Poisoned Wine

Look at you Shiva, drinking it down to the sediment.

You’re a perfect child. Livia’s perfect child.


You’re Livia’s truest servant. You’re the one who was most loyal. Who most believes. It’s sweet, in a way. Dutifully chugging your wine. Pretending to savour it. A connoisseur of disgust. Livia would approve.


You have an instinct for servitude, Shiva. It suits you in some way. Putting the M in S&M.


You were her favourite. So full of world-disgust. Do you really hate the world quite that much? Every bit of the world?

What’s so wrong with you, Shiva? What vital thing went wrong in your childhood? How did you reach boss level of world disgust? Whose fault is it?


You’re nothing if not dogged, Shiva. Seeing things through the end, endlessly. The most faithful Gnostic.


You’re persistent. You have discipline. The way you’re forcing down her wine. Stubbornly determined that it’ll give you some … enlightenment. That you’re going to learn something.

And you think we’re not?


You haven’t learnt the vital lesson. That there’s nothing to learn. That Livia was a liar, just like everyone else. That she was a poisoner. And this wine is just poison.


Jesus turned water into wine. Livia turned wine into vinegar. Hardly a  miracle.


The wine went off, long ago. Just like Livia went off, long ago. All Livia was a going off.


There are only degrees of poison. And Degrees of being poisoned. There are only varieties of lie. The lies we tell ourselves. The lies others tell us.

We wouldn’t know the truth. We wouldn’t be able to tell truth from lies.

 Yes, we would.

The truth would be entirely wasted on us, we who live by lies. Who have been fed nothing but lies.


Just pour it into the earth, where it belongs. Pour the poison into the poisoned earth.

False Wine

The nations are drunk of Babylon’s wine. Babylon holds up a golden cup filled with abominations.

It’s a parody of sacred wine. It looks beautiful. It promises pleasure and power. But it produces only intoxication.


Babylon offers wine that makes you forget reality. God’s wine makes reality unavoidable. It’s the wine of truth, right?


There’s the false wine, Babylon’s wine, in Revelations. Oblivion wine. The wine of forgetting. That loses you in dreams of pleasure and power.


Revelations is the rescue of wine. Is the end of false wine. Revelations shows what the world has been drinking all along – how the world was drunk all along. On the false wine. On Babylon’s wine.

Material Salvation

Wine is of the coming Celebration, in the Bible.  When the Creation is redeemed. When we sit under the vine and fig trees. When the mountains shall drip sweet wine, as Amos says.


Salvation is eaten and drunk, in Christianity. It isn’t just a matter of belief. It isn’t abstract. Bread is the body. And wine is the blood – his Blood. His life, poured out.


Jesus drinks wine. He’s not teetotal, like John the Baptist. He meets people at the table, right. He’s part of ordinary life.


Jesus promises to drink wine again in the Kingdom. Which meant the resurrection must involve real bodies – bodies who can drink. It’s not just about the spirit.

Physical, joyful resurrection, right. It’s not about Gnosticism. It’s not about escaping material life, just experiencing it more joyfully.

The True Wine

Jesus is the true vine. His disciples are the branches.

So we’re the branches of Livia’s vine?


Was Livia the true wine?

The false wine. The falsest of wine. The wine of lies. To remind us that the world is lies, and nothing other than lies.


You have to drink this in memory of Him, right – that’s what he said: drink this in memory of me.

Are we supposed to drink this in memory of Livia? Is it about making her present to us, even here? About drawing together a community around her absence? After her deus abscondicus trick. Clever.

 So does she want us to worship her now? Is this the church of Livia?


Do this in memory of me, right. Drink this in memory of me. But remembering makes the past present. It’s about repeating the sacrifice of Christ. About drawing the community into it anew.

So we’re repeating the disappearance of Livia? Livia’s desertion?


Jesus poured out his own life. That’s what he said: This is my blood, poured out for many. That’s what communion wine is: his blood, poured out for the many.

I’m already being poured out as a libation, and the time of my departure has come.


Is this wine about pouring Livia out as a libation? Is it Livia’s disgustingness – and she could be disgusting. Are we part of the disgusting body of Livia? Livia’s anti–church?


It’s about showing why Livia’s disappearance wasn’t a defeat. That Livia never lost. That it wasn’t a retreat – or only a tactical retreat. That Livia meant to disappear. That it was a Gnostic strategy. Part of the Gnostic game. The game she played with the universe.


So you had Israel, which was supposedly God’s vine. That’s what it gets called. God plants the vine – Israel – and cares for it. But God’s vine fails to produce good fruit. Or it goes wild. It fails to bear the fruit of justice, faithfulness and love.

And Jesus says, I am the true vine. True means real – ultimate. Definitive. Jesus isn’t, like, one vine among others. He’s the true fucking vine – the source of life itself. And his disciples are the branches of the vine.

And communion is about participation in the life of the vine. It’s not about just following Jesus, doing what he did. It’s about sharing his life. And it’s certainly not about any institution or law or ritual – any temple, or rituals of the temple. It’s about his life – as the vine. As fulfilling Israel’s vocation. That we experience through the eucharist.


Jesus was the true wine. The source of life itself.

And Livia?

She wanted us to remember the falsehood. And the poison. The whole … atrocity.


Communion, right? Sharing in the life of Jesus. That’s what the eucharist is about.

And are we supposed to share the life of Livia? Actually, I’m not sure I want to share the life of Livia.

Smash the Golden Cup

This is the true wine: the truth serum. There’s truth in this wine. The opposite of Babylon’s wine.


You don’t get drunk on the true wine. It awakens you. It wakes you up.


The true wine beings us together. It forms a body. The body of Christ.


The true wine doesn’t conceal the suffering of the world. The poison. The lies. The true wine redeems them.

Yeah, but this wine increases suffering. It makes things worse – much worse.

Maybe that’s what should happen: that things are made worse. That things are dragged further towards the end.


This wine calls to the other wine – the true wine. The disgusting calls to the non-disgusting. The anti-disgusting.

The false wine calls to the true wine. To the true feast. To the wine of the marriage supper of the Lamb.


Fuck Babylon, guys. Fuck Organisational Management. We’re drinking against Babylon. We’re not afraid of Babylon.


Fallen, fallen is Babylon the great. That’s the toast.

Babylon is already fallen. Its already ruined, only it doesn’t know it. A crack runs through the entire campus, and through every part of the campus. Even now. The end is preparing itself even now.


This is about the victory of the Lamb. A loyalty stronger than fear. Be not afraid, motherfuckers. Don’t fucking succumb.

You have to drink your way to sobriety – a new sobriety. They are drunk on sobriety, and we are sober.


Our suffering is not meaningless. It is seen It is counted. It is coming to an end.


Fallen, fallen is Babylon the great. It will fall. The towers will fall. The empire is not eternal.


The empire really is drunk. The empire’s mad. But the true feast is coming.

The Worst Wine

Wine is joy. Divine generosity. Wine is the image of covenant. Of transformation. Of new life. Of the arrival of God’s kingdom.


Creation is good, right – it’s not to be rejected. And the good wine is the goodness of creation.

Water becomes wine – the old law gives way to the fulfilment of the law. The old revelation to the new one. Just like the old scriptures are transformed.

The best wine is kept until last, right? The fullness of the new revelation …


Wine gladdens, in scripture. It’s for a people who need to be gladdened. For those needful of joy, who are lacking in joy.


The medicine of immortality – that’s what Ignatius calls it.


Wine gladdens, right? And we need to be gladdened. We need joy. We’re lacking in joy.

New wine in new wineskins. Where new wine means the new power of the gospel.  And new wineskins mean new human lives and communities.

The new wineskins are renewed people.


The best wine is kept to the last, that’s what they say. The worst wine is what you drink after the last. When there is no last.


This wine’s definitely alive. With some weird kind of life.


This wine’s full of a weird kind of algae. A black algae. A dead algae.

Do you get zombie algae? Is it, like, anti-algae, like the anti-dragon in Game of Thrones?


This wine’s humming. Or singing. Or something.

I think it’s hissing.


The wine is probably plotting terrible things.


I think this wine is hostile to us. It’s, like, evil wine. Forked tongue wine. Milked from some serpent.


This wine is the katabasis. It’s taking us down, down, down.


This is what the world is, this wine. It’s concentrated essence of world. of everything. Of nature. In its total hostility to us.

Old Wine in Old Skins

Wine is about the arrival of the messianic age, right? About the generosity of God. It’s about joy replacing lack.

New wine in new wine skin – it’s about coming of the messiah. It’s about the future banquet. It’s about the kingdom of God. It’s about hope. Fulfilment.

But this is old wine, in old skin.


The rotting wine in rotting skin. The putrescent wine in putrescent skin. The senescent wine, in senescent skin. That’s as old as anything in the world. As rotten as anything in the world. As decayed.


The wine has been rotting all the length of time. The wine has been curdling all the length of time. The wine has reached the deepest rancidity.

It’s like it’s been cursed, this wine. Just as everything’s been cursed.


Tasting notes of, like, original sin. Of cosmic curse. Of damnation. Notes of all the circles of hell.

Notes of strangulation. Notes of sin, deep sin. Notes of defiance. Notes of perversity. Notes of abomination.


This wine is seething. It’s satanic. It was probably made to be part of some satanic ritual.  


This wine’s, like, bubbling with sheer satanism. It’s frothing, like the spittle on the mouth of a rabid dog. It’s foaming.


Tasting notes: rabid dog’s spittle. Cancer – can you taste cancer? Well, this is what cancer would taste like. Notes of pedophilia, probably. Of Jimmy Saville. All the disgusting things.

Livia’s Gnostic Ruse

Livia’s Gnostic ruse. Her Gnostic stratagem. The reason we’re here. Why Livia employed us.

We were prodigies of a sort, Livia said. Natural Gnostics. It came easily to us: world-rejection. World hatred!

She’d had to learn Gnosticism the hard way – the slow way, Livia said. She came to Gnosticism gradually. Through her mathematical research. Her philosophical research.

But with us – it was as though we were born to it, Gnosticism. As though we’d woken into it. As though we first opened our eyes in Gnosticism.

There was an attitude she saw in us, in our loser’s corner, Livia said. A stance. Towards everything. Towards Life. Towards ourselves. Towards what we were and are.

We lived in tension with it, the world. We lived against it. We lived in opposition.

We weren’t part of the world, that was the thing. We recoiled against the world – we couldn’t help it. We shuddered at the world – and it was a shuddering of everything we were.

That was our Gnosticism. Oh, it had nothing to do with our so-called philosophical research, Livia said. With our ostensible academic interests. It wasn’t about our writing projects; our papers, that we sent out to academic journals.

The spontaneous philosophy of our lives: that’s what mattered. Which is to say, the non-philosophy of our lives. Which meant, really, the idiocy of our lives. Which meant stupidity as a spiritual practice.

2

Yes, we were natural Gnostics, Livia said. But we had yet to allow ourselves to become Gnostics – not really. We had yet to really come into our Gnosticism, which is to say, our stupidity. At present, we were simply denying our Gnosticism. We were trying not to be idiots – too hard!

For too long, we’d wanted to prove our academic worth – to be taken seriously as academics. We’d wanted to be alone with books – to read, to jot down notes. Intellectual projects: we’d even had those. With which we were busy – so-called busy. Primitively, no doubt. Stupidly – without knowing what we were doing! But there we were, nonetheless, absorbed in our academic labours.

We had PhDs in philosophy, of course – how was that possible? Who’d awarded us PhDs? What lapse had there been in the logic of the universe? No doubt there had been some drastic fall in the standard of UK doctoral research, Livia said. No doubt the quantum leap in grade inflation in UK education had reached PhD study, especially at the dubious universities from which we’d come.

But it wasn’t because of our PhDs that Livia employed us. It wasn’t the crappy papers we wrote that we’d placed in the worst of academic journals. It wasn’t the crappy books some of us had virtually vanity-published.

It was the quality of our idiocy.

3

Only Livia could savour it, the quality of our idiocy. Only Livia knew it, our idiocy, in its true dimensions.

The potential of our idiocy: that’s what she saw. The way it might be used.

In her philosophy department! As her philosophy department! Even in, and perhaps especially as, the inevitable failure of her philosophy department!

Anarchy in the academy! That’s what we were to be. Idiocy in the academy! Tomfoolery in the academy! Jokes and jesters in the academy. Unleashed! At play! Abroad! That’s what Livia wanted.

We were Livia’s plague. Livia’s contagion. Livia’s rats, to be set loose in the academy, as you’d set loose vermin into a building you wanted to be condemned.

She was a vandal, Livia. She was a demolition expert. We were her barbarian horde. We were her football hooligans. We were her rioters. Her looters! Her smash and grabbers!

We were her Viking raiders, Livia! We were her hyperbolists! Her degenerates! Her mutant army! Her flying monkeys! Dysgenics in person!

4

Livia created us, in a sense. She uttered the words, Let there be idiots. And idiot-Gnostics! She found us, in our loser’s corner. She knew us for what we were, and could be.

This was the hour of our stupidity: that’s what Livia discerned. The moment when our idiocy steps forward. Becomes – important. Becomes Gnostic.

In the face of the world – of what the world had become. In the teeth of the university – of what the university had become. In defiance of analytic philosophy – of what philosophy had become.

Wasn’t it only now – now – that she could have discerned us, Livia? Wasn’t it because of the present crisis, which Livia had also discerned? Wasn’t that how we could help her blast her way out of the academic continuum?

Which was why it was a question of reaching it, our stupidity – which is to say, our Gnosticism, Livia said. Of owning it, our idiocy – of becoming worthy of it. Of dwelling in it, our idiocy.

5

Livia’s idiot’s assemble. Livia’s Z-team.

She needed a general apocalypticist: Furio.

She needed an expert on advanced conspiracy theories: Driss.

She needed an all-purpose dunce, who was nothing but impostor’s syndrome: Sophia.

She needed a Christian on the scene: Io. We’re in a spiritual war, she said, so we need a spiritual badass. A punk Christian badass!

She needed a visionary, savant, touched by the heavenly fire: Fiver.

She needed someone to write her Idiotbuch. With an Indian twist: me.

And doesn’t every philosophical gang needs a crap Heideggerian? Like the fat kid in old Hollywood movies. There has to be one …

And there we were, her toy European philosophy department – a miniature breed of Continental philosophy, she said, we remember. Like toy poodles! Like Yorkshire terriers! It wasn’t about us as individuals. It was about our collective idiocy. The constellation of our idiocy.

6

The danger: that we would be absorbed by the university. That we would become part of the university. Comfortable in our jobs! In our university offices! With our office pot plants! With our office posters!

The danger: that we’d give ourselves over the to the rhythms of the university. To working through the academic terms, the academic semesters. Through year after academic year.

Through all the academic meetings! The Boards of Studies and the Boards of Examiners. The Staff-Student Committees and the Education Committees.

The danger: that we’d come to feel at home in the university. That we’d feel that we deserved to be there, in the university. That we’d greet colleagues in the corridors, in the university.

The danger: that Philosophy, Livia’s department, would become naturalised at Mercia. That the university would get used to us, and we’d get used to it.

The danger: that we’d confuse ourselves for players in UK continental philosophy. That we’d rise up in the world, as part of the UK European philosophy scene. That we weren’t just ignorable anymore. That we weren’t sumply contemptable. That we weren’t fly-by-nights, soon to disappear.  

The danger: that we’d be taken to be fixtures, of a sort, in UK continental philosophy. That we were in it for the long haul, and worth getting to know. That we might lend a hand as  external examiners, or something. A PhD examiners. As external degree validators. As co-investigators on a research bid, who knows?

The danger: that we’d become institutionalised, in UK European philosophy. That we were part of mutual advantage networks. Of department on department boosterism. Whatever next: would one of us be asked to become Treasurer of the British Society of Continental Philosophy? Join the Executive of Hermeneutica Scotia? Become the Secretary of the European Philosophy Circle?

The danger: that Livia’s department would become a UK Continental Philosophy powerbase. That we’d become people to meet. People of influence! Eventually, professors. Eventually, heads of learned societies and editors of academic journals. Eventually, commissioners of books for book series. Eventually, keynoters. Worth buttering-up after our papers (‘Very rich. Very interesting.’) Worth Flattering. Worth Cultivating. Worth Attending to in general. Worth sitting next to at conference meals.

The danger: that we’d be on the inside. Recognised at conferences. Greeted. Nodded to. Waved at. That we’d be thought of as Going Somewhere. That we’d think of ourselves as no longer on our hiding to nothing. That we’d become an integral part of it, the Anglophone Continental Philosophy machine. The European philosophy in the UK operation.

The danger: that there’d even develop a kind of mystique about us, the Mercia people. The European philosophers of Merica.

The danger: that we’d lose our sense of absolute precarity. Of original part-timers’ sin. That we’d forget the part-time horror! Our part-time trembling! Our part timer’s fear!

The danger: that we’d forget what it did to our heads, part-timism! What it did to our hearts, being casual academic labour! What it did to our souls: the part-time perpetual emergency. The part-time panic!

The danger: that we’d lose our instinctual world-hatred. Our spontaneous horror. Our disgust for everything!

The danger: that we’d lose our world horror! Our world dread! Such as we knew it at the height of our drunkenness! That we’d lose our drive deathwards. Our apocalyptic thirst. For the end blow to come! For the guillotine blade to flash down!

The danger: that we’d fall from the Great Hatred. The promise of Correction – of the coming Deletion. Of the act of Erasure. Of the divine Wipe-Out. The wave of Destruction, great than we are. The Catastrophe even greater than our catastrophe.

The danger: that we’d forget that we were the Abomination. That we’d lose the dynamics of self-hatred. The life of our self-hatred. That we’d fall from the pinnacle of disgust and self-disgust. From our auto-allergic reaction to ourselves as UK European thinkers.

There was the question of maintaining the Gnostic tension. Of charging up the Gnostic forcefield, the Gnostic Kraftheld, as Livia put it. Of holding onto our apocalyptic disappointment. Of our experience of the endless death of God – of the failure of all eschatologies.

And if that was to happen, there could be no complacency – no mercy. Mercilessness: that’s what Livia would have to be, if things were to be kept at a Gnostic peak, in tip-top Gnostic conditions.

She would have to disappear, Livia, from our lives. She would have to drop her position as Head of Philosophy. She’d have to withdraw her protection from us, her Z-team. No longer stand between us and the university! No longer hold it at bay: the academic horror.

Livia herself would have to disappear, if she was to save us – which means to save our Gnosticism. Livia had to give us a Gnostic push – by exiting stage right. That was the only way she could let us become what we were. What we could be.

But there was more than that. Livia had to prepare the downgoing of her philosophy department – she had to ready its sacrifice, her philosophy department. She had to offer it to be swallowed up whole by Organisational Management.

7

And so Livia placed me in charge, the most unlikely leader. Her anti-protégé. Her idiot-in-chief.

And so Livia sealed the deal with Alan: the future of philosophy at Mercia.

And so on Livia left her job, left her city. Left her flat in the James Knott Memorial Flats. Leaving behind only what remained of her wine cellar – thirteen bottles. Disgusting bottles! So that we’d never become complacent in our drinking.

Livia’s departure would bring us most truly into our Gnosticism. Livia’s tsimsum would let us become what we are – would complete her act of creation.

Philosophy at Mercia, abandoned. Philosophy, left to itself – but only thereby coming into itself. As the world’s first idiotic department. As the only Gnostic philosophy department in the world.

Primal Scene

(My story. My primal scene.

Livia knew about my literaro-philosophical escape capsule. She knew what I was hoping for. She knew my bust-out plan. My tunnel out of philosophy. She knew all about my philosophico-literary opus.

I had failed philosophically – of course I had. Anyone could see that I had failed – and would never do anything other than fail. But I was going to convert my failure. Change its meaning, my failure.

Because I was going to write it up, my philosophical failure. I was going to make literature out of all my philosophical failures!

Which meant I had never really been committed to philosophy – not really. Hadn’t I always been merely watching myself so-called philosophise? Wasn’t it always a matter of observing my failure to philosophise from a distance. And from a literary distance!

Because I’d taken out literary insurance against philosophical failure. Because I had my literary side-hustle, which was also a literary sidestep. I thought I’d found a literary loophole. A literary get-out clause. Something to escape my failed UK European philosopher destiny.

I was going to write the last will and testament of UK European philosophy, Livia says. UK European philosophy’s last gasp. UK European philosopher’s last fumblings in the dark. Its last attempts to pin the tail on the philosophical donkey …

Literature: that’s where my dreams of genius went. Literary writing: that’s where I stowed it, unlike my peers who only ever had philosophical dreams.

A genius of non-philosophical-genius: that’s what I wanted to be. A literary writer who could make good on his non philosophical genius. Very cunning. A genius-move all by itself.

Of course, the potential flaw in the plan was obvious: for wasn’t writing literature just as hard as writing philosophy, if not harder? Wasn’t it the case that the European literature-meisters I admired, that they were as much geniuses as the European philosophy-meisters I revered- if not more so?

Did I really think I was going to be a Blanchot 2.0? Livia asked. That I was going to be a new Hélène Cixous? Was I going to rise to the rank of a Marina Tsvetayeva? Of a Marguerite Duras? Did I really think I had the literary chops? The delicacy of literary register? The profound relationship to the language of literature? To the European greats? Who was I to try to make his literary mark after the massif of world modernist literature?

But I had an answer to that, too, Livia knew. I thought of myself as writing in a post-literary time. I conceived myself as writing at a time after literature – when all the prestige of literature had evaporated; when you couldn’t do that high-falutin’ stuff anymore. You couldn’t write in a high literary register, not anymore – not if you didn’t want to live in bad faith.

The time of literature had passed! The time of the possibility of writing literary fiction had receded. The ultimate excuse: these aren’t literary times, so I can’t be a literary genius.

The only way to carry great European literature forward was by eschewing everything that was European in literature. By writing Britishly. By keeping a British distance from the European fire from heaven. Which is to say, a farcical distance! A bumbling distance! The distance of an idiot, and a British idiot.

The literature (non-literature) true to our times was a farcical literature. A literature after the literary fall, the cultural collapse.

And didn’t I even dream of combining my non-literature with my non-philosophy? Didn’t I dream of writing my failed literature about my failed philosophy? My attempt to become a UK European philosophy was just as farcical as my attempt to become a UK European literary writer. And what’s more, it redoubled the farce. It multiplied the farce. It drove the farce to infinity.


No one ever accepts that they’re an idiot, Livia said. No one ever calls themselves an idiot and means it. They think they’re smart enough to know their so-called idiocy. As though they could outwit it – as though they might master it, by calling it idiocy; and by that they are thereby most assuredly not idiots. And that’s what my literaro-philosophy was for me, she said: my method of mastery. Which was a method of denial!

I called it idiocy. I called it a farce. As though you could intentionally create a work of idiocy! As though creating a farce was something you aimed at, rather than happened through failure.

The hubris! Did I really think I could outwit stupidity itself? That I’d made a move that changed the literary game – and the philosophical game?

My role was only to complete it, my idiocy. To fulfil it. To set the seal upon my idiocy by writing the book that could only be the book of my idiocy – and of idiocy in general. By writing the book of the Mercia Philosophy Department and its idiocy.

And wasn’t that Livia’s project: to write a book of idiocy? Wasn’t what she saw in me at that British Society for Continental Thought, all those years ago: my potential to find a form for Livia’s Idiotbuch?

My idiot’s cry. My dunce’s howl. My one-man protest against my British philistinism. My British provincialness, despite my second-generation Indianness. And my utterly inability to escape that philistinism – that provincialness!

Only once the idiotbuch is complete will the lightning strike, Livia said. Only when it’s finally done, will the world be shown as what it is. By the lightning’s light! By the lightning flash!


Livia used to quiz me about it: the origins of my literaro-philosophical writing. My philosophico-literary writing.

She used to make me tell it to her again: how I began my philosophico-literary writing in my Hertfordshire University years. As I commuted between campuses of Hertfordshire years. Between the Aldenham campus, the St Albans campus, the Hatfield campus. As I commuted to and from Watford, where I had my bedsit. Where I scraped by on my part-time wage, an itinerant hourly-paid philosophy lecturer on the Hertfordshire plain.

Listening to Penderecki on the extra-slow bus between the campuses of Hertfordshire University. Reading Mandelstam on the stopping-everywhere bus. Listening to Ligotti, on the requiring-infinite-patience bus. Reading Hélène Cixous on the stuck-in-various-traffic-jams bus.

And working in a department actually hostile to European philosophy, at Hertfordshire University. That papered its walls with articles warning about the perils of European philosophy. Of the charlatanry of European philosophy! Claiming that Deleuze was a fraud! That Derrida was an impostor! There were pinned up photocopies of accounts of Heidegger’s Nazism! Of Paul de Man’s fascist journalism! Of reviews of Intellectual Impostures! Of Fashionable Nonsense!

And there I was, reading Edmund Jabes behind enemy lines. There I was, in my Watford bunker, reading Friedrich Hölderlin in the cold and the damp. There I was, reading Hélène Cixous and Maurice Blanchot – reading books that veritably flaunted their philosophico-literariness, their literaro-philosophicalness, in my Watford bedsit.

There I was, dreaming that writing my literaro-philosophico project might just be possible, might just squeeze through as the last literary gasp, the last philosophical gasp before UK European philosophy shuts down entirely.

But I’d made a mistake. I was still trying to imitate their high seriousness, the European literary authors, the European philosophical authors I admired. I still thought I could write a UK version of high European philosophico-literary prose.

I still hadn’t failed, fundamentally. I still wasn’t howling from the depths of disaster. I hadn’t understood by Britishness – even my British-Indianness – stood in the way of my essentially European ambitions.

Humour: that’s what I had yet discovered. Laughter in prose, not just in life – at myself. And at my laughter. Abyssal laughter, that falls into itself. That laughs at itself laughing.

And I didn’t know the horror yet. The poison – the lie: I hadn’t experienced them. They hadn’t driven down deeply enough inside me.

It hadn’t happened yet, the disaster. It hadn’t burst into my world. It hadn’t reached my bloodstream. Crossed my blood-brain barrier.

The state of exception. The tyranny. The great Violation. The Atrocity The great Obliteration. That would break my life in two. That would reveal the Real Forces. Show the Whole. Reveal what was coming. What they had planned for us. That was to come. That’s what would show itself in my paper at the Society for Continental Philosophy annual conference. That’s what would roar out of them then, with only Livia knowing what it meant.)

If You Ruin it …

The paragraduates, or whoever they are, want it to fall apart. They want to accelerate the collapse. To bring on the disaster. They want more ruins.

I thought it was just natural.

Do you think plaster falls off the walls like that? That the ceiling caves in, like that bit over there? Do you think rain just gathers in pools on the floor? And the wild dogs? Where did the wild dogs come from?


If you ruin it, they will come …

Sure they’ll come – and ruin things even more. Is it going to be knocked down? It is now. Now that the paras have got to work on it.