Well, one has to start somewhere. There are lots of possibilities. Lots of really good opening lines (and, of course, plenty of mediocre ones, too).
I’m currently reading A Thousand Plateaus by the philosophers Deleuze & Guattari. In the famous first line of their eccentric tome, the pair state: “The two of us wrote Anti-Oedipus together. Since each of us was several, there was already quite a crowd.” (Or, in the original French — the above is Brian Massumi’s translation — “Nous avons écrit l’Anti-Oedipe à deux. Comme chacun de nous était plusieurs, ça faisait déjà beaucoup de monde.”)
It’s an odd statement — how can one be several? This book is by two people, Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari, not a multitude. What would they have the publisher put on the cover? ‘Deleuzes and Guattaris’? But I think considering ourselves in the plural might be a helpful tool. Sometimes I don’t feel so singular. My mind is thinking about lots of different things, and I am both happy and sad, both understanding and confused. All at once.
So let me start off plurally: this blog will be a place to post about my interests and my academic work, and so will cover things like literature, Japan and Okinawa, culture, critical theory and philosophy, race relations, anthropology, art, history, people, feminism, diversity and equality. The subjects are themselves not always linked to one-another in any kind of obvious way; they are themselves diverse and nebulous, but maybe that’s OK. They’re linked through me (or my multitudes?) and my (our?) interest (interests?) in them. Plurality isn’t a bad place to start. One has to start somewhere(s).