I found the two essays by Jorege Borges and Gale Rhodes rather interesting. The first one by Borges titled "Borges and I", although not apparent at first, is about the author talking about his two selves. The one being his personal self, the one that feels and does things, his body one could say. The other, which I find an interesting distinction, is the sense of himself as what he leaves behind. His professional life and works and what we eventually end up leaving behind, and worries if it actually resembles his personal self at all. This is interesting because of the fact that most people don't make this distinction between the works of Shakespeare, or the man himself for example. We can't meet him obviously but all we have of people from history is what is left behind.
The second essay by Gale Rhodes discusses this one written by Borges, though she draws different conclusions from his short page long essay. She focuses on, as a structual biologist, the interactions we have with our body and mind and focuses on the disconnect with what we feel with out body and what we actually know about it in a scientific sense. She interprets the disconnect of himself from his personal work more as a feeling that we all have different selves and different periods of what interests and motivates us. In this way, how can we say that something I've written five years before was written by the same person as I am now. Although I like her interpretation, I'm not sure that Borges just wasn't writing something about his exestentialism and the fleetingness of life.
Franziska
I found the two essays by Jorge Luis [Sp,W] Borges and Gale Rhodes rather interesting. The first one, [P] by Borges, [s.a.] titled "Borges and I," [P-BE or NAE] although not apparent at first, is about the author talking about his two selves, [P] the [Sp-caps]one being his personal self--[P]the one that feels and does things, his body one could say;[P]the other, which I find an interesting distinction, is the sense of himself as what he leaves behind--[P]his professional life and works and what he [ref,coh,M] eventually ends up leaving behind--[P]and worries about [prep] whether [W,coh,M]it actually resembles his personal self at all. This is interesting because of the fact that most people don't make this distinction between, say, [foc,coh] the works of Shakespeare, and the man himself. [s.a.] We can't meet him obviously, [P] and all we have of himhe is what [foc,coh,ref] left behind.
AntwortenLöschenThe second essay, [P] by Gale Rhodes, [s.a.] analyses Borges’s text, [E,M,coh] though she draws different conclusions from his short page-long [Sp] essay. She focuses on, as a structual biologist, the interactions we have with our body and mind and focuses on the disconnect with what we feel with out body and what we actually know about it in a scientific sense. She interprets the disconnect of himself from his personal work more as a feeling that we all have different selves and different periods of what interests and motivates us. In this way, how can I [foc] say that I am [foc,ref,coh,M,E] the same person as the one who [s.a.]wrote something five years ago. [s.a.] Although I like her interpretation, I'm not sure that Borges wasn’t just [WO] writing something about his existentialism and the fleetingness of life.