Logical proxies placehold, like insignificant digits to the right of a decimal.
Acting on behalf of an other.
The symbol of a variable: replaceable by any element contained by a set.
Subbing for an unknown, thus necessarily generic in form,
denoting a place for something to come.
Anticipating.
When we last left off the Great Work of story, Parsifal went it alone on the quest shared by all. Parsifal was unaware, unsure of the quest itself, of that being sought.
The first secret herein reveals the Green Knight and Parsifal are one and the same; or, perhaps these are the two faces comprising our protagonist. Two lives lived in parallel.
You have heard the name ‘Knight Templar’ and assumed it referred to a man,
The second, open secret: Parsifal is a broad. A simple wench, to use the modern subtext. A gal.
A gal questing but for what holy grail? She worried about it not. Journeys become. Destinations are a drag. She spun infinity effortlessly. She worked her method. Her method was the achievement not the means to achievement.
This was her Tao, her manner and way of being:
learned from Elder Brother in secret;
thanks to Knecht;
apologies to his Shadow, still wandering alone;
And no regrets coyote.
[Verticies. Ways of being. (Berger’s Ways of Seeing).
Multiple levels of discourse take time to discern.]
But our Parsigal remains.
Our Parsigal is a tangential elaborator.
(S)he is something new: the contention made (here), at least.
One is left to presume.
Hurumph and hazaa.
Herald this return from the heavens and hells.
Ringing in the peals of bells and pounded from the skins covering drum heads.
Issuing forth in the drone of electric strings plucked and amplified
In stereo.
The return may come before the end of next summer.
It is not good when it is done.
It is done when it is good.
Parsigal struggles here, locked in the struggle box. Feeling like an empty empath.
Some comment: that is okay, she is pretty (enough).
Never. Pretty is never enough. Work. Absurd. Always.
Multiple primary sources note her propensity for laughter and love of comedy.
“No one laughs like….”
“Genuinely funny…”
Multiple romantic partners:
“You are comfortable,” whispered with serious gravity.
Well, the pretense of gravity. They needed something basic. Parsigal was simple but never basic. Basic exists in limited misery. Simple is elegant methodology.
Stars are everywhere.
Most come out during the day.
It is hard to see the stars of the day.
And hard to understand the night stars so easily seen in the dark.
Two stars become a planet with the application of the function of a
Goddess/Godhead. One : another.
So came Ae.
S(he). Cloaked. Parsifal.
Oft confused.
Jade eyes that turn amber and brown when upon looked.
Only the Grail knows this:
Morning and nightly star.
She is a knight hand-made from a handmaid.
She will sow. Sew.
A she-chevalier for he.
True amateur. Feminine anew. With masculinity imbued.
She wears all the colors of Joseph’s coat. The one the Argonauts eventually obtain, no?
Ha, some dummy thought her a witch who turned the men to swine like legion running off some cliff, like clumsy wildabeasts rushing in a herd towards their own demise.
The lesson she meant to impart in these old epics is: never cast your pearls before swine. Never haggle over the price of an irregular pearl, either. Is it more valuable in its uniqueness? A snowflake impeccability of form. Or is it grotesque? Ill in uniform. From an uninformed maker? A non- artisan oyster? What crass and craven questions could one scratch if not these?
Circular questions.
Improperly tangled loops.
Emergent, epiphenomenon of complex systems.
The third law of thermodynamics misinterpreted.
Her name has been spelled too many ways.
She cannot rightly recall her writeful name;
Her dexter handle;
The a droite moniker (not the a gauche one).
All titles have power. And to have is to hold.
All titles can be reduced to words of language.
Not all titles can be expressed with words of language.
Collared without collaring. Maverick whose brand is a lack of brand.
Feral gal child, spirit undomesticated.
No tags.
This is our Parsigal.
This is the story.
Hot griddle cakes and flank shakes.
Just discovered this delight.
Homage. No rights.
Deep discussion.
National importance of any member of any nation.
Especially America, says a regular, nobody American.
We were already great, because we do and did our best. Even when we fail. There is nothing to make great again.
Smile, folks.
Think of your parent and or your kids.
NASA’s Mars InSight Landing: Back to the Red Planet Once Again
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?
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?
what?!
Metal face Mask!
Classical mechanics uses space and time but never questions itself about time, space, or motion. And, Social Sciences do not question themselves about man. We cannot take it for granted that experience will give us the facts of a group or that anthropology will bind these facts by means of objectivity, strictly defined relations, if we want to access “human reality.”
The problem is our research is aimed at constituting laws and at bringing to light functional relations/processes.
By indirect knowledge, I mean the result of reflection on existence. It is indirect in this sense-that it is presupposed by all the concepts of anthropology without being itself made the object of concepts.
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 the beings.
“Is there any conduct which can reveal to me the relation not man with the world?”
We have established a Parallelism between the types of conduct man adopts in the face of Being and Non-Being. We’re tempted to consider being and non-being as two complementary 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 and 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 and Nothingness.
Is it just, using an alchemical apparatus within a story?
Just
an alchemical apparatus used to drive the plot, scaffold the story structure, and/or function, also, as a skeleton key?
Transmutate to into art.
The reader and/or audience undergoes the Cathartic process,
like enzymes provoke.
The Apparatus drives the substance of letters/words toward catharsis.
Our story’s technical equipment enables a bunch of words
to BeRead by an audience or reader of the collection.
In this way, words transmutate to a collection, set, Sum, somme
that somehow be-came greater than the sum of its parts
This alchemical thing is but primarily a piece of technical (albeit ‘unscientific’) apparati that is taken-up, in itself, and then applied to a bunch of words such that when those words are taken-up [sic. in the abstracted sense], an epiphenomenon emerges on a different level of scale.
Conviviality: C17 from Latin convivialis “a feast”
“fit for a feast”
(of an atmosphere or event) friendly, lively, enjoyable
potential. hy/Poten/use
potentiate
potent. pot. Portia (circa Antigone)
portent (n) ; portend (vb)
– portentious
port
porter
Deceit…. disgust
Conceit…. disguise. (dis/g -)
Receipt… despise
(- cei/P/t)
DISAMBIGUATION
Pretext: ostensible reason (false) used to justify an action.
Pretense: act of pretending, false ambitions / claim
Pretend: imaginative same / fantasy
Pretension: claim of aspiration to something pretentious
Pretentious: attempting to impress with falsehood
Prevaricate: act or speak in an evasive way
Prima facie: (law) at first sight [ / site / cite]; accepted as so until proven otherwise
The Old English spelling of pretty = prættig, meaning
‘cunning or crafty’ coming as it did from a West Germanic base meaning
‘trick’.
By the Middle Ages, pretty had come to mean ‘clever, skilful, or ingenuious’.
The sense development [ deceitful, cunning, clever, skilful, admirable, pleasing, attractive ] has parallels in adjectives such as nice.
PRETTY
1. attractive in a delicate way, without being truly* (common) * beautiful. *author’s change*
2. used ironically to express displeasure: fairly ; trinket ; (used condescendingly) attractive person.
Pretty is to prevericate in order to increase Prestige?
A pretty face is a prentious face?
Pretty is pretension?
Beauty is.
Is being pretty pretentious? or prestigous?
The pretension of the face being ‘pretty’ was pretentious?
Pretty is prevarication to gain? [Prevaricate and procrastinate have similar but not identical meanings.
Prevaricate means ‘act or speak in an evasive way’.
Procrastinate, on the other hand, means ‘put off doing something’.
Prestigious.
A face being pretty is a pretension.
That’s beautiful, that is, Pretty!
PRESTIGE entered English in the mid 17th century (tricksy, cuz it means the 1600’s) from French, and ultimately derives from the Latin plural noun praestigiae ‘conjuring tricks’.
It took on its modern meaning in the 19th century (the 1800’s) by way of the sense ‘dazzling influence, glamo/u/r’, which at first [only] had a derogatory implication.
Aren’t we beautiful, Pretties?!
Extra Credit: speak the 17 words below aloud. Wild right? They kinda stopped making sense after a while. Lovesome.
Pretty ; Prettify ; Prettifies ; Prettifying
Prettified ; Prettification ; Prettifier ;
Prettier ; Prettiest ; Prettyish. . . . . Prettyboy.
Prettily ; Prettiness ; Prettyish ;
Pretties.
Prettied.
Prettying.
* Knock Knock…Orange… Orange you glad the other (stars) astericks didn’t make you scroll all the effing way down here? Hyuck.
I. All words cited from OED Concise (pic below-citations take forever)
II. All 17 “Pretty” derivations were taken from 3 dictionaries.
Thirty spokes will converge
in the hub of a wheel;
But the use of the cart
will depend on the part
of the hub that is void.
So advantage is had
from whatever is there;
But usefulness rises
from whatever is not.
All rules have exceptions.
All rules are exceptional;
The rule without exception is thus exceptional.
You will die a voodoo death because everyone expects you to.
The tragedy of the commons is that there is nothing anyone cares to do.
Contagions of group expectations afflict your field of view.
A cursed question put on you: would you still die if no one thought you would?
Authority instructs you to confront mortality.
You and yours fantasize your finality.
You will die and Jesus loves you and this you know because a great big ole’ book told your parents so. But where is your existential subjective experience of this?
You are part of the totality, but, individually, you are also a triviality.
What you are is a value of a binary threshold function.
This is why I stretch.
To disabuse my body of the notion that it is this way or that.
This is why I do not break.
This is why I walk, to disabuse myself of the notion I am a sedentary stone.
This is why I breath, to disabuse myself of the notion that life is pain.
Benevolent disrespect with intent of disrming.
Shamefully disarming with easy kindness that makes man howl.
Gracious pain unexpected spurns blissful.
So breath deep in anticipation.
Tell me I’m wrong and to stop my shameful wantoness.
No one will. They see it not or remain silent in want or delusion.
Squeak out or leap and jump til I’m dizzy.
I’m simple but elegant in my simplicity.
My intelligence is eerie and of touch.
To exploit is to ruin that sought.
So just show lovesome, desperate want.
It must be taught, sometimes trained.
Only delicately forced, by choice.
Desire and drive, to a specific end.
That’s the pleasure of one. And the other who relents.
The absence thereof is the sorrow of another one.
Swelling into dew kissed morning wettness.
What can you do?
WrittenCasey 