Do you read Žižek in his voice?
Absolutely, you see, I do this all the time. One of the best experiences you can have, and here I am not lying, is to read Gravity's Rainbow in this way. You know, that early 70's American Pinecone book.
Its not that I read "Žižek" in his voice but the contrary that my entire consciousness is narrated by him.
My God, I read everything in his voice, to be quite, eh, honest you see. This is done strictly in an ironic manner, though. Here I paraphrase Lacan: By using another person's voice, one gains precisely that freedom necessary to speak with ones own. It is the mask that lets us be ourselves, I claim.
You schee, you bifurcate Zizek's "voice" in shiss way. You schee, you mean, by Zizek's voice, his voice itself, that is, I mean, his vocal noises and so on. But the "voice" of a person is also the meaning which he conveys by the text, this I claim. So the question, "Do you read Žižek in his voice?" is sort of a double question, about verbal noises and reading the meaning of the text. It is only by a dialectical process of synthesizing the two "voices" that you achieve full voice and so on.
>>7992193
I read everything in his voice
>>7992193
>reading shishek
>ever
why
