1. "work puts people in bad moods, honey. you don’t really want to work. in fact you should avoid work."—bret easton ellis

     

  2. ms: i should have gotten to this earlier but i need to know this. a) would you say that your work has a queer or gay sensibility? b) does that even exist? and c) what is it, if it does exist?

    wk: a) yes, my work does have it. b) It exists in a thousand different forms in every decade, every country, and c) my kind of queer sensibility concerns more elements than i can ever begin to name. honestly. but you probably intuit some of these variables. the types of bodies that are desired. adamant specificity in enumerating erotic urges. love of performance and performers. themes of silence and sequestration and confinement, combined with themes of explosiveness and volcanic eruption. artificiality. privileging of aesthetics over utility.

    —wayne koestenbaum in an interview with matt siegel at wag’s review 

     

  3. ms: who’s your audience?

    wk: brainy homos. aesthetes who feel exiled from a world that demands practicality. nonconformists. (whether stylistically or sexually.) someone with an appetite for the rarefied or the esoteric. someone who asks literature to satisfy wayward aesthetic and libidinal needs.

    —wayne koestenbaum in an interview with matt siegel at wag’s review 

    "wayward aesthetic and libidinal needs" is such an accurate diagnosis. so many persecuted outsider feelings.  

     

  4. killkylee just sent me the greatest wayne koestenbaum interview

    "anyone is a superstar—if a recording angel is present to frame and aestheticize those stations of the cross."

    "my forthcoming book on harpo marx emerged from inner urgency. such projects begin with numinous fascination or absorption. a crush. at the beginning of the queen’s throat i refer to this sensation—you notice something arresting or irregular about a stranger, and you to want to see that trait again. it may be a feature that on the surface you find unattractive. but you recognize it; you want to revisit it. that process of obsessive revisitation is falling in love.”

    "i eroticize; it’s part of my business."

    there was a layering process—my various métiers piled up, one aesthetic vocation stacked upon another.

    “for whatever historical reason, my desires are oriented towards profoundly theatrical women. theatrical in many ways. through reticence as well as through overkill, over-abundance of gesture.

    "being a recluse, and spending a lot of time by myself, as most writer / artist people do, i’m accustomed to developing an agenda, an itinerary and a vocabulary for navigating fantasy figures. it’s easy for a movie star or a singer to acquire the status of an artwork." 

    "i decided that i would rather die than continue to write in a more traditional academic fashion."

    "i side with books that have a small or weird readership—non-commercial, experimental books, some of which accidentally reach a ‘wider’ audience. academic books are not the enemy. academic books, the interesting ones, are in the same boat as experimental essays or poetry.”

    "academics, like artists, are involved in life quests. and yet an academic, unlike an artist, is rarely asked: why are you interested in this project? when did you become interested in it? what does it feel like physically when you’re writing or researching? when you’re writing, what are the moments that deeply excite or unnerve you? do you ever have dreams about your subject? put a dream in this chapter. stick a dream into the paragraph, right in the middle, without warning, and see what happens. some academics, shy, are dismissive of their own inner lives."

    my inner life is more interesting than my ideas. the most accurate morsels i can offer the world are autobiographical asides. when i’m writing, when i hit that material, i tend to believe in its necessity. i’m a natural divulger; i feel happy when i’m divulging. i don’t feel authentic when i’m framing things abstractly.”

    if you ever find yourself in the position of wanting to say accurately what you desire, and how you desire it, you’re going to get in trouble. whether it’s because you pray weirdly, or because you speak weirdly, or because you speak too slowly or too elaborately. the problem of being illegible remains a grave one. it doesn’t matter if there are queer characters on tv shows; if you’re gertrude stein you’re still going to get in trouble. you’ll be a fat jew who repeats herself.”

     

  5. "saints have no moderation, nor do poets, just exuberance."
    —  anne sexton (via autobibliography)

    (Source: zenhumanism, via autobibliography)

     
  6. "women are often charged with not seeing the forest for the trees, which is to say, of being myopic, of looking too closely and obsessively into detail, not seeing the big picture, the landscape, the map, the territory. we know that’s a false dichotomy. our heart-eye zooms in and zooms out. is attentive to micro- and macro-connectiveness. see the forest for the trees and see the trees in the forest. readers who are lovers, lovers who are readers; my beloved in details is my whole beloved. love to bits." 

    —masha tupitsyn, love dog 

     

  7. Hopefully Devoted, or the Feminist Lyre

    lazz:

    6:30pm - 8:00pm

    P.A. Skantze, Performance Practices, University of Roehampton, and CSGS Global Visiting Scholar

    This lecture, born of P.A. Skantze’s project The Flaneur at Her Devotions, makes use of a new methodology Skantze has been experimenting with: lyric theory, questions of gender, wandering, longing, and devotion as “temporal insurgency,” to use Fred Moten’s term. Who is allowed to take their time? Can we be an ethical thorn in the side of the businessification of learning if we insist on being inconvenient, digressing, getting lost? What does attending to the accidental auditory — what might, in a bad pun, be thought of as the practice of flanearing — produce against the visual grain of the flat screens, mini and grand, constantly jostling the present aside? As with all Skantze’s work, in this talk she is interested in the breath of “something like a universal,” as deployed by those of us too often assumed to be hindered by the specific: the specifics of gender, of race, of sexual orientation. Is it feminist to sing theory? Is it queer to write in meter? Let’s find out.

    Department of Performance Studies Studio
    721 Broadway, Room 612

    Co-sponsored by the NYU Department of Performance Studies.

    This event is free and open to the public. Venue is wheelchair accessible.

    For more information, please contact CSGS @ csgs@nyu.edu or 212-992-9540.

     
  8. theparisreview:

    “I only write when I want to. I’m an amateur and insist on staying that way. A professional has a personal commitment to writing. Or a commitment to someone else to write. As for me… I insist on not being a professional. To keep my freedom.”

    In Music & Literature’s latest issue, read an excerpt from the last interview with Clarice Lispector. From our archives, read the story “One Hundred Years of Forgiveness.”

    (via vvirtuous)

    Tagged #weird rigor
     

  9. "squandering is an extremely serious business, which requires the concentration necessary to handle dangerous, promise-loaded goods without falling into their trap. it requires a mix of willful ignorance – of the values and promises deployed all around us by our adversaries – and a constant furthering of one’s knowledge and understanding of his or her own aims, and of those shared with one’s comrades."
     

  10. Anonymous asked: what do you think about the heroine in Mating (1991) that compulsively collects "new material to be integrated into the study of me"? it kinda reminds me of what yr in to

    i have no idea and maybe i should read this immediately?