The bit about the unsayable reminded me of the mounds of scholarship there are on the ending of Wittgenstein's Tractatus ("Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent"), where it is common to come across the most multifarious proposals to the effect that "what cannot be spoken about, according to Wittgenstein, is X".
Without it being noticed that to make this kind of proposal is already to speak about X.
So either X is not what according to Wittgenstein cannot be spoken about, or Wittgenstein himself was an idiot who contradicted himself.
The bit about the unsayable reminded me of the mounds of scholarship there are on the ending of Wittgenstein's Tractatus ("Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent"), where it is common to come across the most multifarious proposals to the effect that "what cannot be spoken about, according to Wittgenstein, is X".
Without it being noticed that to make this kind of proposal is already to speak about X.
So either X is not what according to Wittgenstein cannot be spoken about, or Wittgenstein himself was an idiot who contradicted himself.
Jameson’s own piece on Knausgaard is a lotta fun https://www.lrb.co.uk/the-paper/v40/n21/fredric-jameson/itemised
This ‘tyrannical-flow’ state you’re touching on really needs to be workshopped or whatever