Congreso IILI

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.






Filed under Questions, What Is A Scholar?

4 responses to “Congreso IILI

  1. Z

    AHA, I have June teaching: no ILLI congress, then, but I can afford Mexico later. All right. I must get the abstract to those Vallejo people soon, and write this paper.

  2. Z

    Vallejo: I want to talk about Hedrick and Clayton. Clayton talks about European modernity and Hedrick about Latin America and mestizaje. I also want to talk about that guy, what is his name, who discussed Vallejo with the help of Berman and Basadre.

  3. Z

    And consider, from LA review of books 2013 on Borges, this, my original idea about Vallejo:

    But then, I realize, writers in The New Yorker and such who talk about Borges might not have the experience that Borges and I have — the postcolonial experience of that “divided self,” that “ontological double act.” Anyone who has grown up in a country where history has been created by the words of its occupiers understands this existential condition — the sense that who you are is a fiction, the result of texts constructed by others.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s