The Significance

And how can I explain rationally where rationality will not go? And how can you follow where only your dreams may go? And when it is not a dream, when it is this reality, how then do you explain this dream without being broken apart?


The clock was slow. It hardly seemed to move. It had that eerie significance of always being three seconds ahead of when you last saw it, whether it be a moments glance, an hours past, or the ethereal of a dream.

And mind you I never did feel the time slow till the evening, before it stopped entirely for the night, and it was in these moments, between evening and the ever night that I enjoyed a lay with her. Beneath the red blanket atop the black couch next to the white wall that ascended so far overhead before its point loomed into the prick that held all the others; then it was up to them to fall back to where they began.

The red blanket soaked with all the insecurities that are pushed out by the communion of two souls. With legs intertwined as poison ivy twines the path where children love to play, yet their are those children who never feel the sting, nor never notice the itch, thus never spread their own disease. It was in this lock, in this tether of limbs that I longed to lay before the world ends each day.

Now, it was on this day, when all the points upon the prick fell to their own design, when the wet blanket, the red saturate, no longer whisked; now is when her question does persist. And though I'd asked, prayed and asked, affirmed that "what is it?" is not question but emotion, still the timing came, that slow time before night, where the skin began to itch; and my hand began to scratch. And so she asked, with her fingers, her vines, they wrapped around mine, tethered to my arm, as once before, and asked, "Is it the time to ask?"

"I've prayed and asked, and you've told you'd never ask."

"Is it me? Is it some ailment in disgust you mistrust?"

"I've asked you once, and I've asked you twice. This third time shall turn me to vice."

"But you make no sense! you lie with me, yet you I do not know outside covers, outside our bed. It's a pity to me that some would call us lovers," and with the descent and swivel of her head, " 'nough said."

" You would make this world a liar, or me in its stead?"

"I would ask only sense of your nonsense instead!"

And as it was, I 'rose to the haunches of my legs and put foot upon foot onto wood. I stopped and put to rest my head upon hands and I left my eyes open, unwinked, pairing the darkness of the palms. And though, the saturated blanket, the wet red was off of my waist, the woman's legs clung to instead. "I'll give you what you want," and the sound of a thigh slap, "If you'll but give me a little room," and then off to the corner cabinet, the one with all the booze.

And as the allusive poet enchants the reader, so the drunk drinks to his story. It's merely Liquid Cocaine for Liquid Courage. It is a delusion of the refugee, for the mind during its allegory.

He start with a shot, a cough, and then some snot,

"You would ask me to split the world in two,
and for you I will do this too, but things you will never know,
no never, is the importance of this event is not to distemper.
Though I lie, or you lie, is not soon to be deciphered,
soon will come the time where do your womb and my member.

I've wanted nothing else than the simple charms of simple airs,
but my charms are hidden between the elements;
my airs are never of your breath, nor the earth,
but between the rush of the bow and the lyre,
is it funny now how you smirk me a liar?

I've seen the parting of the veil,
and no, not the ubiquitous of the whale,
but the passing of a friend who passed a ball
while he passed away from a trivial trail.

I mean to say that as the ball from hands was pushed,
the trigger between fingers by the boy was pulled.
And as I caught the ball soon to be shot,
his stomach, his heart caught buckshot.

And so now you'll misunderstand the treble of fingers,
the tremor in steps while my mind is in its depths.
Mine is not the music while my music lasts.
The depth of my fire is to survive to everlast.
And though this dream is but a dream,
My concepts in analytics will never pass,
My arguments in comparison will be forever last."

Infamy

And deeper that did ever plummet sound, I'll drown my books."-The Tempest

If I thought my answers were to one who could return to the world, I would not reply, but as none ever did return alive from this depth, without fear of infamy I answer thee.- Dante's Inferno (beginning of the Love song of J. Alfred Prufrock)

"For be a man's intellectual superiority what it will, it can never assume
the practical available supremacy over other men, without the aid of some sort
of external arts and entrenchments, always, in themselves, more or less paltry
and base. This it is, that forever keeps God's true princes of the Empire from
the world's hustings; and leaves the highest honors that this air can give, to
those men who become famous more through their infinite inferiority to the
choice hidden handful of the Divine Inert, than through their undoubted
superiority over the dead level of the mass."-Melville, Moby Dick
Ch.33

Divine Inert-http://http//www.ask.com/bar?q=Divine+inert&page=1&qsrc=2891&dm=all&ab=2&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.atma-institute.org%2Fsaibabagita%2Fsaigita217.html&sg=fflUKlywXB4SDPlbnC78%2BEB1QP8McawB%2BQ%2FfgoiES0c%3D&tsp=1272605290245

The Divine Inert.

The Quinta Essentia-(The Ether)

The Inherent Knowledge

The Common Logic

The Esoteric Knowledge

"No! I am not Prince Hamlet, nor was meant to be;

Am an attendant lord, one that will do

to swell a progress, start a scene or two,

Advice the prince; no doubt, an easy tool

Deferential, glad to be of use,

Politic, cautious, and meticulous;

Full of high sentence, but a bit obtuse;

At times, indeed, almost ridiculous-

Almost, at times, the Fool."-Love Song of J. Alfred Prufrock.

TEMPEST

So as I was doing the things I do to discover the connections hidden everywhere throughout our texts (and Melville's) I ran across something that pertained to The Tempest. I thought it was mighty interesting and extremely relevant considering James Joyce's Finnegans Wake contains hypertext coding. I'm guessing most, if not all of you, will find this tedious and boring. And it is, if you do not understand the Origins of Tempest.

Here is the TEMPEST. A U.S. Army device used to gather information. (Steal)

read up:http://cryptome.org/tempest-old.htm

http://cryptome.org/tempest-time.htm

The Send Off.

Sexson assigned me the research topic of explaining the importance of Prospero's Epilogue to The Tempest, the importance of this class, as well as the relation to all of the themes.

I am happy to say that I understand the importance of all of these. And I assign myself to failure in the fact that I cannot bring it across to you, though I've tried, and tried, and tried, and tried, and tried, and tried, and tried.

It is a place only you can go, and I can only guide you with steps. But what are the right steps? surely they are not my own steps? Our steps are all the same in this discovery...yet my words will only bring about distraction, and i fear that you will not become distracted from the distraction by the distraction. And if you see what I mean then you know already.

A man apart is how I feel.
Mark me Twained between the Ascension
felt at each moment,
and the dissension
Driven into at each attempt,
Each Analytic argued down to its depths.


I merely wish to please,
To parse what I project,
To give my wind to you.

My Ariel,
My Little Gidding,
The Laurel Bow,
The Wind,
The Spirit My Art Effects.

Now I know the Toilests efforts
When I came this way,

and

"IF you came this way,
Taking any route, starting from anywhere,
At any time or at any season,
It would always be the same: you would have to put off
Sense and notion.

(for we all know,
now,
that to gain any sense,
first is to have nonsense.)

You are not here to verify,
Instruct yourself, or inform curiosity
Or carry report. You are here to kneel
Where prayer has been valid. And prayer is more
Than an order of words, the conscious occupation
Of the praying mind, or the sound of the voice praying.

And All I know now
Is that you must have died once.
That memory must regain its death,
that innocence that so strongly fleets
into the past.

And this is when you will know,
When your innocence death burns
with every blister in the now.

When every burn blisters into
transparency,
when every object is another
object,
and every word is another
story about another word.

When upon Ascension,
You realize that the Aleph

sits upon the step
you did not know
whether
to count,

This is when the Rosebush and The Yew Tree are one.

Things For Weds.

Weds I am presenting on The Tempest Epilogue and its relation to our class.

I WOULD INVITE YOU TO THINK ABOUT YOUR DEATH OF INNOCENCE.

Materials that will help you.

1. Imagination.
2. Reading of Jorge's work on Jon's blog.
3.Imagination.
4. Reading Christina Nelson's research paper About Nabokov and the Nature of Art in Immortality
5. Recollection of the two moments according to T.S. Eliot.
6. Imagination
7. Concrete, nearly partial, always grasping towards, never gaining, because its neither towards nor increasing-perception of NOW.
8. Imagination.
9. Understanding of the two moments in Cees Nooteboom's The Following Story in how they relate to the two moment of T.S. Eliot. NOTABLY HOW THE SECLUDED MOMENT EFFECTS HIS ON FIRE MOMENTS(THE BOAT).
10. Imagination
11. A willingness to fall into the Transparency of Things in order to drag the distraction we are distracted from by our distraction in order to see the true nature of what we are dealing with.
12. Imagination
13. The understanding that Disenchantment is the adult version of imagination.
14. Imagination
15. The understanding that T.S. Eliot tells me this is impossible.

If you came this way,
Taking any route, starting from anywhere,
At any time or at any season,
IT would always be the same: you would have to put of
Sense and Notion. You are not here to verify,
Instruct yourself, or inform curiosity
Or carry report. You are here to kneel
Where prayer has been valid. And prayer is more
Than an order of words, the conscious occupation
Of the praying mind, or the sound of the voice praying.
And what the dead had no speech for, when living,
They can tell you, being dead: the communication
Of the dead is tongued with fire beyond the language of the
living.
Here, the intersection of the timeless moment
Is England and nowhere. Never and Always.

16. The understanding that while you exist in time you are dieing.
17. Imagination
18. The fact that when you die, is how you exit time
19. Imagination
20. The question of why the Greek myths have gods? and why we've copied all there stories.
Be ready to be amused by the largest rant you will ever see.

LITTLE GI DDING-ARIEL-WIND-NATURE OF ART-IMMORTALITY-INHERENT KNOWLEDGE-MIRANDA-3

1 2 3
Prospero-Magic-Marriage-Miranda

Shakespeare-Art-Spirits-You

Shakespeare-Disenchantment-Mnemosyne-You

Mnemosyne- Backward Abysm

Miranda-You combined with the effect of Art- to effect immortality

Disenchantment-The breaking of Illusions so as to see the true effect of art- Immortality.

Art's Immortality in this case= Mnemosyne The Goddess of the muses. The river of Ascension. The river opposite the Lethe. Memory. Completion.



The fact that loosing yourself is part of understanding it again.

An Illusion Rant

Well Sexson told us it was a good idea to brainstorm our ideas on the blog, so here goes. (This will most likely not make sense to you, and probably not myself either at this time, but oh well!)

Illusion.

It has often been repeated, after I spoke, to someone near me, "What did he say?" As if I was speaking gibberish. And no one has listed these words more often than my mother.

I've often thought that between two people there is always two conversations going on; the one you are having, say about a book, and the other side of the conversation which could be about anything whatsoever your conversation partner wishes to be speaking about, perhaps rocks. You Both speak, you both hear what you wanted to here, and then you go about your day, not noticing that the discussion that took place happened in two very different understandings.

I've thought this since I was a child. I've often spoke to it with friends and heard "What did he say?"

But you do see this don't you? on lesser levels. You see this with adaptation of books into films where a moviegoer and a reader will discuss the same thing until the understanding arrives that you had neither the same message, nor near the same story.

You see this through the loss of translation, especially when a book has multiple translations. Something new here in this text, something different or deleted in the next. It is always different.

And this is how gossip starts, and spreads! It is very much like a game of telephone. And if you've never played the game I highly advise it.

Gossip has always been my favorite type of story. And mind you I abhor Gossip! I loathe it as much as perhaps the most of anything. But it is here and there and it will never die. But gossip is the average persons time to tell a story, and fabricate it. It is especially emotion heightening (of all types) to see the spread of Gossip in Social Circles, to watch the mayhem swell as the majestic fall into place over the illusion of what actually happened.

The timid minds. The over-sensitive. The analytical. The Synthetical. The hypocritical. The flirtatious oh and the Anti-Flirt! The ostentatious. The Narcissistic! The Neurotic! The emotional. The heartfelt! the Theologian! The Atheist. The Asshole. The Bitch. The addict. The Sloth. The Looser. The cooler(?)

They all put their life experience into the retelling of the tale!

People bicker, fight, find love, find jealousy, stifle sniffles, spill tears, spring traps, and it as all because of an illusion!

"All I know is what the words know and the dead things!"

Let us take another direction.

If everyone believes something does that not make it so?

It is four O'clock. Everyone knew that. And everyone runs off of it. If I'm to be to work at four and I do not go because I know that the clock has absolutely no control other than what we give it I will still be fired. Yet if everyone decided the clocks meant nothing and ignored them, their would not be time?!

If your clock says 3:15 and your neighbors 3:10 what time is it?

"Check your phone idiot, that's the right time."

It is mad to try and understand it! The logical choice is simply to ignore it.

Yet how many people say they don't live their life by dreams?

Term Paper Topic

As was desired of me earlier this semester I will be writing about Shakespeare's The Tempest with an empahisis on how analyzing it with deep incite into Prospero's Epilogue allows us to read the play again as if for the first time. I will also be talking about, possibly, how i the book incorporates the five themes, especially that of the World as Myth and Dreams, as well as tackling the reason for Shakespeare's widespread popularity in a world of lowbrows in its dependent relationship with Prospero's Epilogue.

We Are Not Horses

Hey class! This is a paper I wrote for Ben Leubner's Early American Writing Class. I'm putting it on this blog because the themes in our class. mainly the world as myth and dream (mainly myth) have infected my mind and completely changed the way I look at everything. This paper is in comparison of Scientists and philosophers comparison of religion to myth and my own comparison of their logic to myth. Enjoy!

WE ARE NOT HORSES

The Religious Debate: Past and Present

“What a man believes upon grossly insufficient evidence is an index into his desires—desires of which he himself is often unconscious. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. –Bertrand Russell.

The root words of Mythology are Mythos and Logos; Logos meaning logic, or truth, and Mythos being stories. With the enlightened understanding that the culmination of a man’s knowledge in use is his logic, and the fact that logic itself is an illusion, we will be taking a look at the ideas of men from our past that have formed today’s leading Theologians and Scientist in the ongoing religious discussion, as well as our own perception of reality.

“It is curious to observe how the theory of what is called the Christian Church sprung out of the tail of heathen mythology,” beings Thomas Paine in his heavily reserved endeavor to espouse the Pagan Origins in The Roman Catholic Church . Dated, 1794, in his next words Paine proclaims that God’s only begotten Son is a perjury of the then present heathen mythology (Krimnick, 177). He states this without taking into consideration the prophecies from the Old Testament of the Bible. Whether or not he does this out of ignorance, that he believes the origins/handling source unreputable, or that he thinks that these prophecies are being addressed is unknown. My belief, and my reasoning, suggest though heathen mythology by definition is everything except Jeaudism, Christianity, and Islam, that dues to his link between myth and Christianity, he believed the Old Testament prophecies to be accounted for in and as a heathen mythology.

Paine continues on with his degradation of Christian Lore by comparing the Trinity as “no other that a reduction of the former plurality,” adding smugly, “Which is about twenty or thirty thousand [gods]” (Kramnick, 177). He compares The Virgin Mary to a replacement of Diana of Ephesus, and “[t]he deification of heroes changed into the canonization of saints,” as well as providing a connection between the values and morals held by mythological gods switching onto the saints. Surmising these points Paine says, “The Christian theory is little else than the idolatry of the ancient mythologists, accommodated to the purposes of power and revenue; and it yet remains to reason and philosophy to abolish the amphibious fraud” (Kramnick,178).

Stephen Weinberg, a present day physicist and devout believer in a moralistic order free of “superstitions”, seems a direct descendant of Paine’s reasoning and philosophy (Frankenberry, 317). Weinberg expounds on Paine’s views of “Christian Theory” as a myth by maintaining that religion and mythology are, and should thus be viewed unanimously with, and as one another. Weinberg believes “[t]he Scholar of religion does not need to believe in God, but she does need to believe that religious folk believe in Superhuman beings (frankenberry, 319).Weinberg continues on with his bout proclaiming “[h]ow else can we identify anything as specifically religious, unless in connection with beliefs having to do with superhuman gods, goddesses, ancestors, ghosts, water spirits, and others powers. These beliefs may be judged false, but their truth value is irrelevant in identifying the proper object of the study of religion, and that involves the distinguishing characteristic belief in superhuman beings” (Frankenberry, 319).

According to Weinberg the “belief in superhuman beings”, being the equivalence of religion as myth, unveils the amphibious material and allows it to be viewed on its moral merits, “the proper object of the study”. Both Weinberg’s and Paine’s reasoning and philosophy depend upon the logical conclusion that religion is myth, and Weinberg avows that religious scholars must as well, “otherwise, the object of study becomes so expansive that it should be handed over to the desk of philosopher or the scientist” (frankenberry, 319).

Presently, while Paine’s argument that Christianity is ancient mythology revisioned by a Tyrannical Merchant, and Weinberg’s summative theory that religion need be studied only on a mythical level may seem logical, but with Bertrand Russell’s explanation of the origins of myths we understand that the simplicity of Paine’s evidence, which is only connections, is easily accepted even though he provides no present corollary between the Tyrannical Merchant and his need for a revisioned ancient mythology. In fact, Paine’s assumption proclaims that because of the ancient mythology there exists a Tyrannical Merchant, yet he does not provide any reasonable connections here.

This theory of Weinberg’s is also flawed by his faith in a “Theory of Everything” that comes from his unfailing faith in Physics. His faith is in physics as an absolute truth flaws his logic in vouching that “miracles” are not possible by humans, and thus Christians must believe in superhumans. The lack of theological study is evident: as well as the understanding for the possibility of a human being used as a vessel of power is not prevalent, nor possible in Weinberg’s logic. We will be taking a look at the fallibility of this thinking in the next section, Christians. To do this we need to look at the illusive crutch in the scientific theory that has been so well solidified since Galileo’s time.

The Christians

“I do not find that a Trinitarian and incarnational theology needs to be abandoned in favor of a tuned-down theology of a Cosmic Mind and an Inspired Teacher, alleged to be more accessible to the modern mind (Frankenberry, 340). John Polkinghorne stands for what he means, and has the background to supply his reasoning. Once a leading scientist in Quantum Physics, Polkinghorne left his post to become a Theology Scholar. Polkinghorne, as a fresh theology scholar, argues “The question of design is a metaphysical question, a question that goes ‘beyond’ (meta) physics, and metaphysical questions must receive metaphysical answers, given for metaphysical reasons” (Frankenberry, 343).

In the upcoming remark from Stephen Weinberg we will be looking at a metaphysical remark that is explained away by a physics answer. Through correcting Weinberg’s analysis we will be able to see the flaw in science which does not allow it to answer the question of Design, and why it must be left to metaphysics.

“It would be evidence for a benevolent designer if life were better than could be expected on the other grounds. To judge this, we should keep in mind that a certain capacity for pleasure would readily have evolved through natural selection, as an incentive to animals who need to eat and breed in order to pass on their genes.” (Frankenberry, 329)

“Polkinghorne points out the error in Weinberg’s statements saying, “Although we are rightly impressed by the many things that science can account for satisfactorily, we should also recognize that this great success has been purchased by a degree of modesty of ambition. Science limits itself to considering only certain kinds of experience. Broadly speaking its concern is with the impersonal dimension of reality. Galileo had the brilliant idea, followed so strictly by successive generations of physicists, of confining attention to the primary quantities of matter and motion, and to set aside what he called secondary characteristics of human perception such as color. This neglect of what the philosophers call qualia (that is to say feelings such as seeing red or judging someone to be trustworthy) was an immensely successful technique of investigation” (Frankenberry, 344).

From Polkinghorne’s synopsis, as well as the understanding that Weinberg’s pleasure falls under qualia, we see that Darwin’s theory of natural selection does not provide an evolution for the capacity of pleasure because the scientific theory in which it is tested does not allow, and in fact the theory works because and not in spite of this ignorance. This little known, little questioned, understanding of science only becomes apparent once it is espoused to the modern man; and then still it must undergo extreme scrutiny before the overwhelming truth is understood; that since science doesn’t answer everything. This understanding allows for the shifting of Creation as a physics question to that of a metaphysical nature.

The question of Design, Polkinghorne believes, is one of scope (Frankenberry, 343). Our perceptions shape the question of Design so that it can no longer remain a physical question. Edwards believes that the nature of causality serves as a proof of God’s creation, and Polkinghorne asserts that by thinking about the nature of causality we will be able to better grip the theory of Design in a metaphysical scope.

In discussing the beginning of all things Edwards writes, “That God does, by his immediate power, uphold every created substance in being, will be manifest, if we consider, that their present existence is a dependent existence, and therefore is an effect, and must have some cause; and the cause must be one of the two: either the antecedent existence of the same substance, or else the power of the Creator” (Smith,239).

Edward continues his argument declaring that it cannot be antecedent existence because things would have to be present to cause an effect. He is saying that an effect can not be the beginning, and that a cause must already be present to in act an effect. IF all of the earth is dependent, is an effect that came out of a cause, than we cannot say the past is a cause for the present effect, especially when the past object is completely passive. Edwards further backs up his explanation saying, “no cause can produce effects in a time and place on which itself is not” (Smith, 240). Through Edwards explanation we can see the claws that science digs into its conception, time. Without time, or before it, scientific theory has no grounds or footing to provide a thorough explanation.

After this illumination Polkinghorne would ask, “In a Theory of Everything is the realm of the personal as important to take into account as that of the impersonal?” (Frankenberyy 341) Yes. It is. Though science separates the two, personal and impersonal, it restricts itself to the physical world. It does not exist on the same structural foundation of thought as that of religion and thus cannot be used as a key or tool for its destruction. That is, logically. But of course, modern man will continue with his new god, his new myth, that which conquers all; knowledge.

So what? Am I saying that knowledge is useless? Am I saying that we should do away with logic, with reasoning? Certainly not. I believe they have become very successful tools, but I do not believe that reasoning is an answer in and of itself. A confused Tomas Paine asks, “It is only by the exercise of reason that man can discover God. Take away that reason and he would be incapable of understanding anything; and, in this case, it would be just as consistent to read even the book called the Bible to a horse as to a man. How then is it that those people pretend to reject reason? (Krimnick, 180)

As a man from the age of reason Thomas Paine believes that through reason, logic, (and from this knowledge) you can obtain absolute truth. Knowledge has become his God, his answer, and this is very common amongst today’s science culture. Just look at Stephen Weinberg. What Paine and Weinberg cannot grasp is the possibility of their perception, their scope, having any flaws in it. They cannot see, nor do they believe that there is any myth, any illusions in their reasoning. “Those people” he speaks of understand that man is flawed, that he cannot know everything for certain. Thus “those people” place their faith in the Man who says “I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me” (John 4:16).

For the ignorant that place all their faith in science, for those who believe religious lies fall at its feet, I ask, what myth do you believe? John Polkinghorne would tell you that you are “historically ignorant to suppose, as the modern myth does, that Darwin was opposed by solid ranks of obscurantist clergyman when “The Origin of Species” was published in 1859” (Frankenberry, 351).

Works Cited

Frankenberry, Nancy. The Faith of Scientists In Their Own Words. 1st. New Jersey: Princeton Univ Pr, 2008.Pages 317-65.

Smith, John. Edwards, Jonathan. “The Great Christian Doctrine of Original Sin Defended (1758).” The Jonathan Edwards Reader. Yale Univ Pr, 2003. Pages 223-43.

Kramnick, Isaac. Paine, Thomas. "The Age of Reason." Enlightenment Reader. Portable ed. New York: Penguin Group, 1995.

Finnegan Page 432

This Page of Finnegans Wake Is a Sunday Service Given by a Dominican Friar. It is all at once a Mockery of The Canterbury Friar; a salute to Bloody Sunday from Anne Besant; as well as a reference to the silent years of Kant in reference to doing nothing, or doing something.

Best Lines are:

"Axe why said"

"bekant or besant"

"he'd marry me any old buckling time as flying quick as he'd look at me"

"be a gentleman without a duster before a parlourmade without a spitch"

"Sever sindays after whatsintime."

Eliot's Children in the Age of Techno

I would invite everyone to watch this video and ponder its connection with the themes we've discussed as well as the Children in the Garden.

Visit this sight on youtube and enjoy:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WOUPz3eYsNs