Constantine P. Cavafy: The Incorruptibility of Pleasure

by Daniel Gauss

Wikimedia Commons – C.P. Cavafy c. 1900

I started playing with the idea that Constantine P. Cavafy might be a type of Faust-like character who beats the devil by making temptation irrelevant. Through a poetry devoted to memory, sensuality and the afterlife of desire, Cavafy undermines the Christian-Faustian assumption that pleasure necessarily decays into guilt, disappointment or damnation.

In Cavafy’s work, ecstatic gay sexual experience is not morally or spiritually ruinous, but can, in fact, be among the highest forms of human physical and emotional intensity, experientially irretrievable as a discrete moment, haunting and provocative as a memory but still incorruptible.

Frankly, it might be more accurate for me to say I wish to use Cavafy as a type of anti-Faust. I see Cavafy as a queer poet who dismantles a foundational Western myth from the inside out. What Cavafy preserves in memory is not shame but a type of radiance (a term he uses in his poetry). The sensual experiences of youth do not become evidence of moral lapse or failure even though he might speak ironically about “dissolution.”

Indeed, when Cavafy explores dissolution, it functions as a positive factor in his development as a poet. By dissolution he means a life lived outside the moral pretenses and hypocritical codes of propriety of Alexandria under British rule in the early 20th century, a social world where queer desire often had to be managed through concealment, subterfuge and obliquity.

Dissolution meant a life of erotic freedom and experience, charged secrecy, bold risk and nonconforming encounters that would have been condemned and caused severe social repercussions. For Cavafy dissolution becomes the wellspring of his creative brilliance, showing that the unconventional, even taboo, experiences of his youth were what shaped his art. Read more »

Monday, January 9, 2023

Dinner For Nietzsche: Rhythms, Rituals, And Eternal Return

by Jochen Szangolies

Stone where Nietzsche reports having had the inspiration for his ‘eternal return’, with commemorative plaque. Image credit: Kuebi = Armin Kübelbeck, CC BY-SA 3.0, via Wikimedia Commons

Time presents itself, depending on the context, under two different modalities: cyclical and linear. Linear time moves always forward, carrying us from past to present, ever towards an uncertain future; while circular time, the time of clock hands, sunrise and sunset, and recurring seasons, sees us back again at our origin.

These would seem to be somewhat in tension. But I find that time, perhaps like all the great mysteries, is only enriched by its seeming contradictions. Take ‘stopping time’, as it is sometimes portrayed in movies—that is, holding everything frozen. How long does such a state last? What is the difference between it lasting an hour, a day, or an eternity? In the absence of change, time is robbed of duration. But in an instant of time, there can be no change. Hence, any instant, it seems, might as well be an infinity, held in the palm of your hand.

We have just come out the tail end of one of the cycles of time punctuating our lives, and emerged into a new one—at least according to the Gregorian calendar. Perhaps it is natural, then, to muse about the way time seems to both sweep us away while, on the arc traced by the Earth around the Sun, always returning us to the same places again—changed, but the same. Read more »