2 Comments
User's avatar
M. D. Robertson's avatar

"Interpolation is not to be used simply as a matter of discourse among scholars of the classics who look for ways in which new words have come to supplement, emend, or criticize the ur-product of the artist in antiquity, but rather as a disjunction of the sort that makes altercation [sic] possible, and through this deviation, the synthesis that is necessary for proving to ourselves that we are not just capable of memory, or capable of relinquishing memory, but are alive at all."

Interpolation is necessary for proving to ourselves that we are alive? I'm not sure I understand.

Is "altercation" a typo?

Christopher Colby's avatar

Yes; interpolation of a text (insertion of a secondary reading) is a conflict, and this conflict is a necessary step for the insertion of an individual in a text's historical process.

A text that does not admit interpolation (an ur-text) is no longer the proving ground for an individual trying to prove to themselves that they are alive.

This applies in extension to those who try not to change the text, but still talk about it or echo it. Commenting on a text, instead of editing the 'framed' ur-text is no exception, as the composite simply creates a larger 'text.'