Nous présentons dans cet article une expérimentation touchant à l’enseignement/apprentissage de la phonétique dans laquelle étaient engagés des étudiants chypriotes hellénophones de niveau B2-C1, inscrits dans un Master en didactique du français langue étrangère. Cette expérimentation était centrée sur un texte littéraire, le poème de Guillaume Apollinaire « Le Pont Mirabeau », et avait pour but de sensibiliser les participants à l’importance d’enseigner la phonétique dans leurs futures classes de FLE et à l’attrait que peut avoir l’apprentissage de ce domaine (...) du langage. La procédure de ce projet de recherche a comporté cinq étapes : 1) Lecture préliminaire du poème par les participants ; 2) Cours de phonétique et retour sur la lecture préliminaire ; 3) Seconde lecture du poème par les participants ; 4) Analyse phonétique des deux lectures ; 5) Entretiens semi-dirigés entre chercheurs et participants. Nous concluons par une évaluation générale de l’expérimentation. (shrink)

Biographies of Imam Ghazali, Socrates, Plato and other philosophers.

History of philosophical thought of Vietnam up to XX century.

History of political ideology in Vietnam.

History of government under the Lý-Trần dynasty, from XI-XIV centuries in Vietnam.

L’exploration archéologique du site de l’Arkipiskopi dans la vieille ville de Nicosie, conduite par Fryni Hadjichristofi et son équipe (Département des Antiquités de Chypre) de 2009 à 2011 puis en 2016, a mis au jour les vestiges d’un puits à roue élévatrice appelé à Chypre αλακάτιν/alakatin et plus habituellement connu dans le monde méditerranéen sous le nom de sakieh. S’il en existe des exemplaires plus anciens dans l’île, c’est la première machine hydraulique à traction animale permettant de puiser l’eau (...) dans un puits profond fouillée à Nicosie pour les époques latine, ottomane et anglaise. Cette étude entend d’abord examiner et interpréter les vestiges de ces structures au regard des informations livrées par des documents d’archives et des récits de voyageurs, des dessins de la fin du xvie et du début du xviiie siècle, un plan de 1882 et le cadastre de 1948, afin d’en mieux saisir les contextes de fonctionnement sur une longue durée. Elle présente aussi les godets de terre fixés sur la roue pour le puisage de l’eau et qui, à de rares exceptions, ont complètement échappé aux études céramologiques conduites dans l’île. (shrink)

In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:Reports of the Death of the AuthorDonald KeeferReports of the death of the author have been greatly exaggerated. Throughout Western history, the death of a hero, the disappearance of something sacred, the fall of a leader, or the defeat of a powerful people has signaled cultural crises and the coming of anxiety-filled transformations towards an unknowable future. When Friedrich Nietzsche wrote the belated obituary on the death of God, (...) he was well aware of its enormity. He complains that millennia will pass before humanity will overcome its living in the “immense frightful shadow” of God. 1 Roland Barthes’s 1968 notice on “The Death of the Author,” however, announces an analogous loss of the “Author-God” with nothing but smug confidence: “We know to give writing its future, it is necessary to overthrow the myth: the birth of the reader must be at the cost of the death of the Author.” 2 Since his actual death in 1980, and despite his writings contra the author, Barthes has become the sort of Author declared moribund in his article, as he is attentively read and dutifully quoted with adulation by artists, art and literary critical theorists alike. 3For Abigail Solomon-Godeu, writing on photography, the death of the author, and by extension, the artist and composer, as theorized by Barthes, was a cornerstone in a new age of cultural production and consumption. Readers would be liberated from the tyranny of authorial authority. She links the transgressive edge of “appropriative art,” found in such works as photographer Sherry Levine’s photographs of famous photographs, to playing out the cultural consequences of Barthes’s manifesto. “The dismantling of the notion of unique subjectivity Barthes understood as a salutary blow struck against ossified and essential retrograde bourgeois humanism.” 4 The paramount irony is [End Page 78] that the Four Henchman of the Authorial Apocalypse, Roland Barthes, Michel Foucault, Jacques Derrida, and Paul De Man, are given the godlike status of founding fathers of postmodernism by practically every writer on the current art scene. The program to “challenge the symbolic itself,” is accepted as a sacred charge by the new cultural clerisy. 5Nearing three decades of postmortem of the author, what has changed? The “death of the author” has given birth not to the reader, but to a booming industry of “discursive practices,” or the production of texts on texts. And clearly, not one of the producers of these texts would happily give credit to discourse itself for their byline. Despite postmodern misgivings about authority and propriety, we can still be sued for appropriating without their permission words and ideas theoretically the product of language itself! 6 Isn’t it high time that we began to demand some sort of truth in advertising or reporting on matters such as these?Margit Sutrop has lamented in the pages of this journal the resilient attitudes of those cultural critics who take as axiomatic Barthes’s claims: “Even the sharpest philosophical analysis has had no influence on those speaking about the death of the author.” 7 In fact, many of the critiques are so good, one must wonder if our continuing concern with Barthes isn’t bordering on overkill. Sutrop sees that Barthesian proponents have too much invested in the thesis to be moved. She then acknowledges that arguments might prove fruitless against the force of a metaphor. This is a very troubling concession however. There is nothing surprising about a community’s lack of self-criticism except when that community advertises itself as the party that dares to challenge all. The convenience of certain “truths,” or beliefs not subject to correction ought always to make us suspicious.The truth is Barthes’s attack has much less to do with authors than with a style of reading: “We know that a text is not a line of words releasing a single ‘theological’ meaning (the ‘message’ of the Author-God), but a multi-dimensional space in which a variety of writings, none of them original, blend and clash” (DOA, p. 146). The tenacity of Barthes’s supporters is a function of the sort of reading that Barthes licenses here and in his other works. Clearly... (shrink)

Buku berjudul Franz Magnis Suseno: Sosok dan Pemikirannya, berisi tiga belas artikel yang terdiri dari empat artikel mengenai sosok Franz Magnis-Suseno, lima artikel mengenai pemikiran Magnis, dan empat artikel sebagai catatan, ditulis oleh beliau-beliau yang tidak diragukan lagi profesionalisme mereka. Baiklah kini dimulai dengan mengulas dahulu lima pokok pemikiran yang secara singkat dapat disebut secara tematis: 1) tentang Pancasila, 2) tentang Etika Dialog, 3) tentang sosok agama modern, 4) tentang menalar Tuhan dari dunia, 5) tentang pendekatan ilmiah sesuai teori multijagat (...) dan celah kuantum bagi Tuhan. Ternyata urutan pengulasan tidak sesuai dengan urutan dalam buku, agak mengalami perubahan karena pertimbangan tematik yang runtut.... Komaruddin Hidayat menyebut Magnis sebagai pejuang moral dan pembela hak azasi manusia. Bukankah kekuatan agama menjadi sumber moral dan penggerak masyarakat dalam bidang pendidikan, ekonomi dan lingkungan hidup demi timbulnya kelas menengah yang mandiri? Anjurannya sebaiknya ormas-ormas agama mengambil jarak dari per- mainan politik praktis, dan tidak menjadi bagian birokrasi dan politisi Lele yang sangat menikmati kondisi air keruh yang berlumpur. Kami ingat pepatah memancing di air keruh. Salah satu pemakalah F. Budi Hardiman menyebutkan bahwa Magnis tidak menempuh spiritualitas jalan mistik, meskipun mengawali pengalaman hidup intelektual di Indonesia lewat etika Jawa dan mau tidak mau berurusan dengan wayang, tetapi lebih wayang purwa terkait dengan kejawen atau kebatinan. Pada makalah perihal Etika Dialog pula disebutkan oleh Budi Hardiman bahwa di Indonesia ada jalan lain untuk mengupayakan titik temu agama-agama, yaitu jalan mistik. Memang bila dikembalikan pada bentuk bentuk spiritualitas, spiritualitas mistik yang tidak menjadi pilihan, lebih pada spiritualitas religius, kosmik dan humanistik. Ini merupakan catatan pada ulasan Sudiarja. Kini pemakalah pertama yang disebut terakhir ialah Al. Andang L Binawan yang menarik ulasannya perihal riwayat hidup dan panggilan Magnis, dan penting menyebutkan pada usia 11 tahun sudah berniat menjadi Jesuit, meskipun sempat diuraikan dengan simpatik Magnis kurang suka latihan doa panjang-panjang malah lebih suka latihan musik, dan hobby naik gunung hingga sekarang masih tapi sudah berkurang. Ia juga menguasai dua hal yang perlu baginya ialah Marxisme dan Kromo Inggil. Baginya Tuhan adalah kebenaran, keadilan dan kasih. (Toeti Heraty N. Roosseno, Guru Besar Emeritus Ilmu Filsafat, Universitas Indonesia). (shrink)

Abstrak: Kitab Suci merupakan Sabda Allah yang menjadi tumpuan hidup dan sumber kebenaran bagi umat beriman. Posisinya begitu agung dan penting. Sayangnya, banyak umat Kristiani yang kesulitan untuk memahami isi Kitab Suci. Artikel ini bertujuan untuk memperkenalkan salah satu metode menafsirkan Kitab Suci yang relatif mudah untuk digunakan oleh semua kalangan, yakni metode Analisis Naratif. Dalam artikel ini, metode tersebut akan digunakan untuk menganalisis perikop tentang “Kelahiran Samuel” (1 Samuel 1:1-28). Melalui analisis atas teks ini pula, hendak dipaparkan beberapa pesan (...) teologis yang dapat meng- inspirasi kehidupan umat beriman. Secara praktis, artikel ini berikhtiar menunjukkan bahwa metode analisis naratif cukup berjasa dalam mem- permudah umat Kistiani menafsirkan atau menggali pesan-pesan teologis dari teks-teks alkitabiah. Kata-kata Kunci: Analisis Naratif, Kitab Suci, kelahiran Samuel, iman, doa, pesan teologis. Abstract: Holy Bible (Scripture) is the Word of God. It is the foundation of life and the source of truth for the faithful. Its position is very great and important, but unfortunately, many Christians find it difficult to understand the content of Scripture. This article would like to introduce one method of interpreting Scripture that is relatively easy to be used by all circles, the method of Narrative Analysis. In this article, the method will be used to analyze the passage about “Birth of Samuel” (1 Samuel 1:1-28). Through the analysis of this text, the writer also offers some theological messages that can inspire the life of faith. Practically, it can be argued that the method of narrative analysis is meritorious in facilitating Christian people to interpret or explore theological messages of biblical texts. Keywords: Narrative analysis, scripture (holy bible), Samuel’s birth, faith, prayer, theological messages. (shrink)

Dengan umur hampir dua ribu tahun Gereja Katolik merupakan lembaga paling tua yang mempertahankan diri melalui sejarah. Bagi Gereja Katolik sejarah itu penuh makna. Karena dalam perjalanannya melalui 20 abad eksisten-sinya Gereja Katolik mendapat bentuk serta pengertian diri yang sekarang. Maka sudah tepatlah kalau Norman Tanner, seorang imam Yesuit dan guru besar sejarah Gereja pada Universitas Gregoriana di Roma, dengan mendasarkan diri pada hasil penelitian sejarah Gereja yang berlimpah dalam 40 tahun terakhir, menulis sebuah “Sejarah Pendek Baru Gereja Katolik.” Hanya (...) dengan 260 halaman pembaca diantar secara kompeten menapaki 2000 tahun perjalanan Gereja Katolik. Gereja Katolik selalu menegaskan bahwa Kitab Suci hanya dapat dimengerti dalam ketertanaman dalam sebuah tradisi. Sebagaimana ditegaskan Tanner, “tradisi memegang peran normatif.” Pengertian tentang hakikat Kekristenan berkembang melalui sejarah. Gereja Katolik yakin “bahwa Kitab Suci harus disertai oleh suatu kesadaran tentang bagaimana pesannya dihayati dan dimengerti melalui berabad-abad lamanya, oleh suatu rasa bagaimana isi Kitab Suci dijernihkan oleh ajaran pihak-pihak berwenang dalam Gereja maupun melalui hidup, sembahyang, studi dan perjuangan umat Kristiani.” Karena itu, Gereja Katolik sekarang tidak dapat dimengerti kalau sejarahnya tidak dimengerti. Tanner membagi sejarah Gereja ke dalam lima tahap. Tahap pertama mencakup 300 tahun pertama di mana Gereja keluar dari dua setengah abad usaha penindasan dan penganiayaan oleh pemerintah kekaisaran Romawi, dan akhirnya menjadi agama resmi. Tahap kedua mulai dengan berakhirnya kekaisaran Romawi bagian Barat pada abad ke-5 dan sampai pada 1054 di mana perpecahan tragis antara Gereja Timur, Gereja-gereja Ortodoks, dan Gereja Barat—Gereja Katolik-Roma—menjadi resmi dan definitif. Perpecahan tersebut masih berlangsung sampai hari ini......................................... Yang khas dari buku Tanner adalah bahwa uraian tidak dibatasi pada kejadian-kejadian sekitar Gereja resmi: Konsili-konsili, Paus-paus yang penting, peristiwa-peristiwa dengan dampak historis seperti perpecahan antara Gereja Barat dan Gereja Timur atau Reformasi Protestan. Dalam buku ini juga dibicarakan ordo-ordo dan gerakan-gerakan religius, teolog-teolog penting, keagamaan rakyat, perkembangan-perkembangan intelektual, perkembangan dalam liturgi, doa dan mistik. Juga dibahas mengenai senirupa, arsitektur dan musik, bahkan sikap Thomas Aquinas terhadap liburan, olah raga dan entertainment. Kehidupan Katolik di basis pun ikut diceriterakan. Buku ini memberikan suatu tinjauan yang kaya dan berbobot tentang 2000 tahun kehidupan Gereja Katolik; bisa juga dikatakan, tentang perkembangan dari Kristianitas ke Gereja Katolik sekarang, dalam bahasa yang mudah diikuti dan dengan gaya naratif yang enak dibaca. Sebuah buku yang dapat sangat direkomendasikan bagi siapa saja yang ingin mendapat pengertian ringkas, tetapi cukup mendalam, tentang bagaimana Gereja Katolik menjadi Gereja Katolik. (Franz Magnis-Suseno, Program Pascasarjana, Sekolah Tinggi Filsafat Driyarkara, Jakarta). (shrink)

A ciência fenomenológica procura tratar os fenômenos como puras possibilidades. Tudo o que se doa para a consciência tem a possibilidade de ser descrito tal e qual se mostra por si mesmo numa intuição. O sujeito transcendental é o fundamento receptivo para o que é dado e, é dele, que partem os raios intencionais, dos quais os fenômenos ganham um sentido de ser de algo. Deus para ter sentido de “Deus” precisa ser para um sujeito. Mas, como Deus se doa? (...) Ele não é tal como os objetos que são dados de imediato para a consciência, mas mediado por uma teleologia da própria razão. O presente artigo se propõe pensar no tratamento que Husserl dá a sua fenomenologia como metafisica, partindo da subjetividade transcendental e destacando se “Deus” não excede ou seria outro fundamento ao lado do ego puro. A partir daí, procura-se ressaltar como o “fenômeno Deus” aparece no seu sistema fenomenológico, verificando como isso se dá em seus escritos inéditos apresentados por Jocelyn Benoist e a abertura para uma fenomenologia metafísica com Jean Luc-Marion. (shrink)

continent. 2.1 (2012): 22–28. Jeroen Mettes burst onto the Dutch poetry scene twice. First, in 2005, when he became a strong presence on the nascent Dutch poetry blogosphere overnight as he embarked on his critical project Dichtersalfabet (Poet’s Alphabet). And again in 2011, when to great critical acclaim (and some bafflement) his complete writings were published – almost five years after his far too early death. 2005 was the year in which Dutch poetry blogging exploded. That year saw the foundation (...) of the influential, polemical, and populistically inclined weblog De Contrabas (The Double Bass), which became a strong force for internet poetry in Dutch in the years to follow. In the summer of that year, a lively debate raged in the aftermath of Bas Belleman’s article “ Doet poëzie er nu eindelijk toe ?” (“Does poetry finally matter now?”), on a blog specifically devoted to this question. Up to that point, the poetical debate in the Netherlands had largely been confined to literary reviews (which were often subsidized), having become mostly marginalized in more mainstream media, where poetry could be covered by only a small number of so-called authorities. As a result, literary debate had acquired a rather placid quality. Though a variety of camps with different aesthetics could be discerned, most poetical positions shared a general acceptance of poetry as a form of art somewhat apart from fundamental political concerns. Late modernists would pursue subtlety and density of reference. Others would insist poetry was best understood as a form of entertainment that should ideally be accessible and work well on the stage. Still others would insist that poetry is mostly a play with forms. Linguistically disruptive strategies were valued highly by some, but mostly for their aesthetic effect. Values of disinterested playfulness reigned supreme everywhere. Any idea that poetry could be a field in which one confronts politics and the world was decidedly marginal. This led to a climate in which most attempts at polemics were DOA, often based on far too superficial positioning and analysis. The greatest polemical debates were revolving around the question of whether poetry should be difficult or easy, with both camps defining their ideas of difficulty and accessibility in ways that were so utterly shallow as to make the entire point moot. Debates were performed, rather than engaged with. It was a postmodern hell of underarticulated poetics. Half-consciously, people were yearning for new forms of criticism that could put the oomph back into poetry. Weblogs provided for ways to explore debate directly outside of the clotted older channels of the reviews and the newspapers. Belleman’s essay and the resulting online activity had shown that there was a widespread eagerness to take poetry more seriously as a social art form. It was in this environment that Mettes started his remarkable project Dichtersalfabet . At that moment, Mettes was active mostly in academic circles, having become noted at Leiden University as a particularly gifted student of literary theory. Within the Netherlands, the field of literary theory has a very odd relationship to literature as it is practiced in the country. Academic theory tends to have a mostly international view and engage with international debates of cultural criticism, literary theory, and philosophy, with academics often publishing in English and attending conferences around the world. Literature itself however is much more concerned with domestic traditions. Consequently, in the Netherlands, there exists a language gap between academic theoretical practice (as it is studied in the literary theory departments) and literary practice (which, academically, gets studied in specialized departments of Dutch literature). The Dichtersalfabet can be seen as Mettes’s attempt to close this gap. It is also an attempt to bridge the divide between theory and practice, in which he could apply his theoretical knowledge in a very unorthodox and unacademic critical mode that moreover could reach far beyond the domain of conventional criticism. Mettes’s goal was to trace a diagonal through Dutch poetic culture, to “strangle” what he perceived to be its dominant oppressive traditions of agreeable irrelevance, in order to see whatever might be able to survive his critical assaults. But he could only do so by means of a very serious engagement with poetry itself. To this end, he would go systematically through the poetry bookshelf of the Verwijs bookshop (part of a mainstream chain of booksellers) in The Hague, buying one publication per blog item, starting from A and working his way through the alphabet, reading whatever he might encounter that way in the restaurant of the HEMA store (another big commercial chain in the country). He would subsequently write down his reading experiences, refraining however from trying to write a nuanced book review. Rather, he would write about anything that caught his attention and sparked his critical interest. This way of working would yield vast, at times somewhat rambling, dense, lively, and generally brilliant essays, in which he held no punches. He never hesitated to pull out his entire arsenal of concepts from the international theory traditions, while never degenerating into mere academic exercise and pointless intertextualities. The attempt was rather to live the poetry that he read, and to engage it with the full range of political, academic, cultural, and personal references that he had at his disposal—all that composed the individual named Jeroen Mettes as a reader. Often what he wrote would not be according to the standards of what we usually think of as a critical review of a book of poetry. Sometimes he would even be a little sloppy in his judgments of poets or representations of the books he read, for example by basing an entire essay on the blurb of a book rather than its poetry content. But what he did was always brilliant writing nonetheless—virtuoso riffs on poetic fragments randomly found within capitalist society, exposing an incisive and insistent poetical sensibility. Mettes read poetry for political reasons, to see whether poetry could offer him a way to deal with a political world he detested. The right-wing horrors of the Bush years, the Iraq war, and the turn of Dutch public opinion towards ever more conservative, narrow-minded, and xenophobic views alongside a complete failure of the political left to present any credible alternative, were weighing heavily on the times in which Mettes reported on his reading. Poetry was to measure this world, diagram it, to lay bare its inconsistencies and faults, to indicate where lines of flight might be found. Amid the ruins of a world wrecked by imperialist policies, corporate capitalism, and doctrinal neoliberalism it would have to show the possibility of a new community. And it was, through its rhythmical workings, to release the reading subject from his confinement to ideologically conditioned individuality and lead him into the immanent paradise of reading. The stakes were high. Much higher than anything Dutch poetry had seen for many years. Mettes’s blog was widely read from the start. His posts sparked lively debates. Some of these subsequently led to the publication of extensive essays on a few key poets in some literary journals, particularly Parmentier and the Flemish journal yang , for which Mettes would become a member of the editorial board, a few months after starting the Dichtersalfabet . This could have been the start of a brilliant career, but this was not to be. The initial manic energy that fueled the blog gradually subsided. The Alfabet was updated less and less regularly. Mettes sometimes just disappeared for many weeks, then suddenly returning with a brilliant essay. Until, on September 21, 2006, he posted his final blogpost, consisting of no text whatsoever. That night I learned from his mentor at Leiden University that he had committed suicide. Mettes and I had had some fruitful exchanges on poetry, rhythm, music, and form, mostly on the blogs, but also by email. Three weeks before his death was the last time I heard from him: a very sudden, uncharacteristically curt note saying “My old new sentence epic.” Attached to that message I found a DOC-file of a work so major that I felt intimidated. This was N30 , a text he had been working on for over five years. After his death, it took me a long time before I dared to read it in its entirety. In the meantime, the work of preparing the manuscript for publication was entrusted by his relatives to his colleagues at yang magazine. It took them a few years to brush up the text and to edit the Dichtersalfabet -blog (which, apart from the Alphabet project itself, incorporated many other fragments of political, polemical, and theoretical writing) into book form along with the essays. The result of this labor was finally published in 2011 as a two-book set, and Mettes burst onto the Dutch poetry scene for the second time. The work was widely reviewed, on blogs, in journals, magazines, and newspapers. Many critics who had not followed the blogs in 2005 showed themselves surprised, baffled even, by the intensity of Mettes’s critical writing. But for those who had read the blog, the main surprise was in the poetry. During Mettes’s lifetime, some of his poems had already been published in Parmentier . Although these were strong texts by themselves, in no way did they prepare readers for N30 . Nothing like it had been written in Dutch before. Instead, N30 explicitly follows the American tradition of Language Writing, directly referencing Ron Silliman and his concept of The New Sentence. However, it would seem that much of the poetical thinking around his use of this technique puts him closer to a writer such as Bruce Andrews. For Mettes, using non sequiturs as a unit of poetic construction was not only a way of reinventing formal textual construction, but it was another way of finding the fault lines in the social fabric. From the perspective of the Language tradition, one may put N30 somewhere between Silliman and Andrews. N30 shares an autobiographical element with Silliman’s New Sentence projects, and as in Andrews, there is a concern for mapping out social totality within text—what Mettes refers to as a “textual world civil war.” Again this shows a formal textual strategy for allowing the person “Jeroen Mettes” to be absorbed by the world, which here appears as a whirlwind of demotic and demonic chatter, full of violence, humor, intensity, beauty, disgust, sex, commerce, and strife. Influenced as it may by American precursors, Mettes’s tone and form end up quite different from his American counterparts, consistently referencing a world that is Dutch, all too Dutch, taking on the oppressive orderliness of Dutch society with its endemic penchant for consensus by introducing chaos into its daily life and laying bare its implicit aggressions. The work’s 31 chapters each have a different feel and rhythmical outline, but none of them follow a predetermined pattern. Rather, Mettes would consistently edit and reedit the text, randomly rewriting parts of it, as he explains in his poetical creed Politieke Poëzie (Political Poetry). N30 – referring to the 1999 antiglobalist protest in Seattle – was to be the first text of a trilogy. The work itself was written “in the mode of the present.” A second text was to be written in the mode of the future, and a third one, in the mode of the past, was going to be an epic poem about the Paris Commune, and to form an alternative poetic constitution for the European project. I still deeply regret that Jeroen Mettes never got to complete those projects, just as I would be very keen on knowing what he might have had to say about more recent political developments. Instead, in 2006, he remained stuck in the horrors of the present, that ended up consuming him completely. He left Dutch literature with some of its most piercing criticism and its most profoundly moving, exciting and powerful poetry. Excerpts from N30 Translated by Vincent W.J. van Gerven Oei from Jeroen Mettes. "N30." In N30+ . Amsterdam: De wereldbibliotheek, 2011. Published with permission of Uitgeverij Wereldbibliotheek, Amsterdam. Chapter 1 1999. A day is a space too. And another man, who had chained himself, had his ribs crushed, and a motor has driven over somebody’s legs. Dutch health care system spends ±145 million guilders per year on worriers. A spiderweb vibrates as I pass by. Randstad renovating. She slaps her bag against her ass: “Hurry up!” OPINION IS TRUE FRIENDSHIP Your skin. It doesn’t express anything. “But the use of the sword, that’s what I learned, and you’ll need nothing more for the moment.” Just try to interrogate a guy like that. Gullit in Sierra Leone. Codes silently lying all around. But that’s simply what belongs to “that it’s just allowed”: that sigh of “world” (a word expressing that the trees are now standing along the water like black men with white bags in their hair); that’s nothing else right? And you see how everything has to move, and first of all what cannot do so. Without Elysium and without savings, barbarians lashing out, horny for an enemy, staring across the water, staring into the air—staring to get out of it. “You’ve never showed me more than the mall,” she said. All those “dreams” in the end—and now? It was lying on the stairway, so I picked it up and took it upstairs. Chapter 3 “You know what?” Telecommunication. For love… I don’t really like that cheap cultural pessimism, but… The holy city is on pilgrimage in the earthly bodies of the faithful until the time of the heavenly kingdom has come. The end of an exhausting autumn day behind the computer, my eyes filled with tears of fatigue. KITCHEN / INSTALLATION / SPECIALIST. Network integration. In the sun, stretched out on a sheet. (…) I don’t believe what I’m reading, because I want to believe something else. An illusion? Suits me. There’s a variety of shapes and tastes… “So what?” you may think. 102 dalmatians can’t be wrong. But I want more, dear… A feel good movie. I’m smashing the burned body. So what? We continue to save the European civilization. What’s there to win? Plato with poets = Stalin without gulag? Ball against the crossbar. No wonder. She comes straight to her point. She’s standing in the kitchen eating an apple. (…) The godless Napoleon had used her as a stable and wanted to have her taken down. “Our” Rutger Hauer. Ready or not here I come. Psst… are you also wearing a string? Nobody understands our desire. Cliffs breaking the waves and shattering the sunset. I used to be a real romantic (as a poet). A typical fantasy used to be the one in which I brutally raped mother and daughter Seaver from the sitcom Growing Pains . Nevertheless you only contain bad words. Eyelashes. Automatic or manual? That your skin always in the afternoon. Integration. The air is empty. Too bad! Hand in hand on their lonely way. Alaska! Chapter 12 May 5, 2001 [10:00-10:30] A dust cloud on a hill. Globe. Indian (British) (tie) / pope. Damascus. Rape. We’re carrying the ayatollah’s portrait through the streets. At the moment the girl is mostly suede jacket with white ribbons on her sleeves. A small explosion flares up/impact. Camouflage. Close up. We’re analyzing the situation. He’s dead right? Dead dead. Dead. Everything without, these, and only with the body. Indices signal death. Dollar bills are printed in factories. Holes. Light patch. Globe in a box. Microphone. What’s the situation? Grey impact on a green hill (field?). The water is blue. He has no lips. Interns on the background with skirts that are too long. This is an example of a sonnet. An Islamic woman pushes against the door of an electronics shop. Arrows (percentages (prices)). Is this what awaits the American? Touch screen interface. The word, an island, can only be a sign in that situation. We pull up a chair, join in on the fun. On the shelves only books about computers. One glance in the distance is enough to lighten up a luna park in the distance. She’s really desperate, especially when she laughs. Click. Ah. Next. And now it’s raining, but that’s ok. Yellow stains sliding over the south. Shallow caves light: clothes, boots, electrical equipment. 45. 22:10. Nothing gives you the right to eat more than people starving to death. The Hague. Slam dunk. Traffic light. Two H’s, one L (standing for the L (little prick)). We’re happy to say something. Clouds, small suns, temperatures, cities. The truth is never an excuse. Yellow. Yellow. Green. Yellow. Yellow. Yellow. Yellow. Green. Green. Yellow. Will you email me? Skeleton: “No.” Ex-nerds in brand-new and brightly red sport cars. $$$. I love. Shihab. Hooves in the sand. Skinny senior with over-sized sunglasses; old jockey (cap, trophy) smiling in slow motion. And there I am again, flashback, crying with my head in between my hands. Sometimes I’ve got the feeling that cannibals. Eyes: blue. Cancer. Why would I wait until tomorrow? Golden beams protruding from the lifted/lit earth. May 5, 2001 [11:30-12:45] You’ll remember this for the rest of your life. Graphs, diagrams. Bu$ine$$. Blue shirt, white collar, no neck (porn star). A name lights up. I’m hysteric. Will you join us? Letters falling in their words. Fingers set up a tent and start to dance. Young entrepreneurs from poor neighborhoods (read: black) guided by Microsoft. Kinda makes me happy, that sort of kitsch. A sense of exhaustion/impotence to see anything but the present. (…) Wouldn’t you like to? Orange explosion in an industrial zone. YOU’RE DOING THIS FOR AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL. Would you. A familiar face. Clouds and blossom. Sunflowers. Supermodels. Mountainous area in a rectangle: shades of brown, from dark to beige, more green toward the south. Tents and next to them (it’s all a blur) people. Plane. Stadium. Geometrical block of people. No, I ain’t crying. I don’t speak no more. I just want. Quote + photo. (Positive:) screaming crowd. Three-piece suit, seen from the back, before entering the arena. On the back: “Daddy abused me.” Oh, bummer. State of emergency has been declared and everyone has to cooperate. She’s cut her wrists. What we do know (…) is that there’s never been a unique word, an imperative name, nor will there ever be. [Click here for work that suits you.] Barefooted children are watching it (coherent pieces revelation of what’s lying below). Who knows how she’s changed during those two years. “Everything used to be better” + sigh. And here we are. An empty field of parquet. A city lying behind it. Explosion. Blue. A rain drop falling in my coffee. May 5, 2001 [14:30-15:30] A young Arafat on video speaking with raised finger. “I’m calling from my convertible.” Names on walls, victims, numbers… Tourists. Yellow. Yellow. “Your own child! Really, what kind of human are you?” I don’t want to hear it no more. A woman jumping out of the water in a yellow bikini against a background of fireworks and the Cheops pyramid. Thy sorrow shall become good fortune, thy complaints laudation. All planets will float and wander. Wo die Welt zum Bild wird, kommt das System (…) zur Herrschaft. It is something, but is it? May 5, 2001 [18:30-19:00] Iris. Leaves. NASDAQ. Open / and white and. For the one who’s doing nothing, just waiting. (…) NO DEFEAT is made entirely up of defeat -- since / the world it opens is always a place / formerly / unsuspected. October 2002. “Jeroen, I’m leaving for the cemetery, byeeee.” The rise of the middle class. My entire oeuvre is an ode to the. My entire head is a fight against the. God always demands what you cannot sacrifice. You may take that the easy way, but… “The state hasn’t made us, but we make the state” (Hitler). A stork exits the elevator. Skeletons of. Moscow. Helsinki. Palermo. Paris. Chapter 30 Like your paradises: nothing. United Desire, as only remaining superpower. And even though the sea is now calmer and the wind is blowing pleasantly in my face… Heart! Who determines whether a tradition is “alive”? The yellow leaf or the white branch? Mars. This sentence is a typical example. Most Dutch people are happy. No consolation. When I see a girl sitting at a table with a book, a notepad, a pen, a bottle of mineral water, her hand writing in the light—then I consider that one thing. “Presents,” “poetry,” “classics.” We are what we cannot make from ourselves. “Left”: mendicant orders, missionaries. Saint-Just: “A republic is founded on the destruction of its enemies.” She crosses the street with a banana peel between her fingers. (…) We chose our own wardens, torturers, it was us who called all this insanity upon ourselves, we created this nightmare… But “no”? Girl (just like a beach ball) talking rapid Spanish (Portuguese?) in a mobile phone. Do I have a chance now that her boyfriend is getting bold? CLIO, horny bitch. What else do you want? An old woman, between the doors of the C1000, is suddenly unable to go on; her husband stretches out his hand, speaking a few encouraging words. Selection from. Der Führer schenkt den Jüden ein Stadt. How can it reach us if we haven’t been already reached somehow? It doesn’t “speak.” No problem. Each word she uses is a small miracle, as if she doesn’t belong to it, to language, but wanders around with a pocket light looking for the exit; she’s never desperate (maybe a little nervous), lighting up heavy words from the inside. But indeed, we’re free. But the predicate is not an attribute, but an event, and the subject is not a subject, but a shell. That’s why also samurai, knights, and warriors raised the blossom as emblem: they knew how to die. Locked up in a baby carriage with a McDonald’s balloon. Blue helicopter, the blue sky. Whether you want to refer? The point is. How / Motherfucker can I sing a sad song / When I remember Zion? You’ll feel so miserable and worthless that you think: “If only I were dead!,” or: “Just put an end to it!” “So you’re an economist?” Her card—two little birds building a nest, her handwriting shaking—is still on the mantelpiece. Guevara: “No, a communist.” A straw fire, such was our life: rapidly it flared up, rapidly it passed. I’m fleeing, coming from nowhere. (…) Eazy-E drinking coffee with the American president. If I’d scream, would that be an event? Drown it: the cleaner it will rise up from the depths. No! The night, so fast… As if there’s something opened up in that face. Come on, we may not curse life. He shows me his methadone: “If you drink that all at once, you’ll die instantly.” The last one dictates how we should behave to deserve happiness. One shine / above the earth. “I want to go to Bosnia,” I said bluntly. I don’t even know the name of the current mayor. Let’s despise our success! “There is no future; this is the future. Hope is a weakness that we've overcome. We have found happiness!” Sun. Sushi. Volvo. I feel like a bomb about to explode at any moment. Makes a difference for the reconstruction right? The decor moves forward. Daughter of Nereus, you nymphs of the sea, and you Thetis, you should have kept his tired head above the waves! Alas! This sentence has been written wearing a green cap. I receive my orders from the future. A frog jumps into it. Her husband has turned the Intifada, which he follows daily on CCN, into his hobby, “to forget that he doesn’t have his driver’s license yet." Suddenly the sun slides over the crosswalk. Her (his?) foot is playing with the slipper under the table. Is this how I’m writing this book now? I’m not a fellow man. I hate you and I want to hurt you. These are my people. Their screaming doesn’t rise above the constantly wailing sirens which we've learned to ignore. My whole body became warm and suddenly started to tremble. Unfortunate is he who is standing on the threshold of the most beautiful time, but awaits a better one. Arafat’s “removal” is contrary to American interests. Jeep drives into boy. What you can do alone, you should do alone. A food gift from the people of the United States of America. Two seagulls. [...]. (shrink)

Perjumpaan Fransiskus Assisi dengan Sultan al-Kamil di tengah ko- baran perang salib akhir-akhir ini mendapat banyak perhatian dari pel- bagai macam peneliti (Hoeberichts 1997; Warren 2003, Tolan 2007, Moses 2009). Yang terakhir, Paul Moses—seorang Guru Besar Jurnalistik di Brooklyn College, New York— melakukan investigasinya sendiri dan menulis suatu buku yang sangat menarik dan aktual, seperti yang boleh diharapkan dari seorang pakar komunikasi. Landasan penting penelitian Moses adalah evaluasinya yang kritis terhadap sumber-sumber. Ia mengemukakan bahwa sumber-sumber tertua tentang peristiwa ini (Jacques (...) de Vitry, dan sebuah kronik yang anonim, keduanya saksi mata perang salib kelima itu) memberi gambaran lebih damai tentang perjumpaan ini ketimbang riwayat-riwayat hidup Fransiskus yang kemudian (Celano, Bonaventura, dll.) yang menggambarkannya sebagai misi yang konfrontatif, berusaha mempertobatkan Sultan untuk mencari kemartiran. Adalah Konsili Lateran IV (1215) dan Paus Innocentius III (1198-1216) serta penggantinya, Paus Honorius III, yang pada masa itu membangkitkan semangat untuk perang salib kelima guna merebut kembali Yerusalem yang belasan tahun sebelumnya direbut dari tangan penguasa Kristen oleh Salah ad-Din (Saladin), paman Sultan Malik al- Kamil. Kendati keluarga Sultan sudah memberitahukan bahwa Sultan bersedia menyerahkan kembali Yerusalem demi persetujuan damai, pihak Paus dan raja-raja Barat tetap mengobarkan semangat perang dan mengumpulkan pasukan. Menurut Moses, Fransiskus, dan saudara- saudaranya diharapkan oleh Gereja ikut mewartakan perang suci, tetapi ia memilih membawakan Injil ke seluruh Eropa, tidak terkecuali juga ke wilayah-wilayah Muslim. Serangan pasukan salib ke Kesultanan Mesir dimulai dari kota pela- buhan Damietta di delta Sungai Nil. Tawaran damai Malik al-Kamil, Sultan Mesir yang dikenal bijaksana dan juga moderat terhadap umat Kristiani di Mesir, kembali ditolak oleh Kardinal Pelagius, utusan Paus dalam perang salib kelima ini. Fransiskus datang ke camp crusaders pada Agustus 1219 dan memberi peringatan kepada para crusaders bahwa serangan mereka akan gagal, tetapi ia ditertawakan. Lalu pada September 1219 ia memutuskan untuk mencari jalan lain dengan menyeberangi lini permusuhan dan mendatangi Sultan al-Malik, tidak sebagai utusan tetapi hanya dengan pengetahuan Kardinal Pelagius menggambarkan Sultan al-Kamil sebagai binatang buas. Sebagai anak zamannya, Fransiskus ingin menciptakan damai dengan mewartakan Injil kepada Sultan. Hal itu tampaknya dilakukannya dengan cara yang khas, sebab dalam sumber tertua dikatakan bahwa Sultan mendengarkannya dengan penuh perhatian, dan memperlakukan Fransiskus sebagai tamu terhormat selama beberapa hari. Menurut Moses, Sultan mungkin terharu bahwa ada orang Kristiani yang berbeda dengan para agresor rakus yang ia kenal dari perang salib. Al-Kamil yang dikenal terbuka untuk Sufisme mungkin juga suka mendengarkan Fransiskus, karena Fransiskus terkesan mirip dengan seorang Sufi. Di lain pihak, Fransiskus juga terkesan dengan apa yang ia lihat, misalnya cara pasukan Muslim menjawab panggilan untuk berdoa............................................................... Kenyataan asli menurut Tolan ialah bahwa Fransiskus ingin menjalankan hidup rasuli sampai dengan mahkotanya, kemartiran, yang dapat ia peroleh dengan pergi mewartakan Injil kepada Sultan. Ini memang gam- baran yang jelas ada dalam biografi-biografi Celano dan Bonaventura, te- tapi tidak muncul dalam kronik-kronik lebih tua dan konteks hidup Fran- siskus sendiri. Kelemahan karya Tolan ialah bahwa ia kurang kembali kepada tulisan-tulisan Fransiskus sendiri dan riwayat hidupnya, seperti yang dilakukan secara mengesankan oleh Moses yang berhasil memper- lihatkan dalam konteks hidup Fransiskus suatu penolakan terhadap pe- rang, pewartaan damai, penghargaan terhadap praktik doa Islam, dan cara misi baru; yang semuanya harus dijadikan patokan untuk interpretasi per- jumpaan Fransiskus dengan Sultan. Tolan gagal melihat tema damai dalam riwayat hidup dan tulisan-tulisan Fransiskus itu, dan dengan demikian juga tidak mengakui adanya sesuatu yang inspiratif dalam peristiwa perjumpaan itu untuk hubungan Muslim–Kristiani masa sekarang. Sebaliknya, ia agak keras menolak interpretasi sejumlah peneliti dan gerakan damai sejak akhir abad ke-20 yang melihat misi Fransiskus sebagai misi damai dan menemukan dalam Fransiskus suatu model untuk menolak kekerasan perang dan mencari pendekatan baru, khususnya dalam hal ketegangan antaragama. Kelemahan karya Tolan ini sangat tampak justru dalam perbandingan dengan karya Moses, yang tidak mendiskusikan Tolan sebab terlambat menerimanya. Buku ketiga, St. Francis and the Conversion of the Muslims, karya Frank M. Rega, amat berbeda dengan kedua studi ilmiah di atas. Dengan tidak kritis sedikit pun, Rega menggabungkan semua yang bagus-bagus dalam pelbagai versi—dari kronik-kronik paling awal sampai ke legenda- legenda yang sangat kemudian—tentang perjumpaan Fransiskus dengan Sultan itu. Tanpa membedakan pelbagai versi dan bertanya tentang latarbelakang dan tujuan masing-masing, seperti dilakukan Tolan, Rega menciptakan suatu versi gabungan yang agaknya akan disukai oleh pembaca Katolik yang saleh dan konservatif (yang memang dilayani oleh penerbit Tan Books), tetapi tidak bernilai bagi seorang peneliti yang ingin menyingkapkan maksud Fransiskus sendiri dan sumber-sumber masing-masing; dan sangat mengecewakan pembaca kritis sekarang yang mencari ilham dalam adegan ini bagi masalah-masalah dunia sekarang. Cerita legendaris Rega yang penuh triumfantalisme yang hampir-hampir yakin bahwa Sultan bertobat dan dibaptis menjelang kematiannya, tentu lebih mengganggu hubungan Kristen dan Muslim sekarang daripada membantu menemukan suatu pendekatan baru. (Martin Harun, Program Studi Ilmu Teologi, Sekolah Tinggi Filsafat Driyarkara, Jakarta). (shrink)

Debat tentang pluralisme tetap berlangsung di Indonesia, karena itu dua buku yang akan dibahas di sini sangat relevan. Paul F. Knitter, seorang teolog Katolik, merumuskan suatu pandangan pluralistik mirip dengan yang diharamkan oleh Majelis Ulama Indonesia pada 2005, sedangkan Gavin D’Costa dalam bukunya dengan tajam membongkar “pluralisme” itu. Dua-duanya berargumentasi secara teologis, atas dasar pengandaian-pengandaian Kristiani-Katolik. Dalam bab pertama Knitter menggariskan kembali perjalanan teolo- gisnya dari eksklusivisme, melalui inklusivisme, ke posisi yang dinama- kannya “pluralisme.“ Knitter tidak hanya menolak anggapan (yang (...) oleh Gereja Katolik sudah ditolak sejak sebelum Konsili Vatikan II) bahwa ”di luar Gereja tidak ada keselamatan“ (”eksklusivisme“), melainkan juga posi- si-posisi ”inklusivistik“—seperti yang misalnya dikemukakan oleh Karl Rahner—yaitu bahwa, meskipun semua orang dapat diselamatkan, namun mereka diselamatkan karena Yesus Kristus, jadi bahwa kebenaran penuh hanya ada dalam iman kepada Yesus Sang Juru Selamat bagi semua. Plu- ralisme Knitter menyatakan bahwa tidak ada agama yang dapat meng- klaim keunggulannya terhadap agama lain. Kalau saya tidak salah tangkap, Knitter mengajukan tiga argumen. Yang pertama adalah kejujuran dialog antaragama. ”Bagaimana,” tanya Knitter, “orang dapat sungguh-sungguh ’menghormati’ kebenaran dalam pandangan orang lain... apabila kita masuk ke dalam dialog dengan keyakinan bahwa kita yang mempunyai kebenaran definitif?” (hlm. 33). Argumen yang sama juga diajukan dalam bentuk sedikit lain: Menurut Knitter tidak mungkin seorang tokoh atau suatu ajaran religius tertentu memuat seluruh kekayaan realitas Ilahi. Yesus boleh diyakini sebagai “totus Deus” (seluruhnya Allah), tetapi bukan sebagai “totum Dei” (keseluruhan Allah). Yesus betul-betul penyelamat, tetapi selain Yesus ada banyak penyelamat lain. Argumentasi ini merangsang pertanyaan kembali apakah dialog dapat jujur kalau para peserta sebelumnya harus melepaskan keyakinan mereka yang paling inti? Knitter boleh saja menyangkal bahwa keseluruhan Ilahi ada dalam Yesus, tetapi atas dasar apa ia menuntut agar orang Kristiani menyangkalnya juga? Bukankah Knitter jatuh ke dalam dogmatisme sama dengan yang dituduhkannya?.................................................... D’Costa mengklaim bahwa pengertian keselamatan yang triniter itu menjamin apa yang justru tidak terjamin oleh “pluralisme” ala Knitter; yaitu, keterbukaan, toleransi dan kesamaan. Keterbukaan, karena Gereja dapat dan bahkan harus betul-betul belajar dari agama-agama lain. Tole- ransi, karena Gereja wajib menghormati kebebasan beragama; artinya, ada- lah hak setiap orang dan kelompok orang untuk mengakui dan mempraktikkan agama yang mereka yakini. Kesamaan, karena Gereja mengakui martabat setiap orang sebagai alamat cinta Ilahi. D’Costa mengakhiri bukunya dengan suatu pertimbangan bagus tentang makna dan tempat doa antaragama-agama yang berbeda. Buku D’Costa adalah salah satu bahasan paling jelas, mendalam, dan meyakinkan tentang bagaimana orang Katolik, dan seharusnya semua orang Kristiani, dapat bertemu dengan agama-agama lain tanpa kesombongan, tetapi juga tanpa mengkompromikan imannya. D’Costa membuka dogmatisme deistik-sekularistik (Allah tidak masuk kedalam sejarah umat manusia) dan posisi-posisi yang menamakan diri pluralistik. Adalah kekuatan buku D’Costa bahwa ia memperlihatkan bahwa justru iman pada Allah yang triniter, yang kita ketahui dari pewahyuan Diri Allah dalam Yesus, memungkinkan untuk bersikap hormat dan terbuka kepada agama-agama lain. Daripada menyanyikan lagu bahwa semua agama pada dasarnya sama saja, D’Costa memungkinkan kita untuk tanpa kompromi percaya pada apa yang diyakini Gereja sejak 2000 tahun: bahwa Yesuslah Sang Juru Selamat Ilahi, dan sekaligus menghormati mereka yang berbeda imannya. Itulah dasar mantap bagi dialog antarumat beragama. (Franz Magnis-Suseno, Program Pascasarjana, Sekolah Tinggi Filsafat Driyarkara, Jakarta). (shrink)

Em meio ao tempo e ao ritmo estabelecidos pela dinâmica social da atualidade, caracterizada por uma paisagem sonora que conduz ao desapego e ao distanciamento afetivo nas relações, exaurindo os próprios sentidos da vida humana, este trabalho pretende retomar o sentido ético da escuta como condição primordial de acesso à verdade, uma escuta que, para além do simples ouvir, permita espreitar os sons que constituem a singularidade dos sujeitos e do mundo e dão a tônica da sua existência. Estabelece relações (...) entre o Logos segundo Heráclito, música encantatória no seu sentido original que, por ser linguagem, comunica e diz algo, e a mousiké grega cujo poder de en-cantamento traz aos sujeitos a verdade como voz que orienta a vida. Destaca as artes da existência apontadas por Foucault na epiméleia heautou associada a melos e melodia, aquilo que canta e encanta desde algum lugar do sujeito e o apela a se interessar por determinada pessoa, objeto ou acontecimento. Dessa forma, a verdade do sujeito é sonora, manifestase como linguagem, como canto que se dá, se doa, na condição de escuta dos sujeitos dispostos, na sua abertura, a ouvi-la. À luz do pensamento de Sloterdijk, identifica as esferas sonoras como o domínio onde as palavras primigênias, fundadoras do ser, ressoam revelando sua origem e essência. Coloca a música como uma arte de viver que atua como elemento reorganizador do conhecimento que construímos sobre o mundo e sobre nós mesmos. Focaliza as ressonâncias formativas do gesto de escutar e silenciar como parte de uma disposição [Stimmung] vital para lidar com conflitos e tensões de nossa época. Palavras-chave: Logos. Música. Escuta. Acolhimento do outro. (shrink)