sent: Sunday, October 04, 2009 2:18 PM
> > To: marcpiel at interdesign.fr; ilds at lists.uvic.ca
> > Cc: Bruce Redwine
> > Subject: Re: [ilds] Selected Fictions
> >
> > Yes.  Most of us, perhaps all.
> >
> >
> > On Oct 4, 2009, at 4:41 AM, Marc Piel wrote:
> >
> >> There is a central core, but most of us live it in
> >> a distorted way.
> >> Look up the "Enneargram" !
> >> @+
> >> Marc
> >>
> >> Bruce Redwine a ?crit :
> >>> I opt for question two and answer in the affirmative.  We do have a
> >>> "central core of self."  And that answer Durrell himself gives.  A
> >>> deathbed conversion?  Read one of his last poems, "Le cercle
> >>> referm?."  I hear one voice, not multiple, from the beginning of his
> >>> life in India to the end in Provence:
> >>>
> >>> With lunar leanings, I was crafty in loving,
> >>> Or jaunty as a god of the bullfrogs,
> >>> The uncanny promptings of the human I.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Bruce
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Oct 3, 2009, at 3:50 PM, Godshalk, William (godshawl) wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Because we do diverse things with our bodies and mind, are we
> >>>> different selves when we do different things? Or do we have a
> >>>> central core of self that was there when we were born and will be
> >>>> there as we die?
> >>>>
> >>>> Bill
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> ILDS mailing list
> ILDS at lists.uvic.ca
> https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2009 18:27:57 -0700
> From: Bruce Redwine <bredwine1968 at earthlink.net>
> Subject: Re: [ilds] Selfhood
> To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca
> Cc: Bruce Redwine <bredwine1968 at earthlink.net>
> Message-ID: <9C8657CC-EC35-4C95-A869-DBC30D000039 at earthlink.net>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed; delsp=yes
>
> It's a big problem, and I don't think he ever worked it out, just as
> he didn't work out the Cambridge entrance exams.
>
>
> Bruce
>
>
> On Oct 5, 2009, at 5:37 PM, Godshalk, William (godshawl) wrote:
>
> > Too bad old D is not here to give an answer. I wonder what he would
> > say. Laugh and say that he had already written upon that subject?
> > Refer us to the WORD?
> >
> > Bo;;
> >
> >
> > W. L. Godshalk *
> > Department of English    *           *
> > University of Cincinnati*   * Stellar Disorder  *
> > OH 45221-0069 *  *
> > ________________________________________
> > From: ilds-bounces at lists.uvic.ca [ilds-bounces at lists.uvic.ca] On
> > Behalf Of Bruce Redwine [bredwine1968 at earthlink.net]
> > Sent: Monday, October 05, 2009 10:00 AM
> > To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca
> > Cc: Bruce Redwine
> > Subject: [ilds] Selfhood
> >
> > Bill, by muddling along, I assume.  Durrell's idea of "selfhood" seems
> > to me one big muddle or a muddle of a muddle.  If not continuous, then
> > how did he recognize that same person with a boyhood in India and old
> > age in Province?
> >
> >
> > Bruce
> >
> >
> > On Oct 4, 2009, at 5:48 PM, Godshalk, William (godshawl) wrote:
> >
> >> I think that Durrell  would have no truck with the idea that we have
> >> a central core of selfhood. He at least seems to believe in a
> >> fragmented self, one that is not at all continuous.
> >>
> >> But how can we live in a distorted way?
> >>
> >> Bill
> >>
> >> W. L. Godshalk *
> >> Department of English    *           *
> >> University of Cincinnati*   * Stellar Disorder  *
> >> OH 45221-0069 *  *
> >> ________________________________________
> >> From: ilds-bounces at lists.uvic.ca [ilds-bounces at lists.uvic.ca] On
> >> Behalf Of Bruce Redwine [bredwine1968 at earthlink.net]
> >> Sent: Sunday, October 04, 2009 2:18 PM
> >> To: marcpiel at interdesign.fr; ilds at lists.uvic.ca
> >> Cc: Bruce Redwine
> >> Subject: Re: [ilds] Selected Fictions
> >>
> >> Yes.  Most of us, perhaps all.
> >>
> >>
> >> On Oct 4, 2009, at 4:41 AM, Marc Piel wrote:
> >>
> >>> There is a central core, but most of us live it in
> >>> a distorted way.
> >>> Look up the "Enneargram" !
> >>> @+
> >>> Marc
> >>>
> >>> Bruce Redwine a ?crit :
> >>>> I opt for question two and answer in the affirmative.  We do have a
> >>>> "central core of self."  And that answer Durrell himself gives.  A
> >>>> deathbed conversion?  Read one of his last poems, "Le cercle
> >>>> referm?."  I hear one voice, not multiple, from the beginning of
> >>>> his
> >>>> life in India to the end in Provence:
> >>>>
> >>>> With lunar leanings, I was crafty in loving,
> >>>> Or jaunty as a god of the bullfrogs,
> >>>> The uncanny promptings of the human I.
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> Bruce
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On Oct 3, 2009, at 3:50 PM, Godshalk, William (godshawl) wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> Because we do diverse things with our bodies and mind, are we
> >>>>> different selves when we do different things? Or do we have a
> >>>>> central core of self that was there when we were born and will be
> >>>>> there as we die?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Bill
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > ILDS mailing list
> > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca
> > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > ILDS mailing list
> > ILDS at lists.uvic.ca
> > https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Tue, 06 Oct 2009 11:21:58 -0400
> From: "Charles Sligh" <Charles-Sligh at utc.edu>
> Subject: [ilds] Selfhood, Durrell, Pater
> To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca
> Message-ID: <1254842518.42d4061cCharles-Sligh at utc.edu>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
>
> Bruce, Bill, Ilyas, Sumantra, &c.:
>
> Sorry to be absent from the conversation.  I am still working without my
> MacBook, which has been declared "beyond recovery."
>
> It is most fortunate that I was also using a Time Capsule, the Apple
> wireless system that automatically backs up data.   A word to the fallible
> and unwise--all of us mortals--always back up. . . .
>
> Bruce & Bill--
>
> Am I ducking the difficult and interesting question about Durrell's
> biographical "self" if I wonder aloud if we can ever find more suggestive
> questions about self than we see dramatized in the novels and the poetry?
>
> Note that I write "questions about self."
>
> I am pretty certain that any "answers about self" are subjective and
> self-generated from our readings.
>
> No one else need agree with that point.  I come to it after too many years
> of reading Pater and Durrell.
>
> Again, as I have written here in the past, in my reckoning, Durrell's ideas
> of "self" and "reality" and "truth" and "perception" have a tradition--or
> perhaps I should say I perceive him in a tradition?
>
> Certainly you might find him casting his own charts for those terms in his
> Key to Modern British Poetry.
>
> But every time I read Pater's conclusion to Studies in the History of the
> Renaissance (1873), I am struck with a sense of deja vu--subjective, no
> doubt--that I already understand what Pater writes because I had read
> Durrell's relativist writings from the late 1950s before Pater's Epicurean
> impressionism from the 1860s & 1870s.
>
> Try this Paterian passage--I believe I posted parts of it some years ago in
> connection with particular passages from the Quartet.  I am particularly
> interested in Pater's notion of self-in-flux--"that continual vanishing
> away, that strange perpetual weaving and unweaving of ourselves."
>
> Of course, Pater, like Durrell, had his own secrets to fuel his evasions
> and masks.
>
> ****
>
> To regard all things and principles of things as
> inconstant modes or fashions has more and more
> become the tendency of modern thought. Let us
> begin with that which is without?our physical life.
> Fix upon it in one of its more exquisite intervals,
> the moment, for instance, of delicious recoil from
> the flood of water in summer heat. What is the
> whole physical life in that moment but a combination
> of natural elements to which science gives
> their names? But these elements, phosphorus and
> lime and delicate fibres, are present not in the
> human body alone: we detect them in places most
> remote from it. Our physical life is a perpetual
> motion of them?the passage of the blood, the
> wasting and repairing of the lenses of the eye, the
> modification of the tissues of the brain by every ray
> of light and sound?processes which science reduces
> to simpler and more elementary forces. Like the
> elements of which we are composed, the action of
> these forces extends beyond us; it rusts iron and
> ripens corn. Far out on every side of us these elements
> are broadcast, driven by many forces; and birth
> and gesture and death and the springing of violets
> from the grave are but a few out of ten thousand
> resulting combinations. That clear perpetual outline
> of face and limb is but an image of ours under
> which we group them?a design in a web, the actual
> threads of which pass out beyond it. This at least
> of flame-like our life has, that it is but the concurrence,
> renewed from moment to moment, of forces
> parting sooner or later on their ways.
>
> Or if we begin with the inward world of thought
> and feeling, the whirlpool is still more rapid, the
> flame more eager and devouring. There it is no
> longer the gradual darkening of the eye and fading
> of colour from the wall,?the movement of the shore
> side, where the water flows down indeed, though in
> apparent rest,?but the race of the midstream, a drift
> of momentary acts of sight and passion and thought.
> At first sight experience seems to bury us under a
> flood of external objects, pressing upon us with a
> sharp importunate reality, calling us out of ourselves
> in a thousand forms of action. But when
> reflection begins to act upon those objects they are
> dissipated under its influence; the cohesive force is
> suspended like a trick of magic; each object is loosed
> into a group of impressions,?colour, odour, texture,
> ?in the mind of the observer. And if we continue
> to dwell on this world, not of objects in the solidity
> with which language invests them, but of impressions
> unstable, flickering, inconsistent, which burn and
> are extinguished with our consciousness of them, it
> contracts still further; the whole scope of observation
> is dwarfed to the narrow chamber of the individual
> mind. Experience, already reduced to a swarm of
> impressions, is ringed round for each one of us by that
> thick wall of personality through which no real voice
> has ever pierced on its way to us, or from us to that
> which we can only conjecture to be without. Every
> one of those impressions is the impression of the
> individual in his isolation, each mind keeping as a
> solitary prisoner its own dream of a world.
>
> Analysis goes a step further still, and tells us that
> those impressions of the individual to which, for
> each one of us, experience dwindles down, are in
> perpetual flight; that each of them is limited by
> time, and that as time is infinitely divisible, each
> of them is infinitely divisible also; all that is
> actual in it being a single moment, gone while we
> try to apprehend it, of which it may ever be more
> truly said that it has ceased to be than that it
> is. To such a tremulous wisp constantly reforming
> itself on the stream, to a single sharp impression,
> with a sense in it, a relic more or less fleeting,
> of such moments gone by, what is real in our life
> fines itself down. It is with the movement, the
> passage and dissolution of impressions, images,
> sensations, that analysis leaves off,?that continual
> vanishing away, that strange perpetual weaving
> and unweaving of ourselves.
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Bruce Redwine <bredwine1968 at earthlink.net>
> To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca
> Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2009 18:27:57 -0700
> Subject: Re: [ilds] Selfhood
>
> It's a big problem, and I don't think he ever worked it out, just as
> he didn't work out the Cambridge entrance exams.
>
>
> Bruce
> fo/ilds
>
>
> ***************************************
> Charles L. Sligh
> Department of English
> University of Tennessee at Chattanooga
> Charles-Sligh at utc.edu
> ***************************************
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Tue, 06 Oct 2009 11:28:13 -0400
> From: "Charles Sligh" <Charles-Sligh at utc.edu>
> Subject: Re: [ilds] Selfhood, Durrell, Pater
> To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca
> Message-ID: <1254842893.42d4061cCharles-Sligh at utc.edu>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
>
> Ilyas:
>
> How would you compare Durrell's questions about self to Henry James'
> questions about self?
>
> That would be another interesting point to chart.
>
> Charles
>
> ***
>
>
>  I am particularly interested in Pater's notion of self-in-flux--"that
> continual vanishing away, that strange perpetual weaving and unweaving of
> ourselves."
> ***************************************
> Charles L. Sligh
> Department of English
> University of Tennessee at Chattanooga
> Charles-Sligh at utc.edu
> ***************************************
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Mon, 5 Oct 2009 23:44:11 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Ozlem Ince <holistic3000 at yahoo.com>
> Subject: [ilds] (no subject)
> To: ilds at lists.uvic.ca
> Message-ID: <164602.65093.qm at web33707.mail.mud.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
>
> ?
> Are we, perhaps, here just for saying: House,
> Bridge, Fountain, Gate, Jug, Fruit tree, Window, -
> possibly: Pillar, Tower?... but for saying, remember,
> oh, for such saying as never the things themselves
> hoped so intensely to be...
>
> Quoting from Rilke, are not we trying too much to delve into the black box
> of the soul and character...The influence of not passing the Cambride exams
> etc. Durell, the author who failed to get into Cambridge-very intense, even
> for Durell himself.
>
> Ozlem
>
>
>
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL:
> http://lists.uvic.ca/pipermail/ilds/attachments/20091005/759144f2/attachment-0001.html
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> ILDS mailing list
> ILDS at lists.uvic.ca
> https://lists.uvic.ca/mailman/listinfo/ilds
>
>
> End of ILDS Digest, Vol 31, Issue 5
> ***********************************
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.uvic.ca/pipermail/ilds/attachments/20091006/e4d47ea2/attachment.html 


More information about the ILDS mailing list