To 'Spasticulate electric ventriloquisms', or 'Ventriculate spastique electrocutions'. That is the question.

Saturday, January 21, 2012

Wail, waled whale or pique, peaked peak?

Vainglory or pride, it is said (but it's snide), 's an excessive display of something in order to draw in attention, the satisfaction of a job well done and its communication; feeling fine on getting feel-goods from others, including enjoyment of luxury and by linguistic extension, lust or desire or a comfortable pension, gives birth, (said always without a smile) to gluttony, gulability and ever to be guile. It may well be that virtue is the abject intolerance toward every irony.

No either-ors about it: from any perspective of matter or material, the matter is that æther IS other, unless it's your mother. Today's teaching "meaning is always provisional", coming not from nothing. Words are always optional as long as the context is fitting. Sometimes the context IS the metaphor (see "unbend, v." versus "unbending, adj." to illustrate that an ancient allegory (of a tight bow or loosed arrow, or rope setting free the sail) adds more than any present isomorph or grammatical partition to confine a pregnant whale or restrain its plump position. The blow-hole thing is an air of relaxation or uptight personality: which would you more likely choose, door 'a' or cop 'b'?

Association is a gift, like we can say "clouds bring rain" but not "clouds cause rain" without appearing naive. The most obvious causations turn out to be merely a matter of sequence, the consequence of juxtapositions taken from, in and of themselves (always a questionable proposition, like the ego of a president or king) or disregarding their material, historical or etherial contexts, like, "Is there air?!?"

With polysemy, that wide, poetic region of multiple entendre (mis-labelled "licence" – as if we need permission), and given generalised uncertainty (or the mistrust of others' truths/dogma) there can be no theoretical unification. Unification is empirically impossible without bondage or constraint, and therefore, only brings naivite or ingorance of the world beyond those imposed boundaries. This makes grand theory itself, a joke, given that no one has ever witnessed an identity, much less an identical pair of them. The analogue ('away from word', or the parodic 'in word only'), is only a posited expression of similarity, that is, a reminder. One may conclude there is no theory but fleeting eclecticism, and that is the dada of free association.

No comments:

Post a Comment