as i am too old to learn anew,
so am i, too young
to learn bound to being staged:
having to learn afresh:
call this the thesaurus
proximity, the nearing of 0°
basis for geometric
denial, that no shape form:
other than one:
that be the linear "escapism"
of history, wholly linear
and never contorting,
encapsulating, and likewise releasing
back into the regurgitation
of the void.
  
which had superfluous kings for messengers;
and eunuchs for the party of five
of men who desired to keep harems...

i own no obligation to my genes,
as i might oblige the gut bacterium
the next host,
what is this? this profanity?
why am i owning an allegiance
to genes?
  what sort of allegiance is this?
this abomination?!
    
i abhor darwinistic reductionism!
i hate it! i hate it as much
as ancient greek abhorred
moral relativism!
the two are alike! i don't have what
you say!
recite, quote, or argue with!
darwinistic reductionism is:
just as abhorrent as moral relativism!
no no no, no!
   i ******* hate it!
i don't give two-***** worth of
a ***** martini's worth of acting
the bond part... no!

i own nothing of my ego's existence
to translate into: "passing on"
my genes...
  what are you, some vegetating
comatose athlete,
or the parkur with weak knees
and other joints?
what? what! what?!

      darwinism has to have an ugly
medusa head on the hydra,
and it's darwinistic reductionism:
the ancient greeks abhorred
moral relativism:
      me? being modern?
i abhore darwinistic reductionism,
because it equates itself to
moral relativism...

genes... the **** i care about my genes
being, or not being passed on?
i mean, should i really give serious concern
for this not being achieved?
really?
        really?!
       you have to be kidding me at this point,
genes translate into sentences,
make up words,
  make up a will...
the **** is important about genes?!

right now i can clearly see
heaven (amnesia & somnia)
& hell (nostalgia & insomnia)...

give me a break: it's much simpler than
fire and fluffy meringues...

they keep pushing this populist darwinistic
reductionism: i swear i'm going to crack...
darwinistic reductionism creates the vacuum,
that states:
    darwinistic relativism is not the right hand
of atheism:
    after all, there are no absolutes of
       a. there is and b. there isn't...
hence the space-time compedium:
there's time, but there isn't time within
time-space, that might make it indistinguishable from
space, and so in the thesaurus reverse...
might as well call it the close-contact
space=time: not so uncommon in chemistry...
esp. with carboxylic acids:
  
     i abhor what the ancient greeks abhorred:
moral relativism,
since a status quo necessitated itself out
ouf a per se impetus to encompass both,
rather than a robotic one-sidedness "perfect"...

but what the modern hasn't learned to abhor
is darwinistic reductionism...
    it's almost a secondary formulation of
theology, with the missing poetry...
i abhor darwinistic reductionism...
    what? genes? is that an argument?
am i really about to care about passing
    on my genes?
you have to give me a ******* break,
you really think this form of anglophone
existentialism is going to convince me?
bad luck, i'd sit with a francophone for
10 hours in a cafe talking *******,
over coffee and cigarettes...
   with an anglophone though?
i'd have to drink a litre of ***,
******* 10 times in a row...
    wipe my *** until i rubbed my ****
to reach the point of scrubbing
off accents of blood,
  read an act of shakespeare,
listen to some **** pop music...
     talk to his grandmother...
  and then: "consider" the option
of a 10 hour stretch of convo...

it happens all the time:
with entho-nationalist centralism...
you really can, exhaust an idea if you
cite it too many times, and for long enough
as to make it:
educational,
  i.e. boring, i.e. indoctrinating...
   which is what darwinism has become,
sadly enough; boring, indoctrinating,
this ******* should remain in schools,
not among public "intellectuals".

never in the circulated, supposedly civilised world, a mother so abhorred, or a father so abandoned; people ought to rekindle a shame in being "children", given they're so "motherless" & so "fatherless"... seems a shame to just leave the children without being scolded, as children without being scolded remain: children, and never mature into being the mothers for the motherless, or the fathers to surrogates.

talk to y'oh mamma,
talk to y'oh mamma,
talk to y'oh mamma...
go on, sweet talk her into kentucky...
fwy er a chee-kin...
******...
         goon on!
talk yer mamma daffodil pweety!
go on ******, talk
yer mamma daffodil pweety!
no talk mamma pweety?
neine hooney: beensprout!
   sorrows of: find your other
honey-bon lass!
     ha ha... i took to reimagining
jean-paul sartre in an english
society; didn't get far...
lived with his mother,
me? i revised the female
complex by going to a *******:
**** me, what a thrill!
  i cook my mother food, i clean
the house, even though she lies
about the extremes of having
had hernia treatment,
i had mine, as a toddler...
so... who's sherlock?
  me, or her?
       i solve the puzzle unconsciously,
she "solves" it with a
"moral" compass...
     women... woes to the man
who doesn't deliberate having a tear
to shed this opposite of concerns
being manifest,
with a month, akin to the name
like october...
    i just can't imagine the
twin concern of made effort...
i can't imagine it...
  no, you can't equate
the effort of ensuring
9 months made = with 90 years...
sorry, you can't,
this can't be the nodding existential
relativism,
9 months = 90 years...
nope, convince me a second time..
convince me a third time,
a fourth time, a fifth, a sixth...
convince me all you want:
you will still be unable to convince me!
why?
existential reductionism doesn't
end with the cartesian thought,
existential relativism does though,
existential reductionism begins with
a revisionism of cartesian ticking
of the clock..
       i have finally found
a grander complexity to counter
darwinistic reductionism....
      namely cartesian pre-existential
reductionism:
a thought, without a geometric "bias",
thus cited: no point
of origins;
we all know that glasgow is birmingham,
as we know edinburgh is london.
hard, speaking to your ***** test-e,
when it's not your mother,
harder then to speak to your mother,
seeing your ***** canvas so
rebellious... and hardly the culminating
sort;
english is already a language
*****-slapped-ugly...
   i really can't make it more
uglier, than it already is,
given the *reesh and the picts:
or the charlie-charlies, i.e. the woolsh.

i hate it when a ~haiku is forced upon me, but such
is the case, and it's not a case of dittoing out
a mechanical aspect of that body that's
known as vocabulary:
thus, suddenly, as if a ****, or
a reflex the tongue commanded
the entire body -
left-wing obstructions gave way to
right-wing rebelliousness -
    the left said the tongue was no dagger,
the right said: merely a dagger -
the gyroid: or the muscles we never thought
existed! lanky tendons, etc.
    never the microscopic proof reductionism
and never the telescopic proof           ",
always somewhere in the middle:
and that's about right.
               i wrote a poem, it sounded about right
and then i get the wanked-over shoulder
calling it life-support dandruff
because of the many sprouts possible -
as ever: some come and give a voice unto
the people, and some come and give an ought
unto the people.
               a choice that's mutually inclusive
of thought and choice as a battleground
for the mechanisation of language into
sulphur gas and bayonets
and a thousand wildcards charging and screaming
lost toward the bewilderment of
   forgotten sexting.
      what a mighty affair:
the only country delving the prospect of
an atom bomb being dropped again doesn't believe
in munition economics and doesn't see
that the paranoia can be stopped when the capitalist
sober-heads enter and say: but where's the profit?
there's not profit in an atom bomb:
it ends too soon,
     you never got a Hollywood chapter yoyo
      concerning Hiroshima or Nagasaki...
you got one about Pearl Harbor...
a competent act of war... but not like our
civilians really matter: we civilians got the treatment
of being active members of the army,
while the army personnel were given civilian
Pilate status, the army was given civilian status
and the Japanese civilians were given army status...
oh forget the noodle swindler -
that handwritten hoola-hoop spinster of
carbohydrates is long gone...
          or the greatest paranoia against all other
nations comes from a nation that actually used the weapon!
       i could write a haiku version of what i lost,
but i'll still have to write something about you-tube
vloggers and how they are the newest version
of the objective propaganda machine that's in
the Islamic camp of merchants...
       prophet-merchant? give me a break:
if his word doesn't sell, then who's does?
my endorsement? less of a cosmetic light-touch surgeon
attitude, my endorsement is that of
Morphy Richards' Soup Maker...
cooking pumpkin soup...
  pumpkin... well: it's hardly an easy peel when it
comes to cooking butternut squash...
it's a disaster! a hell to endure! no wonder it's the veg
that frighten offs the ghouls and the ghost
you can't peel it, you have to Apache skin it
like getting a colonial wig: scalping your way into
the high court, albeit minus the greyish curls -
******* is a king of culinary demises
that were sought out expeditions -
you have to knife your way beneath the snail-like
shell and then there's that cobweb of mush
with intrinsic fake seeds / flies lodged in
the orange cobweb - for all that effort
i appreciate it more as a lampshade than a food
source... but then the advertised starving Africans
as anti-colonial compensation for "our"
grandfather's recollection of monochromatic cultures,
before globalisation took off.. hmm.
the soup? pumpkin, potato, onion, garlic,
nutmeg, paprika, chicken stock,
salt and pepper to taste...
tomorrow? a pumpkin risotto...
hey! seasonal abundance, Spanish strawberries
in late winter are too watery anyway...
   people forgot that certain things taste better
in season, that's namely fruits and vegetables...
   go outside your fancy, outside your whim,
you'll finally have to say: my eyes eat
at the very credibility of such things being
there without the season... but my tongue does not
taste the thing that requires a pentagonal sense
honing in toward an agreed to democracy:
it ain't there... as ever autumnal fruits make their
way toward the culinary redcarpet -
                   apples, pears....
     but the real ice brokers remain tangled in
the gnostics of dairy *****: you only see the *****
when the milk turns sour...
              and the two segregate
their cauliflower bergs and that pristine seethrough
        matrix -
then it's like watching the 1054 schism:
          aquasal herring
                               and aquadulci tench -
as painful as listening to my father speak english:
it's just ****** painful,
i write english and speak it like an Anglo
   and he speaks it like an Arab:
with me it's: left right left right left right
and his is an ancient form of actual Latin
              right left right left right left -
of the tongues that appropriated the Latin lingua
optics that weren't conquered it's the same as it was
for Seneca of Virgil, e.g. red beast / proof of all
scientific generic category principle: **** sapiens
                  upright man / bestia rufus -
and that's still orange beast - then aliq for yellow:
then liquid and runny khaki - a monetary equivalent
of money.
          but of the tongues
                      which is why i kept my mother tongue,
i can't imagine what would have been the case
had i not kept it intact... i'd be whitey boy bleached
into an anaemic Arian with those rubbery red
             lost for words rabbit crazy irises that
albinos sport when on the sociopathic treadmill:
that's a daily commute for most people.
i should have anticipated something better coming
out of a forced bad gateway message when
i tried to published and didn't save the outcry...
but it was never a reality when defined by a few
people... it always necessarily the many,
the market square, the hustle and bustle,
     then again few took to ****** to say love...
understandable: if something is called private
it's not called reality, because so many people
have so much **** to say in public that they
treat private life as a tabernacle -
reverse that and suddenly you find people
who possess a "voice for the multitude",
but not (not oddly enough) a thought -
ah the caring scream when not bound to
the horror genre of politics: it's too late!
               end here: a prior to rather than, a
desirably said to appease and conform:
by now we're all cited as having only said
an onomatopoeia of what words should sound like -
we're found hacking a door to shreds with
an axe, rather than merely curling our hands
so the knuckles can be used to knock on the door.
still, i made pumpkin soup today,
tomorrow i'll make a pumpkin risotto -
and the pumpkin is, rightfully, the halloween king
of all vegetables: i am not surprised it's the perfect
lampshade people leave outdoors -
hell of a thing to peel, a butternut squash
would have been simpler to make...
but for the first time in my life:
  i actually appreciate the colour orange...
as said: cooker orange is beyond that fluorescent
acidity of a citrus fruit:
  cooked orange is actually grand...
raw citrus orange?                and a handful
of creepy crawlies.
    funny how the spectrum necessarily made me
endorse a soup maker, rather than the next
big thing in the realm of toothpaste and mascara.

Mr Darwin, please explain

Reading TS Eliot is to be drawn into timeless space where images of past and future combine in a continuous stream of thinking …. perhaps the immortality of ideas. The genetic material of life, DNA, is immortal, an unbroken thread linking life’s origins 4 billion years ago to the present ….. and future.

Sequence upon sequence of symbolic letters encoding countless forms of bodies, built to the same principles inherent in the genetic code, yet morphing in endless variety according to the tenets of natural selection ….. Darwin’s idea that transformed our thinking from a moment of purposeful creation to how life changes through time.

Cosmologists suggest we live in one of many possible universes perhaps in parallel time allowing parallel lives, one not knowing of the other’s existence because of the limitations of our three dimensional view of the world and its existence in the cosmos. We see in three dimensions and no more, but we are aware of more because mathematics tells us so.

Mr Darwin, please explain explores the seamless continuity of Darwinian thinking with the timelessness of Eliot’s poetry…..

I In my beginning is my end …. V In my end is my beginning.
(East Coker, Four Quartets, TS Eliot)


Mr Darwin, please explain

I

What is this selection of love so natural
To drive men insane and women to purgatory
Can Mr Darwin explain?
Some ask the question
But I doubt not, that his meaning is clear
Why love one to one remains so dear,
Though Karl denied it, Lenin too
And Uncle Joe dismissed it
As a plot to subvert what was good for the proletariat.
But in that recent time when ******’s darkness shadowed The Earth
Love glowed in the gloom of the despair of nations’ Terezíns
Which to-day helps to repair our broken dreams
Of why we love one to one.

Keats loved one ***** Brawne
And Coleridge his Asra
But what is ecstasy’s advantage?
When comes the pain of separation
Mr Darwin, please explain.
Is it lust, is it reproduction?
But then when love is thwarted
We cannot function,
Where is the advantage
Mr D --- what is the aim, can you explain?
How the coiled spiral passing from time to time
Its immortal message which condemns each generation
To the pain of separation
When the reaper calls, or the rival sunders
The coils of love’s message we’ve inherited
Since the beginning of time
Why? What is the advantage?
Mr D, please tell me your answer.

The whales they sing one to one
Like Eliot’s mermaids singing
Not to Prufrock but perhaps to you and me
The message of communication.
Is this love as one to one
Each supports another wounded
By the enormity of the harpoon?
The dictator’s message in another form
Devoid of love, sundered, never whole
Coming from that Terezín we never solve.
Dysfunctional Mr D, where’s the advantage
For such conflicting feelings to evolve?

David Applin
March 2012

II

Genes are the immortal ones
The links between past and future
But ever present
Unintentionally directing the future and fate of humankind.

Silent, unobserved yet Gods of their domain
Which is us and life past and future
Coiled threads of eternity that determine our happenings
Including our loving one to one.

Yet ….

In their entirety and interaction
Do they, in their interaction
Determine our loving one to one?
The bond that binds each to each
Perpetual celebration.

Or ….

Is their selfish blindness which some accord to be
Inconsequential
Like boats tossed helplessly on storm driven seas
Subject to the whims of wind and rain
No more than replicators housed in vehicles
Subject only to the chances of a changing world.


III

Bodies are vehicles, genes the replicators
Bodies and genes indivisible
At least in the present
But separated as bodies die after
Genes have passed to their immortal future.
Perhaps this is what is meant when they say
That the gene is selfish.

Accommodated in the selfless body at a particular time
But then discarded as genes pass its immortality
From past to future
Changes slow, quick depending on stasis or acceleration
According to Darwinian tenets that enfold the changes
In genes and therefore bodies
Through all time.


IV

Cycle upon cycle of genes and bodies
One perpetual, the other discarded each generation
By the unseen hand of an uncaring Nature.

Our nature, all nature, the beauty of sunsets
Driven by the mechanical clocks of cosmic cycles.

Yet Relative to other Dimensions where
What we see, we do not see
Because of the profound limitations
Of three dimensions.
We see only dimly what might be past
And what could be future
As we struggle in the presence of tautological explanation.

Body and gene, gene and body the temporary and perpetual
Bound in the dance of a living presence
The one ensuring the other’s future
For all time.
Circle upon circle, tautological argument
Explaining everything and nothing but all powerful
In its reductionism of humankind
And life kind as whales support the one
Wounded by the enormity of the harpoon
Loosed by the bodies of genes
Storm tossed and directionless
When thinking that others’ bodies
Can be discarded without thought or thinking
Perpetual damnation.

Tautomeric interaction.
We say the same thing in different ways,
Recycled ideas that parody the twenty different plots of novels
That return to the same point,
Come back to the common question

Why do we love one to one?

People ask…. ‘Can Mr Darwin explain?’

Perhaps not through bodies and genes
But instead, understanding the epistasis of genes and where we live.
We live in this world because of our past
As genes dance to the chance of environmental shifts
The whims of wind and rain, sea and wave
That blow and toss the genes
In their bodies, in random patterns,
Some sinking, others floating
Not always by chance
But because they float and fight
Yielding to the pressures of an uncaring nature.
Like soft down yielding to the thud of falling bodies
Softening their impact.

So to yield as well as fight
Is part of the selection of one by another
In the perpetual
Celebration of loving one to one.

We yield to the blandishments of the soft embrace
We fight to attain it

And once attained, what we do is all we do
To keep a hold on what we love
Only to lose it to the grim reaper of all our dreams
In this present world,
But to regain it in worlds to come
The link between past and future
For immortal genes
Of transitory bodies which is how
We think and see our presence
In time without end.



V

General relativity and quantum mechanics
The combination of infinity and the very small
Do not replace the Newtonian meaning of the day to day.
Just, that Newton is displaced to another time and place
Where description is precise but with uncertainty according to
Heisenberg.

To be certain is to fix ideas in time
Like natural selection in the Darwinian mind
To be propitiated without exception, else suffer extinction of self
And of all that matters to self and others
Sacrificed on the alter to propitiate the Gods of our certainty.

That is not to say that an idea cannot be fixed in time
That its central tenet is not true for eternity.
But truth is relative and uncertain
To be strengthened or cast aside
By better truths or developments of the same.

Our understanding expands with time
But often returns to something that was said before
And said again as if it were newly minted
In the mind of its creator
To become dogma
And as all dogmas
The truth unchanged in people’s minds.
Yet the central tenet survives, as survival is the result of natural selection
But with added components as
Understanding expands as to what is meant by surviving and survival.
To inherit the coils of love’s message is to survive.


VI

Can Mr Darwin explain?
Perhaps is not a whole question
In the same sense that answers depend on
The question asked and who is asking.

The truths that questions seek to answer
The truths of love, beauty and heating systems
Arise from answers to questions in different languages,
And languages translate imperfectly from one to one
As genes imperfectly translate proteins and therefore love in the
Darwinian world of our dreams.

Truth comes in different forms
And Darwinian truth is true to the questions it addresses.
But these are not the only questions of why we are,
Who we are, what we are
Who, what, why are we?

Questions past and future asked in the present
For all eternity.


Christmas (25th-28th) 2012
David Applin

Copyright David Applin 2015

i write this from experience, not really
the one to save the drowning man
who would still, rather,
catch a razor blade to stray the gills,
i find that people are afraid of poetry,
so afraid on the play of words
that they invented grammar,
so i ask: in between laughing at
a telepathic joke that can't materialise
anything feely, after all it's just nothing,
and nothing can't materialise
in any cartesian extension of what
thought provides, which is exactly that:
in cartesia logistics the extension is soul,
where the substance is thought,
and the third part i'm not too clear about
writing... i envelop sartre as a novelist
but i dare say... he's a **** philosopher;
nietzsche matured in my youth,
i read the human comedy on the tube,
attracting homosexuals:
a different kind of voyeurism - what book you reading?
different with newspapers...
is that a monday? by jingles the uvula bells!
i thought i heard northern irish lingo!
by jimmy fitz patrick you did...
send into the green marshmallows,
i scented seaweed i yoda did...
bad grammar and no poetics...
i provide you with the choicest of the least cha cha cha...
i take pun, i take noun,
i take verb, i take metaphor,
i take conjunction, i take pronoun...
free bulbs free bulbs free, bulb! ha ha!
basically you take poetry and sacrifice the isaac
on the altar, the altar is not alternative,
the cats are curious: why does he sleep so long
like us? he drink alcohol and goes against
the prescription dynamism, he's a salmon,
swims against the current, dollops sleeping pills
with alcohol... dies of a weak heart heart attack in
fiji or kenya... make poetry amusing again...
please... don't make it a transition of language
from a weak **** / bladder into teenage feminism
so you wish i'd never *******, wishing i'd
always *******...
well no fucky fucky Thailand not Taiwan
got my bra on and my strap-on... missing a c-ring...
about as ***** as the tower of Pisa...
venice seems nice... nice to auto-shove the dirt
into the digged hole for a mausoleum of mahogany:
shining smooth... no five o'clock shadow to dim
the neon effect on the polished goods grieved over
supremely beyond the maxim of ash
and reductionism in the taj mahal...
nordic necrophilia is not exactly cannibalism
of the easter islands... they left no trace,
bunch of french nosed stone tyrants who sneezed
rather than coughed the truth out:
they did the inverse extinction of the dodo....
reduced to cannibalism they were:
no merchants of mecca or venice you see...
trade died before it could spawn...
but since i lost the track of things i better remind
myself that i'm about to be engaged with
writing out the index of my precisely arranged
"bibliophobia," i.e. the index of my library;
but you know what... some muslim school friend
of mine suggested a rekindling of the wartburg festival
of 1933 just based on a salman rushdie novel?
odd... it happened just before electricity
took over from the blitzkrieg parameters under
zeus' orders...
having written this... i actually don't know what
i laughed at... something to do with telepathy:
projection of pathology as ego insertion into someone's
own substance of being (thought); otherwise
known as pigmentation... well black on white,
diluted if not fading brown in sepia...
contrast in alabaster.

the oriental notion of meditation is far,
far from a reflection...
            since how can a posit of a reflection
bound to nothing: spell out m    i     r      r     o     r?
sure, upon the myre?
                scandinavian word for: ant.

the oriental notion of meditation
works towards, less a narrative,
  which is the most genuine off-shoot of
the patience tested,
               and more toward a reflex...
        in the orient reflection = the reflex,
and i gather than the latter instance
has many forms...
                       -ion = the,
as if there really was something definite
to grasp...
                 when the reflective becomes
synonymous worth of the reflexive...
            
                 meditation can only allow
a reflex analogy to a reflection,
      beginning work with re-,
or again, and again, again, toward no
apparent gain...

       only europe does meditation
precipitate into a written narrative...
              whatever alan watts says...
          even if "i" do not exist...
                         there is still an insisting
part of me that says i do,
which does not encompass a freedom of
will,
         but rather an: insisting argument
for, a will...
                     harsh to allow definite parameters
into the argument:
               whether gender neutral
pronouns of the current year,
well... not so long ago there were
definite & indefinite pronoun applications,
notably in the plural form of: they, we, them...

             i.e. i might support a football team,
but i will not identify with the *******
supporters...
                 i'm indefinite to the team,
but i'm definitely interested in the sport...
counter that? the ******* supported
care **** for the sport...
                        but cling to it,
on the basis of a team...
                      i prefer the sport...
   you can only go as far with
oriental reductionism...
            after a while the buffer zone
of atoms appear...
                can, do, will etc. are atoms,
sub-atomically?

                 c                    d                 m            s
      a                                                          o
             n                 o                       a             t

no one is expected to bleach their whole
heritage into a blank slate of arguments...
you'd be mad to suddenly drop
the heritage, the inheritance "tax" of
what culminates in you, as you,
to then turn to buddhism and argue for
a "you"...
                   last time i checked the pronouns
are off the palette of worthwhile
arguments...
                      
        but it doesn't require a foreign language
to tell you the inherent structures
of the english tongue...
   i once said: you can have an hour's
worth of conversation in polish,
and not utter, a single pronoun...
              not one!

                     english is structured differently,
you can't avoid it,
    but creating these "problems"
is, seemingly, what i was waiting for,
first the tongue as spider,
then the talk surrounding me requiring
a specific spiderweb architecture,
subsequently the flies...
      loud-mouths...
                     hence me slobbering
my acid saliva readied for
       digestion outside the gut...
to subsequently slurp up...

                             whatever happened in
the anglophone world in the 1960s
with bruce lee and zen buddhism...
   that's gone... way gone...
            proxy warfare has reached its end,
look how the proxy war overlords are
bothered about the syrian civial war...
                    can't exactly fit a proxy when
a syrian butcher is fighting a syrian
cobbler, can 'ya?!
                                      thought not.

  oriental meditation / reflection deals
with an immediacy to prompt "thought",
or rather, the moral lack of: a need for compass -
unconscious they knew, as so they bred,
to reach a swelling point in their populace...
since they meditated toward a reflex activity...
western "meditation"?
               with an immediacy to prompt
narration, subsequently "thinking",
with the reflex being condensed to a knee ****...

but an oriental escape is cheap...
   to borrow from these lands is horrid...
          i once tried tao,
and all i learned was but one maxim:
  - the best way to help the world,
is to allow the world to forget you,
and for you to forget about the world;
sqout's honour cross my heart:
   that's all i ever learned from tao...
makes sense, considering that's
how i am both reflective and reflexive about...
what with so many "truths" spewed
by western philosophers...
   it's actually hard to master a
reflexive momentum given so many
reflective opportunities to try out...

  at least in oriental philosophy
meditation breeds one reflexive offensive,
rather than in western philosophy's
meditation, that breeds many reflective
opportunities...
                 ******* peacocks...
                         (a) to (b) will do just fine...
you don't require as many truths
as are given, with only a few being
tested in a vestor vacuum of
                   excluding so many others...    

so i live by that one tao lesson alone...
this?
        this pixel space?
sure, it's public, but it's an extension
of thinking, rather than speaking...
       what you see, you see,
                                    at your own peril.

I break it into
p
  i  
e  c
e
s
until they mean
nothing.

given the zeitgeist, well, what can you expect, bad punctuation, even worse grammar, and a complete of "raining from above" diacritical appropriation, can make anyone quasi-dyslexic, even if they are said to champion a high-level of proficiency in a native tongue; which always made me wonder: why did i turn into a speedy gonzales, outrunning the majority of natives in the tongue? i guess it came to a dedication to a craft, like any carpenter with a block of wood, english, represented by a block of:
                                               a b c d e f g
                                               h i j k l m n
                                               o p q r s t u
                                               v x w x y z.

sorry, i'm taking over, i've had enough,
enough of these poncy natives speaking
their native language as badly written
as a rap, or as naive as a *simon & garfunkel
song, i don't care for your little english degree,
i know your little scheme,
to ensure the H is mutilated, mainly bound
by promethean chains of surd -
only apparent in laughter...
that alphabet you see before you?
it's my version of sudoku -
i look at that "square" and get **** out -
i never write from the heart,
i write from the perspective of my *** -
**** it out, forget about it, move on,
move on...
            i rearrange what i see and don't see...
and yes: you learn from the best,
and the best being? the ones that allow
you to think, make-up your own little narrative,
you pepper the writing with nuance,
with ambiguity, with a: huh?
   along the the day you also channel in
a tarantula's bite of disorientation -
narrative has seized to be worth a linear
geometry -
  there's no point (a) through to point (b) -
we're talking literature in einsteinian terms,
not newtonian projectiles...
           any ******* idiot can draw a straight
line, this deformed kid i knew from being
a child: hugged the **** out of me,
could have made a brussels pâté out of me,
i liked the ******: his ****** ****** his
wife's sister, and, being a ******,
he supported the whole family with
the benefit cheques...
          couldn't say a word without a ******'s
grin... but i do remember his favourite
pastime - precision of a pair of scissors,
he would sit and tear up newspapers all
day long, sometimes walk the dog,
  but you couldn't cut paper the way he ripped
it in streaks like spaghetti...
       hell: nature abhors a vacuum;
ah, ol' robbie.
                but that's beside the point,
what i learned from my pict english teacher
was: digress... he always digressed,
i learned the art of english is via: digression -
he's the one who got me into jazz -
i can't say i listen to jazz all the time like
some pompous aragonite of catalonia -
       but when the mood is right,
and there's no woman, and there's no wine,
and there's only the identical twins
ms. & ms. pepsi & amber - and it's october,
and the wind is warm in the night,
and i feel like: these headphones are becoming
too claustrophobic, i put on some miles davis
and feel like: like a politician in davos...
   still, i don't believe in linearity of dialogue -
after all, the earth doesn't travel in a straight line...
so why bother with a "beginning, middle & end"
style of storytelling? why not tell a tale high
on a tarantula bite, completely disorientated?
the best english you're going to hear is:
via digression -
     and as i recall, up to the age of 16 -
the pict made us sit through about 2 / 3 hours
of curriculum, i.e. in english class that means
learning grammar...
     ****, we learned about 0's worth of grammar:
his motto was something like:
  hey, if you speak it grammatically,
there's no point learning any grammatically
grammatically grammar, written, or spoken.
fair point.
     so he taught us by digression -
and no one can teach you better english,
  than a glaswegian... hey, you want a great memory
of school, and not turn into some soppy
         morrissey? learn to build up an
affection with your teachers...
           ****, i even remember the teachers
in primary school, everyone feared mrs. hetherington;
she once told us a story of being shipped out
from london (due to the blitz) into
the countryside... the old "hag" is dead by now,
but, although the rumours: she was a gem;
school wasn't a problem, as long as you
didn't buy into this whole famous obscure,
weird yada yada yada, frozen prune on
a popsicle *******, you did fine...
                as long as you had respect and
some sort of weird admiration for a teacher,
or +2, the other kids just, seemingly, drifted
into the song of ambient music - akin
to refrigerator humming.
seriously - the best time of your life is
the time you have in school, esp. given the currency
is nothing more than brownie points / peanuts...
no, i know a teacher's pet when i see one -
but dabbing into the personal life of a teacher,
say, seer thomas! what's your jazz collection
like? and then you get a c.d. to burn
the next day jazz on a summer's day album,
with the opening track being
    art blakey's song moanin'...
but that's beside the point (once more) -
let's just say that solving the sudoku allows you
to clear through the claustrophobia of thinking,
notably, given that all mental illness is
a form of cognitive claustrophobia -
     well...
    there once came an argument against
the godfather of existentialism, JP sartre -
who said: existence comes prior to essence...
so we live a life (borrowing from kant's rigidity)
             vita est a priori
  subsequently esse est a posteriori -
  i need to degrade everything into cartesian
terms, with that eternal formula
that has reached a mathematical pinnacle
of 1 + 1 = 2, i.e. 1 (cogito) + (ergo) 1 (sum) = id,
no matter how much you'd like to shake
it off, you can't! everything in philosophy
zeniths and nadirs on the cartesian sly cat
of expression...
                 what are we though?
do we exist to think, or do we simply,
                           essentially think?
well, if we exist to think, we'd be nothing
more than a brain in a pickle jar...
and we wouldn't get up to moral transgressions
and general idiocy of making mistakes...
    and given the aura and the fauna of
our environment, and the number of sport
disciplines available for us to practice:
thinking is non-essential,
it's a byproduct of existence per se.
before writing this i was actually going to
channel an argument against sartre,
  but given the ongoing arithmetic of the end
product of this writing...
  i kinda agree with him...
       existence is a priori to essence,
as essence is a posteriori to existence -
   nice, look at 'em siamese twins, butter-rubbed
greasy and all...
                 could slide into a chimney
prior to santa (anagram of satan)
          prior to santa saying: bishquits und quackers
and a handful of rollie-pollies to add the
extra, crunch!
    thinking is essential, i admit,
       but it's not exactly an existential absolute
i.e. uniform in: the omni sphere of things,
plants don't think, parasites don't think...
    hence the antithesis of the cartesian
res cogitans is the res impetus -
   phototropism being the best example...
           shlime of a honeybee in the ear
of krampus...
                    how can essence come prior to
existence, given the cartesian reductionism of
pivoting the argument on thought?
  thought doesn't even enter the picture,
once the senses are fully formed,
  and that lesser celebrated cognitive faculty
of memory finally lodges itself on the hamster wheel...
first we memorise, then we imagine (so many
games in childhood) - and we start to think: lastly.
as the world around us suggests:
   thinking isn't exactly essential -
   it's existential...
      wait wait, too many O 0 O 0 O 0 O squashing
of doughnuts and rollings wheels...
                      essence comes prior to existence...
so, by saying that: i am to be born an
essentially good person?
              this is theologically speaking an
inversion of the protestant concept of
  predestination...
        now the spaghetti muddling revision...
       i had it! i swear, i had it!
                         essence can't "predate" existence
since existence has no universal analogue replica,
no uniform coercion of all given examples...
yes, in essence we should all be universally
well off, rich, beautiful, perfect skin etc.,
that would be the "utopian" essential component
in arguing: essence comes prior to existence...
but the reality is: existence comes prior to
the essence of things - given we experience
the odd bouts of daydreaming...
        essentially that, but existentially: this...
trouble with certain counter-arguments
      to doctrines is that they leave the argument
in the jaw of a chimera,
   and never bother with real-life examples of
counter,
          like in poetry,
            with its array of technique,
   philosophy has but one sunshine moment -
   take the abstract road up to a point,
and then ask that age old question:
give a man a fish and feed him for a day,
or teach a man how to fish?
               as any parasitic business model will
tell you: give the man a fish, make him
indebted, and then tell him to mine for diamonds
to make for the first, and subsequently
second fish you're going to give him;
as was my concern:
  if no idea, no concept, can't be made
infantile, or rather, to be reduced to a level assertive:
well, you know, that "serious" thinker was
also, once a kid... what's the point
of taking yourself seriously?

/far from being smart, i'm playing: dumb-honest: because why would you automate diacritical distinctions, pretend it's orthography when it turns out it's a dyslexic protocol, and leave the rest to advert script of wriggly lines akin to the coca-cola script? english, with its lack of diacritical application, doesn't need the use of diacritical markings on top of ιota and ȷade... hardly a mishandling of writing 1; or the lower-case form of the corner stone, i.e. l.

far beyond the reaches of man's comfort
with the tri-
                          or rather: the watcher's angle...
there, is, no, objective experience...
    the argument for objecitivty is
like an engineering prospect for a dam,
(mind you, architecture
is not exactly exactly engineering
when it comes to building thresholds,
akin to dams, rather than buildings
worthy of an argument for a replica
continuum - the usual journalistic
       bravado: type ****, think later):
there are but two outlets for a use of
language, (a) using it,
or (b) asking technical questions
       in terms, rather on the basis of
usage...
              as a non-native speaker
(as one french undergraduate psychology
major pointed out): you're not,
a native speaker...
               fine...
                             but let's hear
what the "natives" of the anglosphere
talk about in america, or australia...
                 ****, me, are these natives?!
diversity is our conundrum,
    notably the variety of orthography
application in the english-speaking world,
without it raining down onto
the surd speech of writing...
           naked Adam!
                 just recently, or rather,
today... a girl writes to a mainstream
article about i wish i hadn't laughed
at him in bed, i.e.:
         i made a joke about the impact
of the cold weather...
       you know where this is going...
infertile *****?
        at the brothel one bulgarian *******
demanded my "castration"
leaving a comment
                    about the african phallus
being, on average, bigger than mine...
did i lose a hard-on?
              not really...
               this is how deep the freudian
madonna-***** complex goes...
    it's fair game when you're paying for
an hour... but having to invest in
a life, and hear this sort of *******?
sorry... no.
(italics, because i didn't want to end
                  it on an exclamation mark).
odd...
                sniff sniff...
                                          you smell that?
how can people talk during ***?
          i put on an imaginary gag during
*******...
                it's the monk's daily bread
to not talk...
                    how do people even manage
talking during ***?
      do the same ******* think
it worthwhile to talk while jogging
on a treadmill?!
                            or lifting weights?
talking is taboo in ***!
                   and that is the only taboo!
do you hear that?
           is that a woman moaning
and balancing on an onomatopoeia
   of (i feel pleased) when drinking a cup
of tea?!
                is there, really, a need to talk
while having ***?
              hour in a brothel and
then, you can tell all your secrets...
             to a ******* mallet's worth of latex.
i love ballet, but the audience just put me off,
that insatiable "need" to clap...
               upon every grand example
is like feeding off of a leech "prescribed"
                       to allow you comfort when
bleeding...
                    mind you, the royal albert hall
has terrible acoustics when it comes
to ballet...
                  am i watching a *******
ballet, or a tap-dance?
                       the floor is too hard...
           ponder, and hear a centipede...
            while the bucks fly off the astroturf
into the silent night, encouraged,
               by the coliseum mob...
                  and that is what has remained
of rome... the coliseum...
                             what was this
originally?
                    ah...
         as descartes reduced a person
                                             to a φ- / Θing,
well...  there is no objective experience,
only an observation...
                         but then again, there is,
a man holding a cup of tea, or a pain brush,
or typing on a keyboard,
  that is, an objective experience...
          the animated concerned with
   the inanimate...
                               but with regards to people?
when there are two animate examples
making the universe, finally, concise?
         reductionism to a punch?
subjectivity is the only medium that allows
experience to make firm rooting,
          of experience per se,
       noumenon, per se, jack in a box...
     hide & seek...
                          alternatively the phenomenon
and subsequent mimic / multiplication / χ  (chi)...
just collateral...
              passing by...
                             because why would
you apply orthography, i.e. diacritical marks
on only two letters, i.e. i and j?
                 the turks managed iota
like the greeks, i.e.            ι,
      so you could, technically, write j, as ȷ.
hey, pedantry of the use of language
          is my tux and bow-tie's worth of gala.