In Reflection of Jon

As we have been discussing, and you've been discussing, the act of writing about reading is rather difficult (impossible?). And this I believe is part of what we are trying to unravel. The act of blending reality and dream is impossible to a rational mind-unless- through our writing we evoke in the reader the same responses that brought upon our own realization of the blend between "reality" and dream.

This is the difficulty involved in an analytical paper compared to a story; you cannot rationally bring up dream interpretation, hallucinations and so forth and etc. in today's scholarly world. How am I supposed to explain that my discoveries were made by following dreams? And that the fact is that they tell me too follow my dreams. How can you explain in a rational essay something that is irrational?

It is often said that Poetry is trying to explain the unexplainable. This is incorrect. We've programmed our brains into needing a structured formula for truth-value and in doing so we have set the understanding of poetry into a realm of enchantment, of wonder.

Perhaps the hardest thing we have to do, Jon, is return to the beginning of our adventure and not explain, but lead our reader in a direction towards the discovery we've made and by a way that we did not go.

And, if a copy of brains on disk is given to the world,
would it be worth it, if one, as they leay back into the sleep, should say,

"That is not it, that is not it at all.
That is not what I meant at all."