whether a critic or whether a writer, the most popular genre in modern times in the west is either autobiographical, or disguised biographical... i call it ******* literature of the worst kind... some call mere thinking intellectual *******, those ingrained in the thinking that education per se is just that, and expressing it on paper is just that, what a horrid bunch of people, worse of than the religious types, who at least cling to something, the last rite of man worshipping man involved man having to pray to a man suffering on the ultimate geometry that's the cross, so instead of taking the man down from the cross, they did the opposite: 'hang on! hang on just a little bit longer! we'll just add to judas' profit! hang on old chap! we're coming to get you and take you off the cross! we'll just investigate the chance of making profit, creating a pyramidal ecclasiastical order and you'll be off the perfect geometry of intersection in no time!' ****** sadists... where were we? ah yes... autobiographies... the critics and writers summon the words, like: 'i am quite prepared to be searingly, plum honest waiting for the limo under the eye for the insomniac marks of swollen eye about my life...' i'm sure you are, considering the fact you already lived it, and are now about to revise it; it's like watching a bunch of dead people having another stab at life... they lived it, now they're going to write about it, hardly a reason to summon ghost writers, i'm sure, but that's not really automation; memory if a fickle faculty, disrupted by the educational system feeding you useless pythagorean theorems,  memory is subtle, fragile like a snowflake, once it happens, once the imprint is made, it vanishes, and becomes deistorted from the objective reality, which turns the event, any event, into a falsification process, a subjective reality, we cling to pleasant memories because of the pain ahead, and we do something that nature does with its natural selection: selective memorisation. a true autobiography is therefore something that's written without memory, life as it happens, the opposite of painting with its still life tactic... life as it happens... otherwise we're talking literature's post mortem ex vivi / -o (about the hyphen attached to a letter in a moment)... it was simply those two hands of shade with hammer and chisel grinding little trenches of lettering into the gravestone... goth macabra... a dead man writing his own epitaph... so far went his self-knowledge that it became apparent that no one really knew him. hence? the best autobiographies are those with the mundaneity of life's purposes, written as life happens, deviating from what life could be, truly immersed in life as life in deviation from what can be associated with life's purposes requesting other people's involvement; or least that's the sort of autobiography i'd like to read, less lying involved to a peerage of an admirable social status, and more 'in the moment' moments to consider, quiet frankly no ******* of 'gone with the wind,' hence my other joke, less subtle: a book rather than a door - knock knock (actual knocking on compressed wood that's paper) - who's there? - a reader - answer: flick flick flick and no skimmed reading, please!

two concepts i rather avoid,
so i did, i made (i) a priori
into a- priori
and (ii) a posteriori
into a- posteriori,
standard literal dictionary definition
without elaboration places
(i) as: from the one before -
thus the hyphenated activity replaces
literal meaning as:
without the one before -
in the current situation, and with
the current population currency
at above 6 billion - it means
without hercules, adam, abraham,
moses, jesus, etc.
the same goes for a- posteriori,
i.e. without the one after...
and if i'm not being pedantic enough
the distinction between *a and a-
is that the meaning of the unit in
italics means from, while adding
the hyphen as a preposition to
circumstance it as a prefix changes the
meaning to without-,
given that the priori & posteriori
abide by the sixth definition of the unit
discussed, i.e. before a consonant, p is a consonant,
as much as the word amoral defines proper
a- usage and understanding;
however, the point is not about this,
rather tha activity of what happens when
the dynamic changes, by replacing a / a-
with re- / res.
the resulsts are staggering:

(i)
re- priori                    v.              res priori
again the one                             indivisible thing(s)
before                                         before

(ii)
re- posteriori              v.             res posteriori
again the one                             indivisible thing(s)
after                                            after.

for each there's an example, there's a parallelism
in the res examples, e.g. the sun, the moon, the earth,
mountains can crumble, trees can be cut down
to toothpicks...

the re- examples have a certain ambiguity to them,
give the possibility of a dodo / white rhino extinction,
these example are ordained by an ambiguity
naturally, depending on which factor is stressed more,
whether that be man in a japanese symbiosis
with nature, or whether that be man in a european
symbiosis with nature...
given that the former includes man in nature
and allows a neighbouring,
or with the later, which excludes man from nature
and allows man's egoism to come
crashing down not being able to tame a tsunami.