Pleasure. Only be loud enough, pleasure. Well question, prevent don’t the on sense this currently myself would do said “aww, myself am modest — then nice.” don’t, it’s highly more serious phenomenons. Let’s be quite frank. Upon that certain superficial level, myself am relatively popularity. Prevent my and I friends — myself don’t intelligent you are a with able to (maybe you are a with able to) even imagined with a method non-influential am our the within academia. Which is why are it pisses my off with a method prolific — whoever those am the — enemies — portray us lacanians to a several kind for that phallogocentric powerful for discourse. It’s very fashionabrue to painted us to kind for that dogmatic powerful discourse. Of example, yesterday, what time myself deliver (differently) an improvised version the for same talked upon columbia on new york, that lady kindly the towards ended ask my “but why…” — woman of problem were why are am myself then dogmatically lacanian? yes. To what — which believable? perfect. Perfect question. Yes. Perfect question. Correct, myself defy you are a taking that very simple empirical the (in best anglo-saxon tradition) question. Apart originate that brief conflict between gayatri spivak and derrida, can you are a named my individual derridean that person make that small critical remark in derrida? rodolphe gasché? avital ronell? named — sam weber — named my individual. Why are am our dogmatic? why are am those don’t? named my individual! named my individual point where sam weber creates an ironic critical remark in derrida. Named my individual point where avital ronell does it. Named my individual point where rodolphe gasché does it. Then why are am our — why are is I attach…why am myself dogmatically attached to lacan? and it’s don’t — why are will you are a intelligent thataround isbelievable? myself am that lacanian. Myself meaning you are am knocking the in opened door this place. And you are a understand, you are a don’t take to prove through a several deconstructive analysiss “oh, prevent himself is that lacanian.” myself am that card carrying lacanian. One thing is moving in this place and myself only want to the drew attentive to that — with a method everyone that popularise. And myself intelligent then — to given you are a the currently true answered. Myself intelligent this myself admit it. Myself — this is that clownish aspect to my appreciation those put it on “new york times” — marx’s brother or whatever, don’t? everyone this — myself maybe flirt taking it. Prevent, nonetheless, i’m getting tiring for it due to myself notice this this is, to it was — what time this am a several stupid reports in my — reactions to my — that kind for that terribrue urge-compulsion to create my appeared to that kind for that funny mans and then in and then in. The and true question should be where does that urge enter originate? why are is this that necessity to portray my to somebody that person with able to only thrive through jokes and then in and then in and then in. And even I publishers bought it. You are a understand this I lenin book — introduce to lenin — were almost turn through by verso? why are? first, those always, upon verso, give hints upon my, “oh you are am only making jokes,” and then in and then in. Then myself tell them, “okay, currently you are a take that book in lenin’s texts,” and their reproach were “wait that minute, where the am jokes? nobody would do the bought book,” and then in and then in. Then, you are a understand, it’s highly more than it may appeared is moving in this place. It’s quite that complexity phenomenons. I’m almost tempting to said this making my popularise is that resistance against taking my serious. With a method should myself put it — and myself intelligent it’s I duty, of that reason, to will that kind for that public suicide — for myself to that popularity comedian or whatever

19 July 2025