5:30 am breakthrough

THE QUESTION THAT CONCERNS ME THEN IS HOW DO WE TALK ABOUT SOMETHING THAT HAS NO SINGULAR DESIGNATION, NO DEFINITE ATTRIBUTES, NO STATIC FORM TO CALL ITS OWN. aFTER ALL ISN'T THAT THE QUESTION WITH WHICH COMPOSITION IS IS ALWAYS STRUGGLING? HOW DO WE TEACH SOMETHING WITHOUT A SINGULAR FORM OR AIM AND TO STUDENTS FROM DIFFERENT BACKGROUNDS, WITH DIFFERENT NEEDS AND EXPERIENCES? WRITING PEDAGOGY IS IN A SENSE A PEDAGOGY THAT OCCUPIES---NO, NO, THAT MUST OCCUPY-- AN UNPLACE. IT'S AS GEOFFERY SIRC SAYS A 'HAPPENING' CONSTANTLY IN FLUX, A MOMENT OF WRITING IS UNABLE TO BE AUTHENTICALLY REPRODUCED, A MOMENT WHICH MUST CONSTANTLY BEING INVENTED AND REINVENTED IN HOPES OF A KAIROTIC BRINGING FORTH. HOW MIGHT THIS necessarily imprecise practice, THIS REPETITION OF AN ACKNOWLEDGED ALWAYS-IMPERFECT PARADIGM ENCOURAGE INVENTION? HOW MIGHT the very ambiguity surrounding what writing is AND HOW TO EMBODY IT actually help us to INVENT, to invent in THE WAY THAT MUCKELBAUER ARGUES IMITATION INVENTS?

HOW MIGHT THE EXPERIENCE OF ARTICULATING THE CHORA IN A NECESSARILY IMPRECISE AND INADEQUATE WAY LEAD TO INVENTION? HOW HAS DISCOURSE ON THE CHORA ALREADY INVENTED NEW WAYS OF THINKING ABOUT WRITING AND RHETORIC AND IDEAS OF PLACE? MIGHT THE INADEQUACIES OF CHORATIC DISCOURSE ACTUALLY BE THE PURPOSE, AS JUDITH BUTLER SUGGESTS, OF THE CHORA?