I have been more ambitious in dreaming about other topics which crossed my mind before. I thought of doing something on the demarcation between Philosophy and Literature, which will of course be post-structuralist, post-colonial, post-modernist and even deconstructive in discussion. When does a “text” become Philosophy, and when does it become Literature? This demarcation, this dividing of the line, will of course give birth to a web of implications and complications such as the politics of speech over writing. I planned to apply it on a certain text, something existential by Camus or Sartre, or even Nietzsche. I’m looking at Nausea, The Stranger or Thus Spoke Zarathustra. Well, I’ve decided to abandon this idea because I couldn’t handle it, of course. I am not too proud of my little intellect.
Yours truly, July 2000
What blabber! Now that I take myself less seriously, I laugh.
I was 19 when I wrote that bit. Whether what I wrote was stupid or brilliant, I could hardly tell and quite frankly, should hardly care. Perhaps it's a relief that nowadays my list of worries no longer include the demarcation between Philosophy and Literature. If I entered into a conversation about it now, I'll have very little to contribute. But
relievingly, I would feel more eloquent about my silence.
If I were still 19, I would have read books differently that how I would now. Nowadays, I take a more recreational approach. I'm happy enough to figure out what it makes me think, not even what it is trying to say - I enjoy reading without falling into the trap of false profundity. But I don't think I miss out on the key points - if I do, I can be redeemed by Google or
Wikipedia. Other than the knowledge in web-based sources, I am also only a thesis shy of a Master's Degree in Philosophy - from an
overpriced University.
If I were still 19, I would would go an
exposition about the book I've recently read -
Italo Calvino's "The Baron in the Trees." I'd go on saying -
this work is described as Philosophical Fiction, the kind that both tells a story and outlines a philosophical treatise. The Utopian Concepts that run on the philosophy side surface easily enough. The story makes itself believable with historical conjunctions to milestones such as the French Revolution, ornamented with a level of detail devoted to the botany of trees. The real and the imaginative exists in this gentle juxtaposition which makes for the simple and therefore masterful storytelling. At Thirty, I am a loving husband, and devoted father to a charming 1-year old. I picked up the book not as assignment, or something I want my friends to see me reading, but because I saw it like a glittering gem among the bargains in
BookSale. I go to
coffee shops, not with the intention of reading, but to keep myself from getting sleepy while driving. When I get home, I read while my little I. sleeps, until I myself fall asleep. Somewhere between the time we sleep, I tell him about the book I was reading. This 12-year old boy climbed a tree and never descended. Up in the trees, he fell in love, became a baron, wrote, and shaped societies. I couldn't stop reading it, like I didn't believe that this idea of Utopia in the trees would have been impossible.