Addendum

After some reflection, I don't entirely agree with what I wrote yesterday.

I, personally, intend to pursue this double bind of repetition and newness. It is the double bind that I want to play within.

Spivak's ultimate double bind of the ab-use of the Enlightenment, I said, was secondary to this double bind of repetition and newness.

But that is pretty silly. It is a more general way of rendering the same problem.

In some ways repetition and newness is the universal of Spivak's particular interest in the Enlightenment in post-colonial countries.

So, I didn't quite mean what I said last night.

Not all of it at least.

I meant most of it, I think.