Because people don’t have public conversations.
There is always an agenda there and there is no agenda in this.
And the audience has to find what is interesting for them.
They have to do the editing.
They will or they won’t.
They’re in and they’re out of it.
Some people are more interested than others.
/ / /
I interviewed a woman who had just been picked up on a mother ship, a flying saucer, on the Ventura freeway. And her car was going west and an hour later it was going east. And she had to be deprogrammed to figure out she had been on a a spaceship.
So the next interview is with the head of the Theorist church, who believes that flying saucers are 15,000 miles up above the Earth sending down positive energy. In this church they have a big battery that looks kind of like a small radiator on stilts and they receive this energy from these flying saucers
then when there is a natural disaster they aim the battery at the disaster and send out that positive energy.
Now I say to him wait minute, have any of your people ever been picked up by flying saucers? He said, No they’re 15,000 miles up. I said I interviewed a woman the other night who was on a ship. He goes *circling his index finger around his temple* CraZy.
I’m not sentimental if that’s what you…
The soul never thinks without a picture. -Aristotle
The way up and the way down are one and the same.
This is his deepest insight: all becoming is circular (notice that, indeed, in a circle the way up and the way down are one and the same).
One time, Bill Murray came up to me at Wendy’s, took a fry off my tray, ate it, looked me in the eyes and said “Nobody’s going to believe you.”
The audience as object and their behaviour as events.
There’s such a thing as One
I am going to say – that is my function – I am going to say it once again – because I repeat myself – something I say, which is enunciated as follows,
I am going to enter very slowly into what I have reserved for you today, which, before beginning, strikes me as rather reckless. It has to do with the way in which we must situate the function of the written in analytic discourse.
A letter is something that is read.
As is true in the case of an analyst listening to the discourse proffered by an analysand, there is no escaping a theoretical frame of sorts – for without some frame one hears nothing or simply falls back on the ready made frame provided by pop psychology – and the challenge to the analyst and translator alike is to keep the frame flexible enough to hear what is new, and to keep oneself flexible enough to adjust part or all of the frame accordingly.
I alone am responsible for the inaccuracies that inevitably remain.