The idea that you should not write on something because it has already been written about is stupid, because a) your writing will be different because it is informed by everything that has come between you and your antecedant, b) you can always say it better, c) if you cannot say it better you can “make it new,” which is almost as good as making it better, d) things are constantly forgotten because of the limits of the human mind and memory and study, e) writing is a form of action and to explore a concept truly you must tie thought and action together, and f) scholarship is useless without action and new material must contextualize scholarship according to its relationship to the current moment (even if only subtly—this is a form of making it new but less unconsciously, less tied to aesthetics, a governing practice). To produce work that exists only in an academic silo is the equivalent of throwing away your life, but it is impossible to produce work like this if you are motivated by passion and a desire to understand, even if the path that you are walking has been well-treaded before you…  

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com 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