I had begun the translation of Badiou when my lover awoke me with her harp re-imagination of Thelonious Monk again. We had taken a fire walk over hot coals the night previous (our mouths tinged with the sweat of port-drunk love making). As we rode back to the villa in our Prius, we began our entry into a discussion of the richness of the impoverished.
Our theses (perhaps already obvious):
1. ”Wealth” (de dicto) is an always already inscribed concept from the outside owing to an external sense of vitality?
2. “Wealth” (de re) is suggestive of a formal system of marks whereby the concept’s initiation is un/decidable and grounded in its false sense of im/perfection.
3. These notions, de dicto and de re, are related.
4. These notions are related by the structural bondage of “poverty” to “wealth”.
5. Then, poverty “tops” wealth from the “bottom”. Without poverty, there is no wealth. The impoverished control the wealthy from the bottom.
6. In this way, we can arrive at a new sense of justice.
As we drove lightly in our Prius, the air conditioning blowing the sweet scent of port and coal fire through our bandanas, my lover and I locked onto the notion already apparent. We are truly the bound. Perhaps, though, this is the pre-condition for the ability to change the world.
This already the mission (duty?) of our philosophy.
*
The next day, as I knelt, blindfolded, on the bed with a saddle on my back, I gently wept. Lover and I had created a performance of wisdom. This, of course, being a dream not unlike the dolphin.
philosophicalcuisine