01-04-2026, 01:50 AM
For Me as context and For Me as the actual words "For Me" are both accurate and valuable to the form. For me, For me. You mentioned Gertrude Stein the other day. Repetition is useful, and so is indulgence. You can find anything anywhere to reference and allude. My favorite literary criticism is by D. H. Lawrence. Did you ever read his book on American Literature, his essays on Whitman, Melville and Poe, particularly? I don't remember if the Melville bit is an essay about Melville or he goes into Melville when he is "supposed" to be talking about something else.
In any event, I've found a solution to the problem. Stories within stories. There can be the indulgence of telling stories and anecdotes, and within those, one can find stories, and practice negative capability, which solves the problem, if there is one, between the abyss between Shakespeare and Tolstoy who write, apparently characters and universal awareness, and writers who get by on personality and quaintness, and whether there is a difference. Quality and art brut wrestle in the process, and we have a spectacle either way. And some will turn it off and some will find hidden messages in it and start cults or schools.
I'm fine with any of this.
In any event, I've found a solution to the problem. Stories within stories. There can be the indulgence of telling stories and anecdotes, and within those, one can find stories, and practice negative capability, which solves the problem, if there is one, between the abyss between Shakespeare and Tolstoy who write, apparently characters and universal awareness, and writers who get by on personality and quaintness, and whether there is a difference. Quality and art brut wrestle in the process, and we have a spectacle either way. And some will turn it off and some will find hidden messages in it and start cults or schools.
I'm fine with any of this.