this one is too good to deny…

“The insignificant position of two associated objects is probably determined by both the randomness of their relationship (let us remind you that neither the ‘statue,’ nor ‘I’ in any way ‘expressed’ a desire to be together, to be united thus by a proposal of anticipation followed by a separation) and – if you will – one’s semic insufficiency.  Indeed, if the semic nucleus of the word ‘statue’ or, say, ‘she’ governs the layers of contextual semes, then ‘I’ is empty (or infinite and hollow, from the very beginning).  This lexeme has no nucleus whatsoever; it’s nothing more than a cocoon of ‘contextual semes,’ like the knot that is a constant deflection of an illusory straight line towards its starting point.

“Frankly, I’d like to say, as I did at the beginning, that ‘I’ is reduced to a ‘seething, ever-changing void.’ But let’s leave it at that.”

-Arkadii Dragomoshchenko-

And, in very much seriousness…if you are a writer in any sort of way (letters, memos, journals, ANYthing)…I find it hard to stomach you not having read Dragomoshchenko’s book Dust.  Really.  Truly truly truly.  Please, if you have even a passing interest in the use and creation and employment of language (even for conversation, thought or memory)…Dust, Dragomoshchenko, Dust, Dragomoshchenko…(mantra until you hold it in your hands)

I beg of you.