Thursday, 26 January 2012

On Writing

Now you see what I did there, in the omission, the bit you can't see. The last two poems may appear contradictory, or hazy at least, as if searching. This is impressionism painted in words that should not be read in three dimensions alone. I wrote them in the other order, another direction. The brushstroke can be a sleight of mind. I say I, when I know there are no individuals, and there is no writing. We put an impression of a paradox in there. REJ regrets he is unable to correct everyone. He uses 1st and 3rd person, but is neither. Translation is delegated by necessity, perfection unreadable.

There are two forms of writing - plagiarism that is noticed, and plagiarism that isn't. A word is a bucket, it contains many meanings, none objective, each a currency. Each synonym therein is itself a composition, supposedly wedded to one meaning, yet we may hear the echo of many mistresses. Each word before and after changes this again. Pictures are closer, more direct. Music is the larger canvas, permitting chords.


  1. Roland Barthes - what would he think? Creative prose reading like poetry...luminous and captivating! What do I like best? It says so much. Probably "Brushstroke can be a sleight of mind."

  2. There is no plurality. Subjectivity imposes it.
    The unconscious universe is not aggregate.
    We are the illusions of conscious division. Fractions not integers.

  3. As Rivhard Dawkins says 'If you push novelty of language and metaphor far enough you end up with a new way of seeing'. That is what REJ does sublimely and unlike anyone else.

  4. Richard D - of course. That was pushing it....

  5. "Assuming that the number of individuals in the universe is not finite..."

    "There are more moves in chess than atoms in the universe..."


    Unus = one

    Versum = something rotated, rolled, changed

    Emergence is the complexity of internal division

    "Assuming that the number of individuals in the universe is not finite..."

    What's the biggest number?

  6. Professor Yaffle28 January 2012 at 22:12

    Sagan shares out an apple pie. The bigger the pie the no bigger the pi. Why get distracted by noughtiness? Perhaps they were Cox's apples. He likes a googolplex.

  7. Sergei Eisenstein30 January 2012 at 11:57

    The Director's Cut

    To readdress our Mystery
    With human telly-ology
    I give you some small history
    Of telling stories visually.
    A queen walked in with regal shout
    But in the cut, instead stormed out
    And while this edit was divine
    The regulator said, "Not fine".
    You see it's really quite a crime
    So royally to play with Time.
    Now Avid tales can all be told
    By putting 'new' before the 'old'
    We must maintain the shared pretense
    That cameras show 'real' events
    (Though honestly no one can say
    How this permits a cutaway).
    With EDLs that may address
    'Facts' with more moves than those of chess
    As messages in poetry
    May order sense with symmetry.
    It's no great threat to most of Art
    To put the horse before the cart -
    But to get human from a fish
    Takes frequent asymmetric wish.
    Since entropy forever free
    Does not provide complexity,
    Though often sense appears post hoc
    You can't make soup before the stock.
    And this is why you cannot plan
    Without eggs breaking omelette an.