I wrote the below post to the blog Words in Space by Shannon Christine Mattern.
I don´t know if it will be posted or replied to but maybe I should not have written it, my comment is a fishing hook in the ocean of a vast and surging question.
I have not read the book yet so this comment is ah floating, but in response to “philosophical works generally do not perpetrate their philosophical positions through their form as books” (93).”
I guess I wonder if he means the form has to create most of the content, or that it shapes some of the content as impact on the reader, or that it has to have a significant effect on the impact.
Also, philosophical works are not necessarily books as such (as he would know, being an Ancient Greek scholar), so if I take the sentence to mean philosophers don’t really consider the shape or form of their book, a couple of counter examples come to mind (if we can extend to writers who write philosophically)
-Steppenwolf by Hesse (the starting sentence is actually part of a look with the ending sentence)
-Philosophical investigations by Wittgenstein
-and I would like to say Nietzsche but that is perhaps controversial.
It is a good thing to think about anyway, thanks for the interesting post.
(I am not sure if the fourfold notions in Heidegger´s philosophy of art, i.e. the silversmith, were inspiration, but they may be of interest to some, especially designers.)