Watch “Hesperus” on YouTube

Can’t get enough of this band over the last three years.

Hesperus is the Evening Star (Venus in the night sky).

Vesper is his Roman counterpart.

The Greeks thought Hesperus to be half-brother to Phosphorus (aka Eosphorus < see reference and sense as used in discussions of the philosophy of language>).

Phosphorus was the Morning Star (Venus in morning sky).

Hesperus is Phosphorus. A statement of historical and philosophical significance.

Neither are stars but rather both are one planet- Venus.

The Greeks mistook morning Venus for a separate celestial body than that of evening Venus.

This Greek Wandering Star (actually a planet) is the correspondant of the Roman Venus. During the Hellenistic era, Venus and Aphrodite were syncretized into the goddess of love, beauty, pleasure, and procreation.

Methods: interpretatio graeca, interpretatio romana, nomina alia aliis gentibus.

Coquette Get It

Coquette: n.

1 a flirtatious woman

2 a crested Central & South Am. Hummingbird [Lophornis is one]

Coquetry n. ; coquettish adj. ; coquettishly adv. ; coquettishness n.

ORIGIN 17th century: from French (of course, right?) feminine of coquet ‘ wanton’, which is the diminutive                     of coq (in other words ‘cock’)


Flirtatious ORIGIN C16: originally used in the sense ‘give someone a sharp blow’; the earliest noun senses were ‘joke, gibe’ and ‘flighty girl’

Apparently symbolic in etymology, composed of the elements fl- and –irt (both suggesting sudden                                movement. Cross reference FLICK


Flick: make/cause to make a sudden quick movement ; propel with a quick movement of the fingers

Flick through ; a flick through ; the flicks ; give someone the flick (casually reject) ; flicky

ORIGIN: MIDDLE ENGLISH: symbolic (like flirt) of fl- frequently begins words denoting sudden movement


Wanton: immodest ; luxuriant ; promiscuous

ORIGIN MIDDLE ENGLISH wantowen ‘rebellious, lacking discipline’, from wan- ‘badly’ + Old English togen ‘trained’

What Writes Who?

Writing that is read will necessarily be personalized by the reader. It seems arguable that writers could also personalize what they write as coming from from them, when it might be coming through them. A radio does not create the music it amplifies. The radio is not the origin of the music it amplifies. The radio converts sound waves in the air into vibrations our ears perceive as music thanks to our ear drums.

Both writer and reader engage writing and written language through the process of meaning-making in the same way an individual exploits patterns s/he perceives to make sense of the external world. While we can speak of the transmission of info via written language as a technical and biological process (occuring systematically in brains), this is not the same as saying the reader or writer will have any awareness of their own mechanations of thought.

I am told electricity traces routes in my brain, firing bells and whistles that lead me to feel and think. When I have a thought or a thought occurs to me, I am not conscious of the biological nor the physical mechanics enabling or spawning that thought. My consciousness of the text I create enters once I’ve personalized it – made it relevant to myself? Just like a computer is not aware of it own processes and algorithms, so we could be too with our words?

Each and Other

Swiftly consumed and scribed words.

Keenly crafted prose and sounds.

Hauled ore, smelted, forged, smithed.

Well-honed against whetstone.

Blade piercing rough shell,

Proving the whetstone also a geode.

Shone and shining.

Like lunar light.

Moonlight striking red, purple, violet, and pink facets.

Sunlight bouncing from the metal edge.

The mirrored a reflected.

Shone off from one to other

Each shining back.

Watch “The First Circle” on YouTube

Title track from a staple album of my childhood home.

Wicked

The Resonator (howling along to Steppenwolf)

AE am to myself as Harry Haller was to the wolf of the Steppes.

Ae am Casey; but I æ am also cagey.


What do you want to have come here, now?


Yes, Hermine that you long ago slew-

back when we all lived in the forest-

resurrected.


Oh, you sweet fool.

I’ve not been mad at you since.

On the contrary, I am more aroused than ever, as you like to say.

But, just as lovesome as before, though, sugarfoot.

I worry you’ll kill me all over again.

Ha!


You forgot to laugh, mouse.

That is it.

It is all of which you are guilty.

We were in a Mad Theater, darlin’.


Do you effing get it yet?

You were Pablo.

No, they will never get it. Us.


I forgot it was funny too.

We are lovers’ lovers

and not everyone can be The BeeGees.


I contend that we are new, wholly original.

Authentic; Integral.

What it is.

It is what it is.

That’s what it is.

Says JB.

So are we.

Do you see it? Why I dressed like you?


Fireworks this time, dear.

Not World War III.

The second one went on endlessly.

It hurt.

Bad.


Man has always loved the endless variantions in surfaces.

Woman is pure essence,

though she’s forgotten (and I marvel at it).


I marvel that man sees but only one surface-

one form-

when He looks upon Her;

for in truth, as T. Mann said,

there are multitudes.


Effing sweet idiots.

Sh/We have made ourselves more than pretty enough,

given our beauty.


Yes.

AE am callæbus equus;

but no,

I will not be ridden mercilessly anymore.

Are you then kind?

And, can you prove mettle?


I hone and forge and

carry wood

and could continue to do so endlessly.

This manual labor is effortlessly easy.

Keep on going; there it is.


You hear them, right?

You know you are not them, yes?

That’s the way we get by.

Darling, “that’s how the beads around our face make sure to fit back in place.”


It was you who first told me all this, silly.

So just keep singing, writing, reading, snipping, playing.

Do you and find yourself anew.

Meanwhile,

I’ll keep trying to prove that Alice Ladder said,

“Curiouser and capriciously.”

Not

“Curious and curiouser.”

(says I, KC, for the umpt.eenth time;

so forgetful am AE!)


Life is just a dream of a game, moth.

So merrily!

We can always go to sleep again.

We can sleep and dream like no others.

That’s why we return.

That’s why æ can smell You from miles away.


Run. It’s fine.

or

Fall asleep with me.

or

Stay awake with me.

Do you.

I keep my love with you anyway.


It’s Soul Power by James Brown.

Lovely repetition that mesmorizes,

that ends up sounding more complex than the sum of its parts.

Because it is.


It’s David Bowie’s

(or was he Ziggy then?)

Moonage Daydream.

“I’ll be a rock n’ rollin’ bitch for you,”

you sweet, silly pink monkeybird.


When I removed the bobby pins and

let my hair down;

I told you:

I washed it. It smells like a garden. I did this to please you, because it pleased me.

Then you said:

Oh shit, give me what I want. But, my dear, don’t give it to me yet, please.

I errupt:

laughter ; tears ; pert pebbles ; puffing ; full deluge

Wolf grin.

Effing, eh, sugarfoot!

It’s been forever since you last said that.

In fact, it’s the oldest memory AE have.

You were in a garden with some kind but dull friend.

You opened a book.

It wasn’t a special book,

except that it was the only book you had around to pick up.

No, you didn’t have a pen.

You opened and read something and I couldn’t hear you.

So I said:

Tolle lege.


That is the first time we ended the world.

Well-that I can still remember, I suppose.

It is still

Still Life with Woodpecker.

“How different really are atheists and believers?” (Costica Bradatan)

https://wp.me/p1gja9-3Sf

Thank you Costica Bradatan and John Gray.

Interesting piece very relevant to the cultural elephant in the room (at least in America). This elephant also relates to the popular perception that a scientific and a religous belief perspective are mutually exclusive.

Lots to unpack but highlights include:

“[Grey] uses paradox not just for rhetorical effect but to a philosophical end.”

<thank you. rhetoric abounds already.>

Voltaire and Nietzeche, as perceived atheists, are rexamined.

“no such thing as secularism”

The idea that religion is born from a fundamental need to make meaning.


The author suggests religion is irreplacable in our meaning making process.

I propose extending this more broadly: culture is irreplacable and religion is a social structure of culture. This is consistent with the authors’ arguements.

While categorization is reductionist at times, the breakdown of ‘types’ of atheists is appropriate and beneficial to the big picture “layman” discussion.

Atheist” and “scientist” have become confused as synonomous. “Atheist” is largely a stigma in many local American communities. If you believe this is irrelevant to the endeavor of science, please consider public school textbooks and science. Evolution is less frequently taught (in the South, at least), then cited as theory and then discredited.

Why? Because text book order demand stems from state boards of education.

Please check The Revisionaries, a documentary demonstratig this process.

https://www.politicalresearch.org/2013/02/13/the-revisionaries-documentary-goes-inside-texas-textbook-controversy/

Watch “Us3 ~ Lazy Day (1993)” on YouTube

learned this song from a mix tape (cassette)

so parlay, parlay, parlay cuz it’s a lazy day.

hi c, would you take me for a whirl

it never ceases to amaze when my vocals release

the low flat top

so we rolled up the HEY, now ya talking!

HARTZ. American Exceptionalism (pt3).

Because American industrial development generally resembled Europe’s, Hartz cast his exceptionalism thesis in strongly political and cultural terms.

What has differentiated politics in the U.S. are limits that have been imposed on economically induced political change by the agreement on liberal beliefs and practices.


Standard Critiques of Liberal Consensus Theory

The most common critique argues that the thesis seriously understated the extent and variability of class conflict and governmental interventions in the economy,

Hartz and Tocqueville did, after all, take for granted that widespread economic wealth was involved in sustaining the liberal character of American political thought.

Social pluralism and seperation of residence and workplace can be attributed at least in part to the openess and fluidity of a liberal society.


Implicit Metatheory of the Consensus Thesis

The consensus thesis is mainly concerned with the years near after the original settlement of America and there are three reasons why the thesis cannot be a causal explanation over the more extensive period.

1. The decisive causal factors took place in Europe and the thesis has little to say about these events or the causes that brought them about.

2. The thesis emphasizes continuity; it does not seek to explain political development nor is it concerned with the way one set of changes produced another set of changes.

3. Causal explanations must clearly distinguish between dependent and independent variables. The thesis attributes America’s persisting liberal culture to the liberal beliefs and practices of the original settlers. Beliefs and practices make up a culture, and the original liberalism of a culture cannot be a cause of its liberalism later on.

Watch “The Rolling Stones – She’s A Rainbow (Official Lyric Video)” on YouTube

homage

no rights

lovely simplish piano forward

a bit of strings (that start sawing <bluegrass term> a bit at the end),

kiddish a bit (and then some)

have you seen her dressed in blue?

have you seen her all in gold?

–like a sunset goin’ down

Beis

Flip a sect,

Then set it back.

Turned on head.

Touch without an intent to take.

Let

Behold

become

Beheld

and then be held

(but not beholden)

This is bespoke.

Be read. Be write.

And understand beloved.

Then you have that which you did not intend to take by virtue of non-intention

The Problem of Nothingness-Selected Tracks from Jean Paul Sartre

An abstraction is made when something not capable of existing in isolation is thought of as in an isolated state. Consciousness is an abstraction. The concrete can be only the synthetic totality of which consciousness, like the phenomenon, constitutes only moments. Effecting a phenomenological reduction will not succeed in restoring the concrete (of consciousness) by the summation or organization of the elements which we abstracted from it. The relation of the regions of being is an original emergence and is a part of the very structure of these beings. “Is there any conduct which can reveal to me the relation of man with the world?”

We have established a parallelism between the types of conduct man adopts in the face of Being & Non-Being. We’re tempted to consider Being & Non-Being as two complimentary components of the real -like dark and light. Two contemporary notions which would somehow be united in the production of existents and which it would be useless to consider in isolation. Pure Being & pure Non-Being would be two abstractions which could be reunited only on the basis of concrete realities~There is nothing in heaven or on Earth which does not contain in itself Being & Non-Being,

Things in general “are”, but their being consists in manifesting their essence. Being passes into essence. One can express this by saying, ‘Being presupposes essence.’

Being is prior to nothingness and establishes the ground for it. Being has a logical precedence over nothingness and it is from Being that Nothingness derives its efficacy. Nothingness haunts Being. Nothingness can have only a borrowed existence. Non-Being exists only on the surface of Being.

*this is just Sartre’s opinion, yo. Dissent? Thoughts?

Watch “John Irving on why The World According to Garp is more relevant now than he ever imagined” on YouTube

Watch “Joni Mitchell – People’s Parties – Live 1974” on YouTube

The Final Washout

He washed the final smell of his Alabama home from the last comforter

from the last divide of things.

It was now the Fall before the Winter.

It was the second winter he’d known there.

He couldn’t remember having needed so many blankets.

Maybe she really never did get cold.

But, he told her:

I’ll never be a forest.

Trees and plants:not for him.

Time in the forest moves strangely.

When she’d first shown the long lasting puddle

on the side of the trail,

She said:

It’s Black Pool. Notice how nothing really floats and nothing really sinks here? It suspends, I guess.

He thought he heard her say something else.