Also: Lucretia.

I managed to express my thoughts with some clarity today in class. That was good.

The first thing that matters: the visible/invisible distinction.

But I am not really super-interested in the discourse of the body. I am instead interested in the idea of imagining integrity: whether the boundaries of the self are imagined as being essentially physical or essentially otherwise, the idea of wholeness is still very much in play. In some way, trauma is by definition that which violates the integrity of the self (whether bodily or otherwise). That's the value of using Douglas' Purity and Danger in this paper.

I also realized in class today the possibility of a new way to read theodicy: namely, that the crucifixion and the doctrine of sanctification provided a model for suffering innocence.

I need to write up a comparison of Lavinia and Daphne. A lot could grow from those few pages.

One interesting idea: that the Ovidian metamorphoses contain two simultaneous readings, the melancholic and the elegiac. Perhaps these can be the two through lines for the argument. I wonder whether we can say that elegiac theodicies tend to fail? The Austin paper is a helpful one here as well, I expect.