Where Philosophers End

Her YES. Where did Clarice Lispector's (1920-1970) yes come from? Was she a tabula rasa? Did she not read anything?

Moser in 'Why This World. A Biography of Clarice Lispector' (2009), page 227-228: 

"She was widely and deeply read, as the numerous allusions in her writing and correspondence prove  (...). Clarice's higer education, her work as journalist, her experience in the foreign service, her knowledge of languages, and her practice in living on three continents made her, apart from her own artistic achievement, one of the most sophisticated women of her generation, and not only in Brazil."

On the other hand she was deliberately a "self-thaught" writer, like a "primitive painter". She placed no value on learnedness or sophistication. She was interested in a different kind of knowledge, that had nothing to do with advanced reading or learnedness. Where philosophers end does Clarice begin.

Let me repeat, was Clarice a tabula rasa? Partly yes, as in the image of a discoverer/ student who erases the slate (tabula) by heating the wax and then smoothing it. 

What was Clarice pointing at? At that part of "reality" that can't be said and is a mystery and has to be discovered. At that what she is truly writing, that is neither bad nor good.  At the state of grace. At ... unio mystica.

Christ was Christ for others. Who was Christ for Christ? According to her analyst Azulay (page 327): Clarice for Clarice carried a lot of anxiety; full-time self-centered because she had a difficulty in connecting; she couldn't turn herself off and when her anxiety reached overpowering levels living was a torment for her; at those times she couldn't stand herself and other people couldn't stand her.