"The Act of Hospitality Can Be Only Poetic"

THE 1st question here for me, is again that of translation. Now I have a sentence by Derrida (again, sorry, sambito) that is translated into Korean as "환대행위는 시적일수 밖에 없다." This can be translated into the following:

1) The act of hospitality can be only poetic.
2) The act of hospitality cannot be more than poetic.
3) The act of hospitality is only poetic.

the three have different nuances in them, but message here is that the question about the question of hospitality, or more precisely here, the question about the "translation" of (the question of) hospitality involves this: double, often contradictory, movements

2. i went to this seminar on "migrant women and multiculturalism." lots of confusion in the discussion indeed. one saliently wrong dichotomy for me: multiculturalism vs assimilationism. without first talking about political rights/space of migrants, "multiculturalism" can be only poetic and is only a different articulation of assimilationism.

3. why talking about multiculturalism (esp. by NGOs and academics here)? i understood this as a kind of an act of "hospitality" towards "foreigners." but the unconditional law of hospitality necessitates and invites conditional rules and regulations of hospitality that contradict itself (derrida). this multiculturalism bulabula sounds only fishy.

4. the seminar concluded with a comment on "a need to talk more about migrants' own agency." and bravo! "yes, they too have agency and we have to celebrate it"; a global academic romance...

5. how to make connection between all these (hospitality, academics, multiculturalism, seminar, agency, nulabula)

anyway, recovering from last week's body in crisis and resuming reading "On hospitality"