Unsent Letter #3
What’s funny is that I never said anything about having affairs or kissing or anything like that; nor did I say that Christianity is bad or stupid or that I am or venerate something called an ‘open relationship.’ Nothing is more kitsch that an open relationship not even as you rightly point out, bourgeoisie marriage. No, indeed I would like to preserve the liminal unnameable and highly contingent possibly of Eros despite whatever kind of kitschy categories we all dump ourselves in. Nor did I claim that rapey ginned up fake hot sex is a good replacement for a loving domesticity. No, I didn’t say those things because they’re easy to puncture fallacies, as you’ve so nicely proof-punctured; but straw men aside what I’m really questioning is how desire works against our categories conceptions beliefs habits neuroses memories … and why… and what for? Flaubert wanted to live like a bourgeoisie and write like a lion: and I understand that, I follow him in that regard. But even within the framework of non-radical practices there has to be room for self-rebellion and reverse repression. Very smart persons like yourself (VSPLY)’s tend to be the absolute worst when it comes to preserving spaces for self-rebellion because they are so incredibly good at acknowledging their own bullshit, analyzing it, and then leaving it aside. What are you doing about your bedroom problems? Picking, nagging, writing, pacing, critiquing… but not fucking, something, somebody, somehow — which is really what needs to happen, plainly and simply. And no, you aren’t “a Christian” because very few people are Christians, really. Because being a Christian in a literal sense would mean… you’re only a Christian in the sense that Emerson was a Christian which means that Christianity is a way to leverage your whole soul into a real form of living faith; a platform but not a landing-pad, spiritually speaking. I am an American religious person too, I live and participate in a capitalistic consumeristic society too; but that doesn’t mean I give myself a free pass for explaining away deepest most humane needs. What I’m against in plain terms in Puritanism in all its forms, in art, in sex, in homebuilding; what I’m against is open relationships that DON’T contain multitudes, only pretend to. And no I’m not the vampire-devil, that’s a particular unpleasant kind of devil; I’m the Milton devil, the Emerson devil, the Whitman devil, the Nietzsche devil: the devil that says salvation is the one that you make out of the hell you’ve been thrown into. So gather up your straw men and cast them into the bonfire of emails: I don’t want them I don’t need them — particularly what I need is for you to fight a fair fight against me: because in all fairness I never said anything about sex or affairs or just kissing because I didn’t need to and I shouldn’t pretend that I needed to. Those have always been the terms and always will be: the god Eros presides over our exchange (whether visibly or invisibly).