“Thoughts constituted by non-uttered words…This monologue always – ‘I speak’”
Paolo Virno – Word Became Flesh
“its thisness, then, cannot be fully articulable since any such articulation would require the articulation of a complete context, which in all cases is the world…often the experience includes an awareness of not being able to give an account of the this”
Jan Zwicky – Wisdom & Metaphor
“457. Yes: meaning something is like going up to someone”
Ludwig Wittgenstein – Philosophical Investigations
“…I wept up to a great age, never having really evolved in the fields of affection and passion, in spite of my experiences”
Samuel Beckett – Malone Dies
“to frame the unsayable, & mute the sayable… he was the singing and the no one there…”
Larry Levis – The Darkening Trapeze
“All this must be considered as if spoken by a character in a novel – or rather by several characters”
Roland Barthes – Roland Barthes
– I believe I told them that “all language was like a metaphor” in several characters.
I heard nothing, I said to myself, as if nothing were something that might be heard.
Still I stroked her ankle, index-finger-pad to delicate-bird-bone. And lip. Finding textures and surfaces with lips and tongue. Precarious…it never lasts. Taste and touch are like that [metaphor] immediate.
Am I speaking when I write? What is happening now?
– “often the experience…includes an awareness of not being able…” (J. Zwicky)
She tasted of…
“…to give an account of the this…” (Zwicky)
…coffee grounds, sandalwood, humidity, and turquoise…
I left off my exploring.
What is it like [metaphor] to…?
I told them that ‘I speak’ is a metaphor…as is indeed all the rest having to do with language.
(consolations of philosophy)
I hear nothing when I talk with myself. [metaphors].
The sounds of flying a kite.
It’s rare that I am naked. But “yes: meaning is like going up to someone” (L.W.)…some sort of connection is made (some convergent affect) and a resolution leaks open…resonance…endlessly (perhaps).
“I wept up to a great age”…by which we always mean the aggregate…which seems quite less than my ‘great age’, if ever there was one.
What is ‘great’ like? [metaphor]
Once I was younger…
– Always wished you’d known –
Are photographs metaphors?
I said that ‘nothing made is like.’
(“in spite of my experience”)
“Did I say I only say a small proportion of the things that come into my head?” (ontology of perception) (Samuel Beckett)
I intended to quote: “It is a pretty little object, like a – no, it is like nothing” (Samuel Beckett)
But what is ‘nothing’ like? A “pretty little object”?
We know what he means (“like going up to someone”) … I was naked, I tasted.
You know the story… “I wept up to a great age.” I touched, I tried, I felt.
What do you see?
Hardly ever the point. Perception + Reflection = Imagination (perhaps) I told them – it’s a metaphor – a “crossing-over,” some traversal. The trace of sweat behind her knee just above the calf.
Once I was alive.
I crossed over.
Several characters: ‘I speak.’
“Affection. Passion.” I said. (what I had thought it was ‘to learn’ [metaphor]).
– “in spite of my experience” –
Perhaps language wasn’t made for speaking.
Someone. Somewhere. Maybe. Here. Now.
That thing that words do [metaphor].
The “experience of this”…”non-uttered words.” Non-utterable? Perhaps, this. (I traced the swerve of her, its curvature, hair-smell and sounding…’I speak,’ non-uttering…)
What is writing?
I believe I was speaking of metaphor…
“Yes,” I said, “yes…” “it’s always alright to weep.”
…yet another example of negotiating tools and context. The previous post it seemed natural, as if I reached into the surround in order to work through something, reveal or discover something I hunched toward. For me this is often why reading, why conversation, why activity – in order for something to emerge, perhaps unsubmerge, for perhaps…
As I sat to write the other day, I recognized my reaching (a little more). That because 4 colors of pen were available… because they fill my surround when I am annotating texts I read… more voices seemed to join the conversation. Perhaps intoned by the colors, perhaps offering myself other conversations, altering access, even as the shape of the page contains my possibility. Or evokes it.
Anyway… the notebook notions tincture now… and I – both follow and concoct…
“words are drying out” – Franco “Bifo” Berardi
…and for her,
I held in my hands
a few hours, whom I gave back
only to keep holding the space where she was,
a small fire in the rain”
– Galway Kinnell
“Who will ever be able, in this heap of dust, to tell the words from their underpinnings of paper?”
– Edmond Jabes
“Life is the search for the impossible via the useless…no one truly knows how to know and thinking confuses everything.”
– Fernando Pessoa
“man has no other way of living ‘now’ at his disposition besides the possibility to realize it through the insertion of discourse in the world”
– Emile Benveniste
“…if philosophy can be defined at all…”
– Silvia Jonas
“THE DREAM’S NAVEL”
or, Troubling Abstraction
or, refusing reduction
or, peircing the generic
There was a fox with a beautiful tail. And wondrously colorful. Like a dream, but tangibly perceptible.
– A dream then, while you’re thick in it –
No, an actual. Not a virtual. An imagining. Beauty.
And this, it is said, is philosophic thought… the questioning and caress of what is, unknown.
– Perhaps unknowable? –
What I do not know. Have not experienced. Know this way.
– Imagining. –
Experience. Experiencing. Almost like a dream, but languaged now, i.e. controlled, labeled, made discrete and symbolically communicable…signified. Not that.
- An other
– Something, anyway. Try again. Become. –
To cross. Trans-late. Waver boundaries of meaning. Only to continue discretely, or to discretely continue. To work at the edge… both/and versus either/or versus verses… Weaving. Text-ure.
Ever again, always another other, anew, again… What is: difference, and repetition. Never the same, almost, again
– What? –
Someone or something is living. Is being. Perhaps simply is. Perhaps that… if only we knew. If anyone could.
– Imagine –
Someone (something?) said. Set down, symbolized, spoke… suggested…
– Something to work with – from, into toward, away, perhaps. –
Dip and scratch, gesture, limit, now one, now another, both? The thread, the fox’s multi-colored tail. Needle. Point. Pierce. But the thread connects above/below, under/over, in/out, alike… just traversing, transforming, betweening, continuous. Air, breath, blood, wave, particle, motion, fluid… Almost a point-of-meeting, a multi-sided trace, not a touch. Not touching, perhaps. But touching’s not a point of contact. Where do you feel the touch of your hand to a leaf? The touch of your hand to yourself…?
I’d imagined so. I’d dreamt of thought. Particularized continuity. Cognizable flow…
– Something to work on… in… to be… come… –
Participate? Renew? Anew? A gain?
There was a fox with a beautiful tail. Like a dream, not quite limit or form or shape… potential, like beauty, like amost…AND… Like a resonant word meaning this and more also, perhaps non-compliant, unresolved
– How “hate” = “love”, both and neither? –
What!? I don’t know.
Adjoin. A margin? Where what, which, might be meeting – meets all ways? Area? Neither/nor, both/and, reciprocity?
– Someone spoke “transduction” –
The fox’s tail is never still, too many hairs to distinguish, melded, trembling in airy surround. Sometimes the light seems colored, sometimes the fox’s tail.
– Perhaps –
Always part question, regardless the notion, emotion, or statement.
May not have been a fox
– Every thing questions –
Such is our “stance”? – ever in motion
Only a question, questing, going-on/in/for/toward/away?
I saw colors in the light, or air, I “took” to be a fox. I ex-tracted, ab-stracted, perceived… removed and oriented, made foreign, recognizable. This woman is so beautiful.
– In other words, “desire,” an imagining –
Almost like a dream
– What IF? What if we take back as we give, and offer as we reduce or remove?
Now one thing and another
And others more and more
– Only extension, addition? To multiply? –
Cuts that open and join… multiply and combine…
A fox with a beautiful tail, perhaps… flowing in forested light…
Anything, anywhere, and also
– And also not-this, not-that, not-quite, almost… else…
What follows is exemplary of my tendency when I open a notebook and begin to write… digression… sigh…
“a man, however intelligent, is no better at maze-running than a rat, unless assisted by notes, whether these are remembered verbally or sketched out in a drawing”
– Michael Polanyi, The Study of Man –
I am beginning this story with words, for I am writing, and writing has often occurred as the transformation of experience to perceivable mark for communicable purpose: programming code, impressions in sand, lines about the mouth and eye, numbers, letters, notations and visible strokes.
The mark I begin with is “I.” To imaginative purpose. Say we could coordinate belief around marks (which “we” already have, or “you” are unable to comprehend, co-perceive or mutually interpret anything of what “I” am scribbling). Imagine with me that we can: foster markings and gestures, sounds and expressions, that stabilize over time toward agreement…
1, I; 2, we; 3, you; 4, with; 5, world; 6,… and so on… where marks come to re-present a sharing or relation toward – together we assemble at “tree(4)” or “word(4),” at “sign(4)” or “kingdom(7),” at “ours(4)” and “us(2)” and at “we(2)” or whatever(8). All might be marked other ways, sounded or gestured – a squirrel’s flicking tail, a whale’s sonic wail, bird twitters, rock cracks and colors, cloud movements, sighs. Images, letters, motions, or sounds. Impressible, expressible movements. Relations enacted, touches and probes, effects and affects across spaces and times, this is language in-scribed and con-scribed –communicability – glance of finger or toe or of eye, brush of hair or of death or of light… con-tact. Tactility, touchability, WITH.
Imaginatively-agreed-illusory and often elusive – “Abstraction (11, or 10+1, or..)” – What-is-not becoming what-is. “Creation(8 or eight or 11111111…).” Coordinated occurrence of subjectless objects and objectified subjects and things among things among things “co-existing(10),” – or so “we” mark “it.”
I begin with a mark that is “i” or 1, or the slightest, least notable line. “iota” in Greek, as Frost deftly inscribes – just a pass, accident, happenstance, hardly constructed and simple – a stick falls from a tree and leaves an “L” or a “Y” in the soil, but an “i”?
A mistake usually, a drip.
So “I” use it to refer to “just 1” = “what-is-not.” No “one(1)” has yet known only one. With “one(1)” there is nothing ‘to know’ – to attend to, perceive. With 1 there is only the one – less than nothing. 1 counts the same in negation. You have nothing or one, but once perceivable three – the 1, the 0, the difference.
We make marks.
The mark I began with is “I,” just the least, the inception, the start of a “we.” A cry, a twitch, a tone or effect, a coloration, occurrence. What’s the difference…
“I” could have made a sound. Could have poked, puked, stomped, wriggled…simply gestured into wind…
ANYthing, EVERYthing can only happen as more-than-one. More than meaningless mark (/) or vanishing point, it indicates RELATION. If 1=nothing, we still get 1 + -1 = 0…all ways at least 3. And if 1 is alone (“all-one”) there’d be no knowing, telling, perceiving, deciding without at least a “NONE(4, 0)” or “TWO(3, 2)” to proffer recognition – ALWAYS MORE THAN ONE for there “2B.”
I could not propose “I” without other or else (no-thing could be perceived without difference, and difference demands at least two + a relation, [even similarity – which always harbors difference] – therefore 3 at the least for a mark). If “you” couldn’t tell a difference (perceive or experience something…how would you know some thing is?). Identi(cal)ty would seem (necessarily) IM-perceptible.
1 NEVER EQUALS 1. Such is my thesis. If equality and sameness are possible no one could mark it, perceive it, proclaim it – 1=1 is not perceptible. For 1(“I”) to be identifiable, not-1(not-I) is required, which demands a 3rd(third) that might distinguish or experience – whether relation-itself 1±1 or Otherness to “tell apart” or cleave.
Identification demands Other. A mark, even the slenderest, simplest, accidental dash – to be perceptible, to matter – must be different from an other. Therefore, always 2 have to be for a 1 to be, and for that to be perceptible a third(5, 3) must exist… 1≠1=3, and 1=1=3…
i.e. I begin with “I” to invoke/inscribe MANY.
I am beginning this story with words…
“All discourses…would then develop in the anonymity of a murmur…
What difference does it make who is speaking?”
“We talk only because of a persistent desire to understand what is it we are saying”
“Again and again there is the attempt to define the world in language and to display it –
but that doesn’t work”
According to a receipt yellowed in the pages of The Impossible book, 16 years ago I purchased the Story of Rats by Georges Bataille.
“What are you ‘getting at’?”
“What do you mean by ‘kernel’?”
Questions are asked. I ask them myself.
Today I got bored of it.
Uncertain I ‘get at’ anything. Doubtful even that ‘I’. Yet “feel” pursuit of some ‘kernel.’ In other words, because, simply, ‘other words’ (fore-words, afterwords) sometimes eventuate communication…
…as if experience were an undifferentiable ocean of moving waves – incalculably deep waters ever in motion – unstoppable, interminable, immersive, and overwhelming – and something splashes, a cup dips, a boat prow plows its way, an arm drops, or rock, or bird flashes down talons – and a surface becomes, is broken…
…ruin. Ruined. Inalterably (no, that’s not accurate – rather incessantly alterable, altering, altar-ing, alterity – othered and changed) altered, altared – SACRIFICED to perception, experience – peering-in-out-of, or peering/prying-out-of-in, out-of-pry-into
Rue-in, is what ‘I’ seem to do. Bring sorrow, lack, and loss with each perception, each calling, each again/comparison/re-cognition…Ruin, rue-in. Touching, seeing, tasting, smelling, hearing – continual selection and ignor-ance (DE-selection, de-lectory, de-clamation, di-visory…) rues-in, sorrows-in, i-dentifies creating lack, erasure, damage.
“What happens – ?”
The temptation together [to gather]…to peer and pry into, in, with…to test and to try…to extract and bring, to-gather… to form-u-late. AFTER experience, to create other…posit(-ion) a “You,” “out,” exo-, ex-tend, ex-plain, ex-haust, ex-hilerate and ex-aspirate…to KILL, CRUSH, SLICE, DIFFERENTIATE…’I’ hiding somewhere in All and Every.
An ‘I’ in All is AIL. Rue-in.
“Wouldn’t it be better if we didn’t get sick? But we do.” – Jan Zwicky
“Don’t be so hard on yourself…we all…”
Separate, tear, disjoint, di-chotomize, di-vulge, de-story, de-struct [de-con-struct i-we-form de-form]
As I was saying, try-pry-di-ing to say…
“Who? When? Where? How?”
Tri-, di-, all in-volves, in-volutes, con-volutes a cutting, a ripping, a be-lying of de-struction – as it crafts an alternate structure (con-struction)…
Oui. We. Yes. The sense that Is the sense of being-thrown, dropped, something making a splash, separating the waters… a kerneling, an ob-ject (re-ject, ab-ject) dis-turbance that sub-jects turbulence…
Thrown. Splash. Change. Alteration. Altaration. Altarity. Othering. For-IN (foreign)… kernel.
“What are you ‘getting at’?”
“So that’s what you mean by ‘kernel’? Dis-turbance… Turbulence… something must be… in order to…”
“What thing? Why?”
“In the beginning was the Word… was God… and God moved…and divided the waters…” (John 1:1, Genesis 1:1, 6, KJV) a Bar, a “firmament,” a permanent Between “called Heaven.” And so separating, separation be-gins…from the first very first motion, movement, change… ex-pulsion, ex-crement, ex-ultation, ex-is-stance. Out. OUT. OUT-of… posit-ion.
“You’ve lost me…”
“Oui – what are you ‘getting at’?”
Ex-perience. Prying, peering. Trying. Be-ing separates? Dis-joins? Dis-tracts? ‘I’ am a rupture. Dis-rupts: not two, not one. I stray, strive, volition, volute…de-story, de-volve. What am ‘I’ but a weapon-blade? Rue-in. And thus I speak, say with pointed pen…poke and pry and terrorize – ex-perience.
“Glorious or gory-ous – visions are di-visions”
So it seems…
“So it is…”
Is, was, will be spoken into/out-of our stance (existance)…falsified di-visions…
“I cannot get beyond language by means of language”
The Three Oddest Words
When I pronounce the word Future,
the first syllable already belongs to the past.
When I pronounce the word Silence,
I destroy it.
When I pronounce the word Nothing,
I make something no non-being can hold.
By Wislawa Szymborska
Translated by S. Baranczak & C. Cavanagh
Copyright © Wislawa Szymborska, S. Baranczak & C. Cavanagh
thank you Unwanted Advice
“Pangs of faint light and stirrings still. Unformable graspings of the mind. Unstillable”
– Samuel Beckett –
Let’s loiter about here a little, as if language were lakelike, locatable, alive enough to lollygag loose within. Perhaps not. Perhaps it is nearly always just-becoming. Perhaps nearly all, nearly always, is thus: just-becoming – liminal lineaments languishing-then-livened, languishing-then-livened, “again” we might say, designating (de-term-ining) a balance to enlivened. How so? Why so? By what author(ity)?
“In the madhouse of skull and nowhere else” (– Samuel Beckett). Is that so?
“Skin has no choice but to converse with the world…thin, ignorant borderland of skin…myself all trespass, misunderstanding, translating, translating…” (-Laurie Sheck). Is that so?
If words were invented with sense. To “make sense” between one and an ‘other.’
What if words ARE THAT? Connective contours between.
I am inebriated, my willingness loosened to expression, though it might ruin me (like language) and I stare (Dostoevsky – ‘Myshkin’) “intently” into Mikhail Bakhtin’s face, his specific eye-gaze, and say:
“Is it the case that words are ‘meant,’ are ‘formed,’ are breathed, are…constructed, are…utilized, to be tissue woven between ‘me’…and ‘you’?”
Do we… speak, say, expire back and forth… to become? To string and weave lines, flows, strands, threads, that might forge or invent co-respondence, texture, significations combining you and myself into WE?
But Bakhtin is dead, and cannot answer. Mikhail Bakhtin does not have the capacity to co-respond.
…like Beckett, Blanchot, Plato, Montaigne, Pessoa, Pascal, Wallace or Euclid, Bulgakov, Heraclitus, or Celan (as with any and all dead!) he emits traces (tracings) with which I can consider, decipher, and interrogate in and within my ‘selves’ but not between…
What might this ‘mean’ – between anyone? Nothing.
It can not, has no opportunity to, delineate or circumscribe, draft, figure or shape any relation.
Sign emitted, call evoked, death, and then text as silent partner. Prognostic retrograde delineation.
Bankrupt, impassible, impossible, communique.
The decoding of words as communication, connection? An imaginary. A handling of terms. Inventing, devising, originary. With whom? Where? How? Hint and vestige, remnant and sketch, scheme and fabrication, inkling and outline.
Unstillable. Unformable graspings of the mind. Is that so?
If we’re limning the liminal now, let’s loosen the letters and slacken the sieves. Lasso and lounge, scatter and scrape, together (to gather) – a scintillate sense – sporadic sparks, succulent scenarios – exist for enlivening language, whatever limited lust lies therein – if language is locatable and not merely modal mechanics? A modicum of music then, some scrap of sonority, some lingual litmus ‘making sense.’ Whatever. Possibility, potential, particible particulars…
“THE TEST IS COMPANY”
“If there may not be no more questions let there at least be no more answers”
– Samuel Beckett, Company –
“We must not die: kindred spirits will be found”
– Viktor Shklovsky –
“quiet field without possession”
Laurie Sheck, Captivity
I am an ocean of signs. Of a womby surround – undulate, viscous, discombobulate, obscure. Tremulous quarks of murky markings and inference, connotative particles, confused, ill-defined, and indifferent. Instigative convolutions, a potentia of concatenation and combine, cations and anions, dispersive attract.
Filled with words. Prescriptive, disruptive, chaotic, coherent. A turbulence transposing subjects, predicatively morphing, an aqueous slurrage of verb, vim and weave. Compositive, foreign, constitutive terms. Not-I. Of Other. As shapes and colors, sounds, concepts, any all perceived – no idgit of me, all permeable outside – Otherness, environ, cocoon – borrowed, received (or rejected?), an elusive collude.
Signifiers swarm me. Inherited meanings, genetic loom of semiotic loops and swirls. Who begins? No ex nihilo. All arrange, revise, adapt. We’re composed. I of an ocean of signs. Language and impulses, instincts and codes. Ellipses and notions imposed. Undifferentiate, senseless, stirred by experience – a cacophonous chorus of bones to my suture.
Oral, aural, textured and gestured, I swim and I sink, flux in the float. Fragments and fractures, compounds and bonds, links and erasures. Malformations. Dis-ease. Some viral, some blocked, unusable and ill-conceived, undone, or aborted. Indisposition. Swim on, slurry substance, amalgam of shreds, resist and desist, copy and swallow. I choke. I chortle. What makes “mine”? Just a word, (yet another), from whence and from where we don’t know, but not “us” (neither that, nor this keystroke, this breathy design, dasein, without ownmost). Even a name is built upon countless. Other.
Epi-, meta-, arche-, unknown and unknowing, interpreted through mediated mattery fracas, encompassing commotion, tempestuous din, innately ordained. But not-I, freak iota, insignificant smallest, author of none. No one. No thing. No not-I.
Quavery, wavering, components of signs, my birth-sea and umwelt, disjoiner and fabricate mush.
This become, in this swelter, this wrap and unravel. Efface and inveigle a ubiquitous unique. I am drowning, a seaway of signs.
“I have only to go on, as if there were something to be done, something begun, somewhere to go. It all boils down to a question of words, I must not forget this…”
– Samuel Beckett, The Unnameable –
Waiting for the passerby to pass. Contingency. To not open the door until the potential for harm is past. No apparent harm: adult man, skin color variance, divergent ethnicity, strolling outside the iron black gate surrounding my home, gesturing toward and addressing my small pet mammal (a dog) – ostensibly safely contained and separate – from the strange-other, (“stranger”) traveling past my abode on a designated path “outside,” a public sidewalk… yet no harm is ever apparent, or we’d be almost certain to avoid it.
From behind the closed door, thus abandoning the small animal, the “pet” that I care for (“care”? – to keep alive with food and water, activity and touch – for what reasons I have never understood, it seems something we do, or something done to us) in any case (who “us”?) to me (“me”?), in any case, in every case, (what is “case”? – case is what occurs), in any case the sensation that harm is imminent, is possible, that any/every-thing (or case) harbors potential threat – intrusion, oppression, obligation, response-ability – that ANY passer(s)-by may enforce (force what in?), force “presence” (presence: the pressure of an other)…occurring-with.
Mammal, woman, weather, man. Peril of change, of inevitable occurring, alteration, the inception of a “case.” Event. Permutation. Disaster. Perhaps.
Wait for “it” to pass (ambiguous constancy of language, of pronouns, of perhaps). To be.
No apparent harm, harm always arriving where not apparent, otherwise averted.
Therefore damage expected everywhere, until proven otherwise or bypassed, for when has it ever been the “case” that harm, hurt, or affliction were not lurking unaware?
Always caught “off-guard” when injured. As in “accident,” or un-fore-seen. Must not not-fore-see. Avoid wreckage.
He passes by. Or she, or it, or they (ambiguous language and malleable, eminently referable, transferable, vague for application). No harm incurred (as far as is known). As who knows? Who might know? Or what?
World transforms. Passers-by. Incidents. We have a “case” (who – “we”?). “I” step back, step in, amidst walls, barriers, rooms. “I” retreat. Evading catastrophe. Probable hardship. Imaginable uncertainty. Such is the “case,” my “cave,” a cave uncertain, unreliable, self-designated, no one knows. This (what “this”?) is vague – hurt has always materialized unexpectedly. Danger is disaster, or if not, no harm no foul, never wounded by suspecting, only oblivious or uninformed. Must anticipate harm. Less proven guiltless. Never guiltless. Never harm without an-other, without outside, without obscurity. What is “with-out”?
When ever not with-out? With-out always. With. No in without with-out. Danger of disaster. Any definability requiring with-out. No in without out. Being with out.
Waiting for passersby to pass. Bye.
When have I been harmed when I expected? Perhaps in love, perhaps adventure. Any venture with out. Into the without. Within without. Knowing I was risking with the out. “Self-harm.” It would appear without’s within as well. Never not another. Abysmal and ubiquitous. Possibly impossible: to be without with-out. No reference or referral without being-with “out.”
No within then. Only out could be. In with in? Self-same. Tautology. A=A. How A without out? Without not-A? Without absence, other, space, not-line, shapelessness, void? A=A because A is distinguishable from. Distinct. From – ? Without.
Why “without”? Why not only “with” – necessarily out or other? Variant. Different. Without “out” no “with.”
Squirrel, leaves, air, skin. Cells, organs, activities and processes. Even what’s “in” is “out” for “with.” “In” “with” “out.” A=A. So say. Think. “I.” Passing by. Table, paper, pen, without prompting “in.” In without as well. No “in.” A=A. IN WITH OUT.
Out the “within.” Without in/out. Writing. Saying. Bleeding. Breathing.
Only think with out. All out, away, a way.
Wait for a way to away. Within/Without. A/A. No equals. Never equal.
Pet mammal dog, own voice, man, woman, child, sensation, language, molecule, atmosphere, ground: without with-in.
WITH, then. Simply with. No out, no in. All danger and disaster, potential and unsuspected harm. Can not. Unprotected. Only WITH. No out, no in.
Waiting for the passers-by. Passing. Bye.
III. “…with murderous care…”
Jon had said, to Jesse, about the fires.
So we persisted, Jon, Jesse, and I, and the deceased Beckett, with perhaps thousands of others, unbeknownst any to each around some mythical innermost.
“Fail better.” The worst times are the ones in which one simply wants to quit failing altogether. Unfortunately (literally) that necessarily entails a kind of “end of the world as one ‘knows’ [perceives, participates, experiences, or imagines] it” – either suicide, tragedy, ‘terminal’ illness – death of some sort. Maybe silence, but that’s not certain.
The game table is always already laid, you’re always simply ‘entering’ it (LW points out this fallacy in his collections of numbered critiques of anything anyone writes or says or claims) actually (as far as we know) always already there (where you ‘find’ – what?!? – your ‘self’ – what?!?) and (again, perhaps, literally, unfortunately – or at the very least extremely limitedly) you can only occupy one position at the table (or wherever the action happens to be) at a time, that, unfortunately, always involves the very delimited…well, YOU. These are the arrangements as they transpire.
Language can (and does), we surmised, go anywhere. I try to record, invent, notate, mark, initiate. It all seems unnameable. Or of far too many names, references, usages, subtexts and connotations, inferences and denotations, already implemented in order to represent anything undone, reconstructed, deconstructed, novel or ‘new.’ “There’s nothing new under the sun” was already a cliché at the beginning / in the earliest phases.
Fires and voids all imagined early. [Apeiron. Chora/Khora. Clinamen. Flux. Infinity. ABSENCE. The ‘Other.’]. I begin. Again. GWFH and Freud refer to this as “repetition.” A hopeless hope of emergence. As different or unique as it may seem, ever a plenitude of the pre-existing. The already-there.
Been there, done that, Beckett exhausts from his grave alongside. “He was found lying on the ground…a voice comes to one in the dark” Imagine. Imagine. Everything is already there. The table set and set again, arranged. Already there when you wake to it. World.
It hasn’t…apparently…been given up. Perhaps it is inexhaustible. Limited though we be, we seem to be teeming with it/them… efforts at the unsayable. Unnameable. How it is. What is the what. Lost in the labyrinth of the occurrence, experience, now with shoddy, partial, biased and over-specified or eccentrically particular maps, guides, or rulebooks. Ourselves.