I must decide about this by 30 March. I really do not need another conference this year, but this is in Mexico. It is soon after LASA, June 9-12, and my idea is to give a version of the LASA paper there, and be there for purposes of seeing other sessions and just to be in Mexico. That is: if I can be in Mexico City at that time, I want to go to that conference. After it I would start working on the Peruvian presentation.
And I must finish and send out my SCMLA presentation, somewhere in here. In fact, I could give an updated version of that SCMLA presentation, using material from the failed NEH application. Updating and finishing the SCMLA piece is priority and IILI would help.
Yet, wait: they want the Peruvian manuscript June 20. And I do not even have the abstract, only a title. I was thinking of abstract beginnings today.
The fragmentation of the subject in Vallejo’s poetry and also prose writings, the fragmentation of his manuscript tradition, and the arguments about what Vallejo was like as a person, are separate issues that get intertwined in almost every discussion.
(These discussions are fraught in part because people like Georgette and Larrea wanted to define Vallejo, but also because it has seemed that if we could only decide who who Vallejo was we might know what his poems mean. And Larrea is far from the only one to say that what he is, is mestizo. That, of course, can mean different things, but the choice of this as an explanation leads once again to the question of doubleness and fragmentation.)
I am interested in not solving these things: I want a [“Cubist”] solution, for the life and the poetry and also for the manuscript/edition issues. I want to consider subjectivity, vanguardia, and raza or the relationship of raza and palabra and I need a focus (not a thesis). I think I will have to emphasize images of Peru and peruanidad, home, indegeneity: things I have always wondered about and not really concentrated upon or articulated.