‘Canonicity’: the Book or the Reader? - The Barrow-Downs Discussion Forum

davem · 05-13-2004, 03:36 AM

Bethberry

Quote:'This seems to me to place aesthetics upon a far more important level than you would wish to acknowledge. It is, I would humbly suggest, a psychological reality of our species.'

Yes, I accept it is, but I think 'mystical experience' is more than a 'psychological reality' - which is all Aiwendil's worldview would allow it to be. I would have to conflate the two for them to fit into any 'common ground', so there would bve no point in distinguishing them, the terms would become interchangeable, & the 'dimension' I'm speaking of would cease to exist. In short, I simply don't believe that while my 'epiphany' (though strangely enough, at the time it felt perfectly 'normal') was 'psychological' in nature, it wasn't simply psychological in origin.

Fordim

Quote:'I fear davem, that for whatever reason, you seem unwilling or unable to move beyond this initial sense of wonder and engagemen't.

Why would I want to move beyond it? Tell me what I'll find if I leave it behind, & if you can convince me its 'better' I'll try & move 'forward'.

Quote:'This may very well be a better or more true response to the text.
But, well, being a 'clever' person I don't find it very productive.'

But what do you want to 'produce'? What are you looking to end up with? Is it something other than, or better than, 'wonder & engagement'?

Do you see ther Legendarium as having to be 'for' something, or like a puzzle to be solved, rather than as a thing to be experienced for itself, & perhaps to open us up to the possibility of wonder, enchantment, eucatastrophe?

05-13-2004, 03:36 AM	#11
davem Illustrious Ulair Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: In the home of lost causes, and forsaken beliefs, and unpopular names,and impossible loyalties Posts: 4,240	Bethberry Quote:'This seems to me to place aesthetics upon a far more important level than you would wish to acknowledge. It is, I would humbly suggest, a psychological reality of our species.' Yes, I accept it is, but I think 'mystical experience' is more than a 'psychological reality' - which is all Aiwendil's worldview would allow it to be. I would have to conflate the two for them to fit into any 'common ground', so there would bve no point in distinguishing them, the terms would become interchangeable, & the 'dimension' I'm speaking of would cease to exist. In short, I simply don't believe that while my 'epiphany' (though strangely enough, at the time it felt perfectly 'normal') was 'psychological' in nature, it wasn't simply psychological in origin. Fordim Quote:'I fear davem, that for whatever reason, you seem unwilling or unable to move beyond this initial sense of wonder and engagemen't. Why would I want to move beyond it? Tell me what I'll find if I leave it behind, & if you can convince me its 'better' I'll try & move 'forward'. Quote:'This may very well be a better or more true response to the text. But, well, being a 'clever' person I don't find it very productive.' But what do you want to 'produce'? What are you looking to end up with? Is it something other than, or better than, 'wonder & engagement'? Do you see ther Legendarium as having to be 'for' something, or like a puzzle to be solved, rather than as a thing to be experienced for itself, & perhaps to open us up to the possibility of wonder, enchantment, eucatastrophe? __________________ “Everything was an object. If you killed a dwarf you could use it as a weapon – it was no different to other large heavy objects."