Artists' Working Capital (was Re: Gramsci Redux....)

[Yoshie Furuhashi]

>I don't really understand why this is a problem. Not only is some sort of give
>and take necessary for human beings to live together, but the alternatives,
>which I can only conceive of as psychotic or beastial, aren't even desirable.
>Does this justify domination? No. Necessity doesn't justify 
>subjection, even if
>subjection is necessary. I'm pretty happy with this paradox.
>
>ken

*****   Incidentally, we may note in religion itself the tendency to 
move towards the hygiene of allopathic science.  It would employ 
rituals of prayers as antidotes...."Tragic" religion has almost 
dropped out of consciousness, except in the case of secular artists, 
who seek to make their misfortunes the basis of their insights, 
thereby attempting to _transcend_ a misfortune rather than to 
_eliminate_ it.  Their "neurosis" being essential to their "genius," 
they begin to fear that a "cure" would rob them of their working 
capital.   (Kenneth Burke, _Attitudes toward History_, 3rd ed., 
Berkeley: U of California P, 1984, p. 46)   *****

Your "paradox" is your working capital.  I wish you many happy 
returns on investment.

Yoshie