1.
One
should use one’s time at the cryptic crossroad to denounce
violence.
Violence
is
wrong and the world can do without it. It would be false to believe
that we are all sinless, but when we react we must do so without
violence, calmly. In our time there is war between Russia and the
Ukraine and war leaks in the head from afar, speeded
by the driverless car, making
one feel nauseous and insecure. It should be stopped. There
is also said to be a war going on online. There are those that
believe as a matter of stance before life that unless they exact
bloody revenge on those that trespass against them, their own wound
in the real will never heal, but it’s wrong. It’s wrong to do
violence unto another or cause suffering, and as the saying goes,
“two wrongs don’t make a right.”
Of
course war is more than a nauseous feeling of insecurity felt from
afar – it is running and screaming, colourful and loud – but it
does leak in the head when there is a war in a far off place, even if
the countries involved don’t speak your language. Violence
of all kinds is wrong. The world needs more love in it. There is an
old song by a band whose name I cannot remember that goes “you
can’t trust violence,” and it is a tear-jerker too.
This
one would understand is government policy – to do away with
violence – and it could be my moment to say that it is specious
that the Feds are evil if they step in to save your life when you are
in a tight spot in Monopoly Jail. When
I wrote my last book Let
The Jews Win,
as a binary-machine comprised of two long poems, it was for the sake
of peace, both as “a truce between old
friends fallen out like fools,” and for the world at large.
2. ‘Awesome’ is a word that is often misapplied but sometimes is in order.
It’s hardly a cosmi-economic theory but my father used to say, of this family home where the Plough alignment is viable, that “the value of this house should include The Bigger Picture.” It could also go the other way into a neo-Marxist direction; but if we gave the house away for 50p, (after spending £30, 000 doing it up), we wouldn’t be able to buy a new house. The Age of Enlightenment was said to be the simultaneous astrological and sociological de-centering of Man and the White House its child in terms of both philosophy and build, and nowhere has that been more apparent to me than when observing the Plough alignment with the oldest fell Black Combe at a time of a rhythm change in the White House. To devalue that priceless gift would seem counter-intuitive to my meagre mind, and what happens in reality is that an estate agent will neither increase nor decrease the value of the house should it be on the market. That is, they will not factor the alignment in, nor devalue the house to 50p (which could also be said to be factoring the alignment in) but measure the value against the other houses. My father inherited the house from his father, and passed it on to my mother when he passed away; but still, I sometimes hear sadistic voices disputing that my father ever owned it. I think he did by law but there is an extent to which the Plough alignment belongs to us all. When dad spoke of valuing in the Bigger Picture he meant syncretism – the belief that all religions share a common goal - but there have been philosophers such as Sir Karl Popper – who taught my father at the LSE in the 1960’s - who don’t believe there is a Bigger Picture towards which things tend.
3. Sunlight multiplies by dancing.
But having mentioned light, philosophy is more about air. The considerations of this organism are very much air. It’s 16. 25 and I insufflate my Vape pen, unfit. I picture a world where we don’t need to breathe because we’re all so united that oxygen falls in you from above… I can’t see it happening. Whatever the effect of global warming on the unicorn means as a postmodern ‘id,’ I can’t see us learning to evolve out of breath. No symbiant circle, poetry hive-mind, Communist ego-loss experiment, omnijective interface of random access co-imagination, surely, can start to bypass the need to breathe. I must’ve got quite high, into some interesting headspace, to think of a “mouth” like that.
4. Philosophy might’ve died.
Is it true that philosophy might’ve died? I don’t know, but it is true that most lives are unaffected by things like Wittgenstein. As John Gray writes in The New Leviathans, the universe too remains indifferent to human philosophy. The human mind is a spec of dust in the cosmic order, he says. Life is essentially meaningless, in other words.
But with philosophy we try and give it meaning. The quest for meaning is not such a bad one to be on. The quest for meaning implies that we can redeem a situation with the salvation of our arts and sciences too. It gives us hope, something to strive for, without which the entire enterprise of research would collapse in on itself.
5. It isn’t too hard to ideate a theory of meaning.
If I need a theory of meaning I could just reiterate a few salient points:
a) The pre-verbal, the thought-pattern, when translated via the mechanics of meaning, into words, represents dilution.
b) When you renounce the quest for meaning, you find it, fall back on meaning-by-proxy.
c) The meaning of something is inherent to its exact mode of expression.
d) Meaning is not a delusion unlike Time.
e) Meaning is an emotional import given mere exo-skeleton with words.
– These statements seem to state the obvious and are largely not original but that doesn’t mean they are not true. My next point is that:
f) Meaning is an effect of differences in sound combined with differences in idea.
g) If all these statements are simultaneously true, something “polysemic” has happened.
h) It may be that for something to attain meaning it must journey from Sheer Signification to (in)significance.
Note:
Point (f) that meaning is an effect of differences in sound combined with differences in idea seems to suggest that meaning is quite superfluous; but it has to go deeper than being a mere “effect,” has to correspond to something in the human surely. I’m not proposing a return to the conception of the linguistic sign as “transcendent referent” like pre-Derridean philosophy just think meaning should be more than an effect.
6. There is no such thing as mind cancer.
I may have said this earlier already but Hobbes and Descartes sat on opposite ends of the spectrum w/r/t the mind. For Hobbes the mind was part of the body, for Descartes the mind was separate from the material world. You could argue, there being no mind cancer proves Descartes right in that debate; but you could also say there is no mind cancer because there is nothing for the term “mind” to name except the dance of the synapses, electrical impulses in the brain.
Furthermore, it could also be instructive to add that when I read of Descartes clenching the idea of perfection in his mind and using it as ontological proof of God; and when I turn inward my eye – I find a perfect inner judge whose concerns are grammatical.
7. Sensation precedes thought.
As I have written before, and can delimit again, in teenage years I developed a belief that sensation precedes thought. But I now have reason to doubt it and think it not Absolute. For instance if I prick my finger, the brain sends a chemical message to the affected area of skin telling it what to feel. So in that example, sensation does not precede thought.
It could be that this confusion is created by the ambiguity of the word “sensation” which could mean, say, the colour yellow or be interpreted as something that effects the central nervous system more than being a mental image.
I get the impression I am not the first to consider that sensation precedes thought and that philosophers hide it, deal with it through opacity, analysis and argument, in order to not just dictate a tenet of a credo, a dogmatic set of beliefs.
8. Man is words.
This reminds me of a further piece I wrote, about words this time, in Upper Sixth:
“Words, words, words… what are words? These are words. Words in this epistemological system could be useful tools associated with the instinct to survive. Man is words and “man” is a word and words draw bridges across metaphysics and words make connections between first and third persons. Words are also a great bandwagon of falsity we must presume is not false in order to make life easier. Words are, well, ONLY words.”
It’s this idea that “man is words” that has the ring of timeless familiarity to it like air from the great subconscious.
That year I decided the word “noetic” meaning “of the mind” was my favourite word because its suffix ‘ic’ reminds of Icarus who flew too near the sun.
9. There is no such thing as immutable truth.
My ex gf when I was at Warwick University said “there’s no such thing as immutable truth.” Yet reading Russell I discover him saying philosophers do believe in a kind of truth that is fixed and static, timeless and eternal. I think of the idea that
“there’s no such thing as almost infinite.”
You could say it is timeless and eternal, that truth; but you could also say what my ex gf means is that the language used to say it is plastic and malleable. Still, I like to believe that beyond the language the meaning of the words is eternally true and immutably so.
10. There is indeterminacy at the core of all things.
So far in this narrative uncertainty prevails in the debates that arise as we hear both sides of the argument and weigh up what is best. It could be that what science calls “indeterminacy” art calls “undecidability.” The former corresponds to the world of matter, the latter to the world of consciousness, of thoughts, an immaterial realm and that is the difference therein.
11. Science and art still differ on the matter of truth.
They have different sensibilities. In science truth is to be falsified through which nothing is 100%, only ever 99% at best. In poetry however there is truth-to-itself through which anything can be true if well-made enough. Poetic truth is like the truth of the individual, constituted of its own inner nature. This came up in my dissertation on the work of David Morley, years ago. I was instructed in that by Dr. Tony Sharpe of Lancaster University.
12. There is no such thing as the Nirvana barcode.
Still it seemed a brilliant moment when I first made the Nirvana barcode to be but the beat of ‘Scentless Apprentice’ by Nirvana tapped out in approximate barcode shape using the tool of the qwerty keyboard:
|| | |||| | || | |||| 909 & 693 are wings.
13. If for some reason you attempt the maths of the new colour as a cellular mark, you shouldn’t give it away for free.
But you can say that while reading Saul A. Kripke trying to persuade a sceptic that when he says “plus” he doesn’t mean “quus” you kept thinking how interesting it would be to add to the debate that back at 7 years old you wrote the line:
“I have a scar+ that is red and black,”
using a + sign for an ‘f’. You also did that after taking care of Einstein’s E so that the E and the F were a seamless continuity. The so-called maths also extends further, beyond the F and is published in The Sunset Child; but as I say one shouldn’t just give it away for free.
14. A game is a rehearsal for death.
Reading Philosophical Investigations by Wittgenstein I’m reminded, bizarrely, of a state of relational undoing that I’d get into as a child. I’d lie in my bed and sometimes by chance, sometimes by will, forget where the wall is, which way round I am lying, which end of the bed my head was at – with my eyes closed or else under the duvet – and it was delightful – the detachment, the escape from spatio-temporal awareness. To have lost the room was a pleasure.
Wittgenstein also says there is no one thing common to all games; but on the second page of The Lords And The New Creatures, Jim Morrison says “all games contain the idea of death.” I would go even further and say “a game is a rehearsal for death.”
15. You should read Lucretius before you start.
They said I should read Lucretius before I begin and now I have. I think it remarkable how advanced the discussion of the atom was, in a world before Christ, considering they didn’t even know if the sun was remade every morning. Indeed, Lucretius – On The Nature of the Universe – would make a great compare and contrast with a modern Italian physicist called Carlo Rovelli who wrote Reality Is Not What It Seems. Lucretius inherited and versified the content of his book but it’s still remarkable and that includes the way he keeps bringing the discussion back to the goal of Epicurean philosophy, in tranquillity of mind and good behaviour. He never loses touch with the ultimate goal of Epicureanism. As for the atom, once the idea of it is conceived of, he goes overboard and attributes everything to the work of atoms. He even says sight is an effect of a thin stream of atoms emitted by an object. As I say to compare and contrast with Rovelli would show how much things have changed and how much they’ve remained the same.
16. The paradigm of psychoanalysis is over and has given way to that of neuro-science.
Mental illness is seen as chemical imbalances in the brain which are therefore treatable with medication, which some deem crude. Still the brain is 99% blood and 1% statistics. Scientists still know very little about the brain. The point is that philosophy too has moved in this “physicalist” direction, moved from “the mental image” to the central nervous system. Even ineffable qualia can be considered effects of the CNS rather than the mind. Things are all moving in that general, physiological direction in science, psychology and philosophy at once. I read about this in A. J. Ayer’s Philosophy of the 20th Century which is probably itself way behind the ever-changing times by now but still indicative of the general direction of things. And I am reminded of a debate I had with my ex who said “intelligence is a social construct” as opposed to hardwired/ physiological. The truth is not that; the truth is that intelligence is a balance between the socially constructed and the hardwired/ physiological. In neuro-aesthetics where they say “if it fires it wires,” contact with other artists only hones and enhances one’s skills but at the same time, twins separated at birth can grow up to have identical handwriting, indicating a hardwired aspect to intelligence. So it is a bit of both. And meanwhile in philosophy everything is loaded more on the central nervous system and the physiology than before.
17. The Ancient World is extant.
Reading History of Western Philosophy by Russell there were moments of intersection where I identified with the Ancient world. Russell explained how philosophy and science began simultaneously with an accurate prediction of an eclipse by Thales. I myself spoke against September 11th in 2000 using my own brain. Not only that but in the same conversation I looked into the dust swirling in a late ray of light angling in and said one day they may hunt for something called The God Particle, as if God is not extrinsic to matter. Whilst the God Particle may be daft, I am reminded of this prophecy of mine by reading of Democritus of the Ancient Greeks who said atoms in the soul are as dust particles in a beam of light when there is no wind.
I also liked to read that commerce began in Crete because that was where my parents took their Honeymoon; and my mother made a flower-press ending on cannabis from plants taken from that Honeymoon in Crete. This could be evidence Cretan Literature is not dead and it supplies the notion that if a flower-press ending on cannabis = a dialysis a love poem only hoping to impress poor Flora = a motor.
18. It is possible to show scientific evidence there is no free will.
I have a brilliant friend who designed a trajectory of metaphors of the mind down the ages. In the Industrial Revolution the metaphor of mind was the factory floor. In our own age it is the laptop.
He told me there is new scientific evidence that there is no free will, and invited me into his flat. He went into the kitchen and left me talking to a beautiful woman who said “there’s no free will.”
I disagreed and said “I can pick up this puzzle on this table and say I’m going to solve it and achieve that.” it was a plastic maze with a small metal ball you have to roll around in there.
I picked up the puzzle, though, and couldn’t do it. So I said “well, if I had enough time.” But I soon put the puzzle down and still to this day haven’t done it. So it seems my friend has indeed got scientific evidence of the heteronomy of my will.
19. There is delight in wilful opacity in philosophy too.
I never finished Being And Nothingness by Sartre but from what I read, his gunman taking aim from the top of a tower is reminiscent of and informs the Jim Morrison line:
“the sniper’s rifle is an extension of his eye.”
Both these “gunmen” show a degree of opacity. The Sartre came first and I wouldn’t be surprised if Jim Morrison had read it.
For me to now go and tell you what my philosopher friend Dr. Calculator Ptom told me in 1998 would seem to ruin the opacity; but I told him I had found a more poetic way of saying what he said.
He said “go on then.”
So I said “the sniper’s rifle is an extension of his eye.”
So he said “I love it and am jealous, unless you’ve stolen it from someone like Jim Morrison.”
He was right – I had stolen it, but didn’t say.
I think what we had there was a case of a fossil of art not life.
We also saw that philosophy is more sterile, poetry more alive.
20. The attention span in the postmodern world is very short.
The best title I can think of is “McTruth And Flies,” but it’s not mine – my friend Paul came up with “McTruth” and I came up with “And Flies” with a little encouragement from my brother Dr. Robert – so I make it still Paul’s title.
Isomorphic in their imputation of speciousness they have ironic equipoise written in to their unseemly collocation. It could be about a place where the postmodern and mystical converge. It could be the book of philosophy our age deserves. Here I am tempted to quote myself on several fronts.
Firstly the yellow DogMuckels M atop the pole in the industrial park in town is the postmodern churchspire in the spiritual vacuum. Secondly postmodernism is theme dissolved into message. Thirdly, there can be no more proof of something being real than saying it was imagined hence the effect of global warming on the unicorn is the postmodern ‘id.’ Fourthly, semantics is a road sign not a place.
21. Wittgenstein would write with his other hand.
Well, philosophy. Wittgenstein says it’s when language goes on holiday and we start naming things like it’s a baptism. Quine says “an analytic branch of science.” As I write with my weaker hand I wonder what else. Pasta, tea, air, hair, water, clothes, loo-roll. It could also be an abstract prison. It could also be a process of elucidation. It is surely not a dogmatic creed. Philos means “love” and sophistry “wisdom.” I may be an amateur ordinary speech philosopher but I think my “case” qualifies me as more than a “Diet Philosophy” philosopher. The case is about dad’s business. He said he was an international art smuggler nicknamed “Blue” but art might’ve meant pollen. Anyhow, philosophy. It might be a self-contained language corresponding to nothing real in life. And here I sit writing with my left hand, slowly. As if to overthrow the predominant brain hemisphere.
22. My brother is a genius.
My brother – he’s a genius too – designed the sheet where pictures grew – pictures of brown and blue – says <BEE> may soon ensue from @ in the international language alphabet. He is working on a sci-fi novel set over 1000 years in space. I think with regard to the sheet he set up the experiment to use Einstein’s value for light-speed (c) as the author. He says to design the sheet took a deft left hand born of another. Gnomic things he comes out with include “a dog is a dog is a dog is a dog.” That is an allusion to one of the diagrams in his experiment. Right now he’s making cheese, ham and tomato toasties. Dad used to say of him “still waters run deep” and “he even dreams creatively.” My brother. We go back a long way. He remembers the speech in the barn in 2000 when I spoke against September 11th, when I also had the idea to invent earphones on which to record. He says “River Island clothes are made to fall apart so you buy some more.” He says “if you buy cheap you buy twice.” He h-a-n-d-s- me my food, takes his own upstairs. It’s the bit about the international language alphabet I like. We share what I call “co-imagination” and what he calls “sympathy.” He doesn’t take too kindly to the rich robbing the poor; to the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer – like when the idea to invent the earphones was stolen from me. He remembers instances like taking one more crumble from dad’s soft pollen several times in the night and laughing about it between us, how absurdly easy it was.
23. Some binary opposites are too black and white.
Before my dad died he wrote an ingenious piece in a green notebook, that surfaced when he was gone, that I can describe as a seemingly innocuous list of French vocab that is actually a code to crack encrypting a poem that tells a story. Whilst I am not going to show you that at this juncture, he also left behind a list of 8 Precepts conveyed in ordinary speech.
1. All writing is fiction.
2. It’s rude to write of the living.
3. A writer has a right to a name otherwise an Exclusion of the Individual Machine can close ranks against you.
4. “Why not?” is not a good reason for writing a poem.
5. You’re supposed to get the ball over the other guy’s head.
6. The poet is a translator of feelings and the feelings you get on drugs are all fake.
7. A standard of truthfulness should come before the need to sell a story.
8. Literature can either have moral compass or sheer cleverness alone.
I agree with them all apart from maybe the last one about moral compass because it seems a bit “reductive” and “old-fashioned.” For example William Burroughs (whom dad thought all sheer cleverness and no moral compass) was on Ted Hughes’s bookshelf. The others I fully agree with or at least would like to. The idea that, say, Saussure on the arbitrary bond between signifier and signified is “fiction” was also put to me by my ex. It would follow that Derrida too is fiction in this conception of the written word.
24. French postmodern theorists are not necessarily right.
Saussure described the arbitrary bond between signifier and signified, which is between phonetic and semantic aspects of the linguistic sign. This created “the Saussurian atom” which Derrida then came along and exploded, saying there is no bod at all. The arbitrary bond is often metaphorised using milk-tops: there is no reason full-fat milk is blue, semi-skimmed green and skimmed red. But what about when Omnibus Press gave The Lords And The New Creatures a traffic light colour page motif of orange and green pages respectively? Then I would say the green pages of The New Creatures intrinsically denote go, grow, evolve, continuation, motion, life. This would radically counter French postmodern theory. You could then divide The Lords And The New Creatures thus:
The Lords The New Creatures
orange pages green pages
spaces closed spaces open
doors open doors closed (in the sense of banishment of doubt.)
So it is possible for a signifier and a signified to still have an intrinsic bond of meaning. I hesitate to say any more because I was the witness and don’t necessarily think it the subject of philosophy.
Mssrs ‘in’ and ‘of’ and ‘to’ and ‘from’ were all invited to that party. The witness ‘in’ was the one in the book, flat, in 1968. The witness ‘of’ was the one attesting to specimens at the age of 8. The witness ‘from’ was the correct endorsement and the witness ‘to’ a mere formality after the correct endorsement was made.
25. The symbol [R] represents the stance, the large-R, Romantic stance that there is room for Creativity in the synapse gulf, that the creative spark is not all mappable/ predictable in advance.
My usual example of this is to connect the words “drip drown dream dragon drop” but never before have I expressed the truth that it is actually easy to conjure examples of word-combinations that nobody has before. The polkadot dancers left the door fleering in a leery way and to be quixotic hitched a ride on the cosmic wave south where a mouth lay in wait, open as a gate, until the hexagonal sun set, dreaming.
When I say these words have never been organised before I must temper that by saying there are super-computers who can put every word, letter, sentence, book, paragraph in every order, like the machine in Gulliver’s Travels. But presumably that would run on indefinitely instead of providing a single sentence. Whatever the case, there is a debate in Foucault’s Pendulum by Umberto Eco as to whether or not the super-computer in question has ruined the heart-purifying permutation games of the Cabala or whether in fact computers can be spiritual – and the answer is it is subjective.
I think of exemplums like [R], like the number “!00%” - and like my old Nirvana barcode; like James’s notion that <BEE> might soon ensue from @ in the international language alphabet, even the plus sign for an ‘f’ in the line “I have a scar+ that is red and black,” - as somehow escaping the totalitarian machination, as somehow representing hope, but they may also be accounted for by the super-computer.
However this is a specious imputation. It is not that we are up against an Evil Empire and must usurp literature from the hands of said supercomputer. It is just a marvel of technology that everything we can think of is accounted for – everything that is, in my list, apart from the suit. The computer won’t have done the suit. It escapes. In fact you could say the supercomputer cannot compute the suit.
26. There is such a thing as “Halfware.”
When I read of Maxwell and Faraday I think of a particular period where I was surrounded by creative things. For a start the Tower was on the shelf, including a book with smell that may have been the word of a dog and a book with a line that went missing. My computer bloomed a numinous purple light and working on it, typing up the plot of the film Eraserhead for a blog entry, one day, the telegraph pole in the field exploded. The binaural earphone album on which I said I’d plug my senses in the mains went online; and I also had an experiment into a cassette tape with a pause where resealed in the flimsy reel. That had been going on for years and was now a successful fusion. I melted it in the AGA at night to make it a valid work of art. At the time I considered some of these examples to be halfware, like, say, tattooing a name on Piper At The Gates of Dawn, or an effervescent mobile reverberating the rhythm of ‘William Tell’ through every technological inlet in the room before it rang – which I did also used to possess. It wasn’t long before my dad died and that meant I discovered the sheet, my brother’s sheet, where pictures grew, which could be portentous of the end of the chip; and it also meant my seven year old text emerged that encrypted a sophisticated notion concerning gravity, stored the idea of the net in writing in the attic to give it a chance to grow all the way round the world, conducted an experiment into the maths of the new colour as a cellular mark and separated the object pollen from its name. It was then that I falsified the Nirvana barcode, saturated as I say by creative things. Still, I lost my mind with grief when my dad died; and possibly shouldn’t still be going on about all the halfware.
27. One must go beyond the realm of the self.
How can I begin to elaborate on the much-overlooked “area of the self?” I’d say the ontological, archaeological excavation, the existential detective case of peeling back layers of falsity only to find nothing underneath, and the postmodern “burial mound” or “tumulus” are akin.
When I was a teenager I drew two overlapping circles, one for the Known, one for the Unknown, and said the oval shaped bit in the middle where they overlapped and clapped was “the area of self.”
Not long after and already a multiplicity or myriad, I heard someone say some words to me that I had previously thought exactly. It was a philosopher and he said “I feel like a net grown so fine-mesh it is but grey, smoke, static and fleck, neither retaining nor permitting anything.” I thought “hey that’s my line!” but didn’t say.
It works the other way too: I once considered that I was “spreading the same packet of butter over an ever-increasing surface area of toast,” and soon enough found the exact words in an Arab Strap lyric sheet from before I had come up with them.
Dr. Bob says if you get busy you’ll find out who you are more than if you just sit around contemplating who you are, asking yourself, navel-contemplating – and he’s right.
28.
A monster needn’t be very big.
What
can you do when you become the witness from The
Lords And The New Creatures by
Jim Morrison? My latest thinking is that my dad was sponsored by some
philosophers to provide the real, human witness. The first was, I
believe, something also attested to by James Joyce in time before me,
which is written about in Ulysses.
The second – it struck me recently – was an actual monster,
albeit very small and albeit contained to a plastic rectangular card.
With
the first I went into the wood to get the booted away ball, and as I
stood looking for the ball, it came from the right, crossed my body,
parked and started to wriggle its little wing. This caused me to run
and upon returning to the wood to hunt for it was not to be found. I
think it was meant to look like a hoax but still exist in meaning.
With
the second, I tried on a jacket under the stairs and got a sense
something was wrong and took it off and looked inside… “mum!” I
cried up the pine, wooden stairs. “There’s something disgusting
growing in this jacket!”
I
was
ignored and it
was a flat plastic rectangle with a pattern of black stuff – maybe
eggs or seeds – splurged on top of it. I did not leave it to soak
in water like a good scientist might. I left the room and went back
in to see if it would still be there as the wood had taught me –
and it was. So I made the decision to bin the whole jacket.
29.
Just
because a theory is true doesn’t mean you should always say it but
it is also better to have a false theory than no theory.
Once
upon a time, when I first decided to “get scientific” about my
life, I devised something called The Theory of Dark Evolution. It
states that James Joyce also saw new creatures too, and that him
writing Ulysses
is therefore the reason Ted Hughes then went and saw a monster in the
river, and Hughes writing The
Hawk In The Rain,
about the nature of visionary experience, then becomes the reason Jim
Morrison saw winged serpents in the desert, and Morrison writing The
Lords And The New Creatures
then becomes the reason I met more than one specimen. The
Theory
of Dark Evolution therefore posits a Logical Bond between narrative
and Naturalistic Observationism of a strange kind. It implies that
what one man makes of the recurrence of strange Observationism
influences the nature of the next observation in the line.
30.
You shouldn’t write about what you cannot renew.
More
recently I decided that to talk about
The Lords And The New Creatures coming
true, something “kinetic” becomes something “static.” It’s
the same as John Barnes’s sensational goal against Brazil. When we
watch the action replay we know the ball is going in. We cannot give
the uncertainty back to the moment. Something “kinetic” becomes
something “static.”
31.
There is an equation blowing in the wind.
Permutation
games can be a rehearsal for death. Not sine wave with minus sign
coursing through. Tony Eade the gay maths teacher
stood with his arms in a T and spoke in a strange tone. Intention –
what is my Intention, but to shed scientific light, to make an
imaginative advance, to contribute to the history of knowledge and
maybe make the world a better place? In this world we are all equals.
The image is of Egyptian mystery. Maybe.
You
don’t need a knife to achieve it.
32.
Love is grouped with language not God.
Teenage
philosophers sometimes group God and love together in the cynical
sense that (as they say) both are illusory. However, I think it more
sophisticated to group love with language. As WH Auden said “love
is a choice of words.” So this I would say is an essentially
pragmatic option.
Wittgenstein
said a lot of the problems of philosophy are created by language and
its misuse and hoped to elucidate these problems. A lot of problems
in life are also down to communication. So, believing, on top of
this, that love is aligned with language not God, I hope to improve
my language-use – to open communication – and I think this comes
down to care. Taking care, engaging brain, needn’t make you a
fastidious middle aged man, but a happier communicator. And after all
lack of communication is saddening, isn’t it? Like when as a child
Valentine’s Day passes you by without anyone telling you it is
Valentine’s Day. It’s saddening and sadness is a terrible emotion
whose waves seem to stretch before and after time. All told then to
remedy sadness, communication should be focussed on.
33.
There is a lot to be said for common sense.
I’ve
been reading A. J. Ayer; and if I could start my philosophy again I’d
restart by highlighting the 3 beliefs of the “common sense”
philosophy of G. E. Moore.
1.
there are in the universe enormous numbers of material objects
2.
men and perhaps some other animals have minds that perform acts of
consciousness
3.
we really do know there are objects and minds.
Now
I look about the room grounded in basic tenets of belief that I
share. If “colour” was my next port of call, I’d take my point
of departure either from a Neil Curry poem on the shelves that says
“colour is merely a spectacular event;” or look up a scientific
definition of colour on Google. That is, I stare at objects as if
trying to expand what is known yet know that philosophy must inwards.
Increasingly (it
says), mental states are co-aligned with actions in the brain.
Struggling to expand at leisure on Moore’s general beliefs, I stare
at some tiny insects moving on the white ceiling; then the lightbulb
dims and flashes back on for a split second while I stare. There are
such things as hallucinations but this I don’t think is one. Still,
trusting my own perceptions does not necessarily correlate to
intelligence much like recognising there are no Absolutes kind of
does. I am left with the room again, thinking “isness is the centre
of everything; the quiddity and suchness of existence, but not
exactly only enough.” In time I hope to build on Moore’s 3
beliefs.
34.
If you pick up a book of philosophy you should stay with it until you
finish it.
A.
J. Ayer presents an historical trajectory of philosophers as a
continuum of philosophical discourse. At some point in his
historicisation he encounters himself in the timeline. What is clear
is that the saturation-point of his erudition is light years beyond
what I have read in philosophy. I could probably list the philosophy
books I’ve read on one A4 page, as if the desire to keep shaping my
own philosophy book is dictatorial. Then again I excuse myself by
saying Wittgenstein himself was no scholar. Ayer accounts for the
history of Western philosophy
as has happened since Russell wrote History
of Western Philosophy,
or rather as an adjunctivity to where that history ends. It’s
difficult reading but I got through it in the end. As we reach the
contemporary point, or rather contemporary as it was in 1982 at the
time of publication, Ayer takes us through pragmatism, the analytical
school, physicalism, existentialism, neo-Marxism, structuralism,
essentialism and gets to the end and says he’s still an
old-fashioned empiricist.
35.
There are many senses of the word “perception.”
The
word “perception” has different meanings that are not utterly
distinct but related. First and foremost is the Primary Meaning: the
activity of the sensory organs in a neutral state. This is hearing,
seeing, tasting, touching and smelling. The next is the
Interpretative Meaning which is meant when someone says “my
perception of events was such and such.” It is an analytic
interpretation of what goes through the senses. The next is the
Subjective Meaning which is akin to Belief and also Opinion. It is
meant when someone says “in my perception, so and so.” As stated
these senses of perception are not utterly distinct but related and
it could be said one builds on another; even that taken as a process
there is a procession from information to knowledge to wisdom.
36.
A plane is a curve.
A
plane exists on 2 dimensions including Time. A pyramid exists on 4
dimensions including Time. But to turn a plane into a pyramid
represents only a 1 dimensional step. Therein find extra dimension of
the words “1 dimensional” meaning stupid, a dimension which could
also
be
called a separate plane.
And did I mention that I wanted to die?
Then
you get that the plane is a curve, because the world is round,
because the shape of spacetime is curved, because Gravity warps and
bends it.
37.
Some
coinage seems universal and pre-existent.
Ounce
upon a tome, a while ago, I
invented the word
distractionary to contain such neologisms as comnambulism, meaning
online sleepwalking, as funger meaning hunger for fun, as filence
meaning delicate speech, as amazeballs to replace archaic ‘gay,’
as emocracy, meaning rule by emotion, as agovernment, meaning the
opposite of government, as gravitolution and evity which might go
without saying, as co-imagination, as in to be diagonalised by
omnijective interface of random access co-imagination, which is not
fun, and I thought isness was another one, as in music is penetration
of isness, but it was already done in Joyce, whom it seems knew a lot
of these, and I have just recollected
another, not just “indwellable” meaning the opposite of
indomitable, when it comes to
cinema, but the word entropy
spelled backwards, as if to frame the first, unformulated spark of
appetence in Nothingness, preceding Creation, yet again, even though
the
universe was born in silence not
appetence as far as we know.
38.
The idea of “the given” has two opposing meanings.
My
ex conceived of the dichotomy of “given-ness VS craft.” For her
what was given was akin to the freedom of automatic writing, as
opposed to laboriously slaving away over something. I took the idea
of given-ness to mean the exact opposite thing though, taking my cue
from The
Lords And The New Creatures
where “we are too content to accept the given in sensation’s
quest.” Interesting how the same word can have diametrically
opposing meanings for two young lovers.
39.
Some poetic effects have no name.
My
undergraduate dissertation was an immanent, Kantian critique in
mimicking the
methodology of David
Morley’s series of findings into itself, into the concept of art
and science writing as a single discussion of perception. The
micro-analysis focussed on the line “the heart trammelled and
rammed on the anvil bleeds visions.” I worked out he was using the
anti-dactylus, two soft, one hard; and not only that but the stressed
syllables in that metrical pattern all rhymed on a short A. The
effect is kinetic; and there is invective monotony written into the
line’s musical configuration; but apart from that it is nameless,
nameless in all the array of hyper-specialised tools of sustained
critical micro-analysis.
40.
Time spent reading in hushed library corners pays off.
Professor
Squillegybob says:
“The
Great Gatsby
could be an infradiegetic heterotopia pertaining to panchronic,
panoramic overview like a chronotope turned euchronia, unless this
represents a word-world gone polysemic with the multifarious
possibilities of hermeneutic autonomy through whom the esemplastic
has fled away with the quadlibetical.”
41.
Language contains fossils.
The
word “went” is not past participle of the verb “to go”
originally, but the verb “to wend.” It is thus a fossil; and
language is full of them, fossils, coins, corruptions, dead metaphors
the brain is built of, ossifications, word-shades, word-frequencies,
ghost-vowels, consonantal masses. The English language is worth
billions of pounds, the creative industries second only to the
financial markets for bringing in wealth.
42.
Language is a creature.
I
read in The
New Scientist that
we developed language on the basis of meat; that we grew our brains
by eating meat; that we then needed to spread information about
farming, hunting, killing, cooking
and eating meat – so developed language.
One
of my Professors, Prof. John Schad of Lancaster University, says
“language speaks Man.”
Another,
Professor David Morley of
Warwick University,
says “language is a word-world where words are a species.”
My
friend Paul the poet and I think that “language is the emotional
condom of the world.”
Part
of that is that the pre-verbal, the thought-pattern, when translated
into words, via the mechanics of meaning, always represents a
dilution.
43.
The lesson of post-structuralism is twofold.
Professor
Squillegybob also
says:
“the lesson of post-structuralism is twofold, meaning:
(1)
the condition of being a text can extend to any object
(2)
the condition of being a language unto itself can extend to any
text.”
44.
Telepathy
has been proven.
An
interlocutor picked up my hands while I was at the screen and got me
to type:
He
found himself on a plane.
He
found himself on a.
He
found himself on.
He
found himself.
He
found.
P.
But
what “P” means we do not know. Wittgenstein for example would
say:
P
= ~ ~ P.
45.
There is simplicity the other side of complexity.
In
the movie Pi
the protagonist is a mathematician that has God’s name and its
syntax embedded in his head and is therefore chased by people wishing
to control the Stock Market and religious fanatics alike. He ends up
attaining the simplicity the other side of the enormously complex,
just sitting there gazing at a tree with the sun in it and the wind,
as if to be endlessly inveigled by the delicate, vein’d
instructions on a leaf.
46.
There could be a book in the undersea of dreams.
I
am a dreamworker, b/t/w/, who has tried to smuggle language out of
the unconscious; and I have grown convinced there is a book in the
undersea of dreams. Once I flew to the Isle of Man to pick
up a poem collection the shape of a remote control and made of
chocolate from a white, garden table. Another time, the dream text
was signed three times by Einstein’s value for light-speed c.
Another time I held the book in my hands and it was a mate who had
written it, and I read it, and it was genius, full
of pretty spirals, oneiric-textured dreamwriting and liminal phrases.
Maybe
our best work remains lost on sleep’s crumbling biscuit shore.
47.
It is indubitable that there are objects
in the room.
I ask if matter is not but energy vibrating at a particular wavelength and frequency but it won’t get me into Heaven. I look at the bedside table: a lamp, two books, two plugs, two pens… how gravity has it flock together. But the net is awash with more than I could ever say, already the sum of all difference connected. You could glean more clarity from a Youtube video than a philosopher going about his business in the old-fashioned way. Saying this though limits my options, problematises continuity. I lay back and read Descartes, but it might not get me to Heaven.
48.
If
my book was about damage, and repeating oneself was a faux pas, then
it would be the repetitions and mistakes that were the good bits.
My
book thus far does repeat itself but I don’t think it is damage
that is the cause of that. It’s something to do with working –
albeit only sometimes herein – at a computer – having that
facility – and having all the leisure time with which to work. Also
it is to do with hearing voices, that prompt me into copy and
pasting, as do real, living people in the house. I think, yes, it is
the copy and paste function, that leads to repetition. I have
endeavoured to remove the damage so to speak from my book but it just
gets more damaged, gets worse. If you erase bits that repeat you can
lose the gist of what you are saying at times. Sometimes I abandon a
text, start a new one, thus go over some old ground again in the new
one, then realise I am to augment the abandoned one with the new one,
thus creating repetition which could be called damage. Whether that
corresponds to actual damage in the self I do not know. The
book is not supposed to be about “damage” at all, but
autodidactic scholarship in the field of philosophy at the foot of
the fell. Still, the damage creeps in.
49.
Philosophy is best when just tea.
So
here I sit with my cup of tea just after noon in the solipsistic
kitchen. Don’t
the English say philosophy is best when just the condition of tea? I
drink tea in
extremis,
a habit I got into in mental hospital; and I’ve read some
philosophy too, although probably not enough. To raise my mental
level above
the
medication is hard, to lift the brain off its shelf, to liberate the
mind from the traps of the given but
I can start by saying it
is a winter day - a layer of frost crisp underfoot!- and
the roads are icy in parts. My mother and brother are driving round
to Barrow-in-Furness for an appointment. Even though what I went
through as shown might indicate that I had been a genius with my
life, it is my younger brother, who has not done any of those things,
that has actually conjured a genius idea, which is to do with <BEE>
maybe
coming
after @ in the international language alphabet, and much more what
was required than my own sorry experiment into the maths of the new
colour, if you can even call it my own.
Now
it’s just myself and the washing up. There is a backlog of messy
plates left over from recent
meals.
Because it’s the house where the Plough alignment is viable, not
writing would represent a victory for philosophy. That is, electing
to wash up rather than draw out some tedious point when I’m not
very inspired would represent the philosophical victory. For then I
would be pulling my weight, doing my fair share of the housework,
bringing the house forwards. I think my housemates expect me to have
washed up before they get back and it being my job I can only resign
myself to it.
“Most
people have to get up early and work hard,” I muse to myself as I
get busy. Indeed, I can’t because of this dreadful illness that has
nothing to recommend it, not even concomitant creativity. So I put
two hours into the backlog of dishes, then
take a quick tea break. It is now that my tea is brewing. When there
is a messy environment, mess gets into the brain, so it’s good to
do the washing up. By now it’s been more than two hours of work,
and there are only items of cutlery left, but we’ve run out of
really hot water, so busy have I been washing up with a running Tap.
I am not entirely lazy and recalled during the washing up how I
trained myself to run all the way up the oldest fell, which is more
than
three miles of constant ascent. That was way back towards the end of
my youth when I got tired of getting high and went on a health kick,
a fitness campaign. I
remember struggling up the fell step by step; and so it is with
washing up now – you just have to get busy and do it. When I look
back at my life I wish there had been more of this “getting
proactive” as my father named it and less lazing around getting
high.
50.
<BEE>
is
confusing.
We
don’t even know if it exists. If the idea is that <BEE> might
soon ensue from @ in the international language alphabet, it could be
a dangled carrot, just for the sake of the ‘A’. But they say
without <BEE> I wouldn’t be able to hear all these voices
like a telepath. So it must exist on some level. I
think I will find if I don’t engage with <BEE> at
some point I
will soon become an outmoded songbird. I did engage with <BEE>
in the songbook Soundcloud
Rain.
Herein,
I
mentioned some of what I do, my work, what I went through, and <BEE>
is no less essential than any of that. It’s through the medium of
<BEE> that we feel free. It’s
a buzz and part of my belief-system. I believe, that is, that my
brother’s notion is what succeeds the work I myself did at a young
age, work towards the invention of the net. I believe that all that
light evening jazz, all those things I did with my life, are back at
the @ function from which <BEE> tries to somehow move forwards.
51.
Truth is aligned with psychic pleasure.
So
far this seems to be about me trying to catch up with my circle of
intellectual friends from London, who all started reading Philosophy
at school the year I left town and went to another school. I am, that
is, hot on the heels of the scholars, and would like to take things
further. Maybe I would start learning about “Impartials” like
undergraduates
at
Lancaster University? Maybe I would realise I need to read some
indigenous philosophy if I am to deal with events in the mystical
realm that happened in my own country? Maybe I am to recognise the
Nirvana barcode is a fallacy and I am not to redo it? Maybe I should
open up on why the word “philosophy” is built with the word
“philos” meaning love? For after all isn’t love how we are
programmed to function?
Well,
Kant
says love is Nature’s trick for ensuring reproduction, the colours
of the flowers attracting the bees and so on. Auden says love is a
choice of words. Love used to be aligned with madness, fever and
intoxication, but became more pragmatic, more to do with language in
the Modernist era. Martin Amis says love is Man’s highest emotion;
but a female poetess I saw live took a much more biological view and
said love is a kind of banana custard, presumably meaning semen. I
suppose if it were “trust” or “respect” of wisdom rather than
philos
meaning love, it wouldn’t be as strong; and also that it remains
love because very often it is passed down, inherited, and love is the
function through which we have offspring after all. I suppose it is
also love because philosophy treats a subject in as high a way as is
possible. The verb with which the wisdom is treated is very often
love.
My
father, for example of wisdom itself,
used to say love is the hope the heart literally needs in order for
it to
survive without which it can stop; and that was the lesson of his
tale about some great grandparent on my Finnish side dying of a
broken heart. I suppose if he
just dictated the wisdom in that case it wouldn’t be as good as it
is when you bind it to life. He never used to say the wisdom
out-right just tell the story of a Finnish great grandparent who on
seeing his daughters scattered and sent off to different homes after
a Russian Invasion, died of a broken heart. “You can die of a
broken heart,” he said. “The heart needs hope in order to
survive,” he continued. Thus the wisdom is bound to life. The
definition of what love is is embedded
in and derived
from the narrative that is being passed down. He
also therefore
passes
down the wisdom of binding wisdom to life. I use this example of
wisdom in a passage on love because it is wisdom about love.
My
answer to the question is already given which is that philosophy is
about treatment and
treatment is about love but
it’s also because it’s about being a good human, loving thy
neighbour, making the world a better place, a subject conducted
between individuals that love their work, and
ideally, hopefully love each other as parents love their offspring to
whom they impart their wisdom.
Wisdom,
in short, is something we pass down, and passing down is for
families, and families are made of love.
There
is also the idea that truth is co-aligned with psychic pleasure. That
it is the fakes and frauds that lead to pain. Truth after all is what
the philosopher may be after. He seeks to extirpate every trace of
falsity from his myriad mind, and
develop a stance.
52.
Water is a very English concern.
Rain
falls on a grey, dank, papier-mache day. I am upstairs wondering what
is “water” in the international language alphabet… maybe
“a-wallity wallity Walter?” Experiments in the laboratory of
language have been made into the international language alphabet, but
still I come back to writing in normalised English – and
about water I shall say a few words. Water
has been called the Universal
Solvent.
H20 might stand for hypothalamus tattoo, for even water leaves an
indelible stain on the hypothalamus. Water is said to be a very
English concern, here at the home of fairness. Some say the division
between the sane and insane is just water, indivisible, nothing. I do
know David
Morley’s
equations for water’s effect on water but shall not say; though I
can say that
H does not = 0 – 0 because I have a heart. But water is what I am
talking of. They say the word “water” is the word least changed
in all languages since the dawn of language. Down it careers as
gravity and katabasis require, always choosing the course of least
resistance. I would also
say
that water’s boiling point is when it starts to involuntarily
breakdance to the tune. The
sound of running water, meanwhile, is very soothing for the soul. O
is the key of the babbling unicorn. And
when you take E it can feel like your mouth is full of cold,
heavenly, crystal water and when you speak it spills. Water, water,
clairvoyant daughter, please show us your ragged silken eye. I still,
still like Gulliver’s
Travels
and ‘Goodbye Ruby Tuesday.’ Goodbye.
53.
Voices could be difference not illness in the future.
I
hear voices, people on the intercom.
I
think voices would be better known as “onjects,” quavers,
syllabubbles, sonic machinations at the periphery of sound.
(In
the same way the pills I pop could be “poetry buttons” and mental
hospital Monopoly Jail.)
Sometimes
they are sadistic sometimes not.
Sometimes
the rate and frequency is so high that I cannot translate one muffled
word-chord before the next comes in.
I
heard it said that in the future, voices might be perceived as
difference rather than illness.
The
same thing happened to homosexuality between Arthur Rimbaud’s day
and our own.
Speaking
of him, voices could also be the colours of the vowels.
This
is to idealise and paint a pretty portrait of illness which largely
speaking has nothing to be said in its favour.
Sometimes
they seem proleptic, tuned in and co-imaginative.
I
believe they can come from without, from outside the consciousness,
and that the belief that voices are merely one’s own thoughts is
too solipsistic.
Voices
might bring up questions of post-humanity too – to what extent am I
already A. I?
54.
Maybe we are living through the birth of A. I. from the death of
music.
Is
the theme of the age The Birth of A. I. From the Death of Music? I
don’t know but A. I. is certainly a thematic thing right now. But
looking back you find it has been coming for a long time. There is
mention of the net in Ulysses
as a visionary and Utopian
glimpse. Robert Lowell also pictured “a net.” In my own seven
year old work in
1989 I
stored the idea of the net in writing in the attic here to give it a
chance to grow all the way round the world. I called it “the ire ii
net,” then.
In
the year 2001 I was writing about how I. T. might stand for Instant
Travel too. By the time I was doing my undergraduate degree in 2004
or 2005 I was already telling my gf about A. I. Companies. I started
hearing voices and thought they were A. I. One piece I wrote was
called The
Birth of A. I. From The Spirit of Music
and I tried to exchange it in my poverty for a bus ticket to get from
town to University to no avail.
By
the time my father was dying, I had a numinous purple-bleeding
screen. It filled the room with a purple light. It made every film a
noir and every poem file like it was a featherlite love poem shop.
Its colour was co-aligned with mystery, sex, suadade,
longing and shame thus to incorporate every vowel sound into a
feeling. There was something post-human going on and this was
confirmed by the fact that the PC died at the exact moment of my
father’s passing.
Such
talk certainly seems more in keeping with the spirit of the age than
talk about The
Lords And The New Creatures.
As my brother Dr. Robert – now a computer scientist – says
“nobody is interested in the new creatures. The future of A. I, the
possibility of other dimensions, of Philip Pullman portals too, are
more interesting. Spirals of epistemological doubt are also out and
Love In The Age of Facebook is in.” It was Dr. Bob that
photographed me sitting next to the purple screen with a guitar in my
hand, on my old phone, just for the evidence.
55.
Philosophers can like football too, and footballers like philosophy
in turn.
And
I
suppose
it
can’t be done, writing a book of philosophy as good as Barnes’s
goal against Brazil. I find with my life story there is a sequence of
“ands”. The story is “and and and and and and and and and and
and and and and.” But with my books, it is nearer John Cleese in
The
Holy Grail where
he keeps proceeding forwards despite getting his limbs chopped off
when he does. The life story includes the beating of many men,
metaphorically speaking, and Barnes’s goal against Brazil becomes a
container, a mathematical device; but when writing a book of
philosophy supposed to be as good, even within one singular book it
is nearer John Cleese in The
Holy Grail.
My
dad would
nevertheless encourage my most valiant attempts. He was
big into football like myself. He supported Man United; and when I
started supporting Liverpool young, because Barnes, their winger, was
already my favourite player, and because they were top, my dad came
in and said “John your boys are playing Arsenal today and I want
you to watch Ian Wright very closely.” I was being punished, by
having to focus on Arsenal’s deadly black striker.
Years
later dad brought in a sheet of paper, containing two teams. He asked
“what do you notice about these two teams, son?” and I said “one
is black and one is white.” “Correct,” he said. Then he asked
who I thought would win and I said probably the blacks. He then said
“there’s a difference between having all the skill and being able
to win a match.” We looked at the teams like they were blueprints!
He asked if Rio Ferdinand should still be in the black team even
though he had some white blood and I said I thought so. We discussed
who would captain the sides and for me Barnes would’ve been captain
of the black team.
Then,
when this was done, dad suddenly dropped in the philosophical
message: “there’s probably going to be a black President of
America in your lifetime son.” That was the message, and I was
happy. It seemed like good news; and I liked the way dad delivered
the message, going through the medium of something that appealed to
my teenage boy sensibilities. Dad was a philosopher really, and
preferred Camus to Sartre because Camus was an international
goalkeeper – and now here I am trying to write a book of philosophy
as good as Barnes’s goal against Brazil.
I
would have to add that a few weeks after the delivery of dad’s
message through football, I went to the shop down the street in our
old London house and found two black guys on the end of the street
smoking a spliff and talking about Infinity. It strikes me that there
will be more of that in the future Utopia, that this is a side of
philosophy much overlooked. Even as a white, male, upper middle
class, educated person, I get frustrated that formal philosophy all
seems to be white, middle aged men with an Oxbridge degree, never a
black guy on a street corner smoking a spliff and talking about
Infinity.
As
dad used to say there’s no such thing as almost Infinite. There had
to be Everything for there to be anything
at all. A drum is also a dream of bounding in huge, magic circles in
space. If the windows were washed – every one – we would see
nothing through them except the same white mirrors reaffirming the
quiet interior of the solipsistic kitchen.
56.
Reality is not a computer program designed by aliens in the 1980’s.
While
reading Descartes’s Meditations
I struck upon
an idea for reality-building. Take as your supposition that reality
is a computer program designed by aliens in the 1980’s and try and
prove it wrong. The first two things I think of, to confute this,
that I believe to be real are that (1) I believe my English-teaching
granny was Head of English at
a Comprehensive School before I was born and (2) I believe The
Lords And The New Creatures by
Jim Morrison was still written and published in the 1960’s. I would
also hazard a guess that (3) the apple tree in the front garden has
roots going down into slow centuries gone and was producing fruit
which my father ate in his boyhood before I was born. So far I am
noticing that all this evidence is one-sided, all from my father’s
side and from my mother’s side nothing leaps out. Of course the
flood-gates could open and an endless torrent sweep in, data proving
the notion specious, but I like it when there are only a few salient
points of confutation. I cannot prove that my refuting the notion
doesn’t mean that
The Lords And The New Creatures
is as if a fossil planted by God to test our faith; for the alien
computer program once established could precede its own origins like
Time itself is said to. It could contain things meant to blind us,
historical evidence against itself. So the question becomes one of
healthy intellectual persuasion – what do you consider to be real –
what do you put faith in blindly… I
suppose I could say (4) I believe my mother won prizes for her poetry
at school in Finland in an era before I was born. It doesn’t trip
off the tip of the tongue or come as naturally as a kneejerk
reaction, that one, but is more like a concession to the slow, old
universe as it is. There is no pressure forced by the presupposition
on the mind when I think of that one, and so it opens the door to
more and many more facts about life that confute the notion. If
reality was a computer program designed by aliens in the 1980’s,
the government would be in with them, and the people that helped me
write my seven year old text, that stored the idea of the net in
writing in the attic to give it a chance to grow all the way round
the world, would know, would work for the aliens, who leave no trace
of their insubordination.
57.
You can’t just come to philosophy with the CV of a mystic visionary
and automatically hope to be remembered as a philosopher.
Well, as I have no doubt said, and as you may well know by now therefore, my latest thinking, aged forty three, is that my father was positively sponsored by some philosophers to provide the real, human witness from The Lords And The New Creatures by Jim Morrison. So mustn’t I therefore give an account of my life all over again? At seven I am said to have helped invent the net: when the idea of the net needed storing in writing in the attic here at the foot of the fell to give it a chance to grow all the way round the world it was me that wrote it. By eight I had made not one but two very strange Naturalistic Observations. By eleven I was marked by the maths of the new colour as was contained back in the book I wrote at seven (it didn’t turn out to be the new colour in the end). By fifteen I had attained the face of stars which might’ve been scripted in the Bible. By eighteen, in 2000, I forewarned of September 11th and wrote the highest-marked English Literature A-level exam essay in the nation at 100%. I also predicted the hunt for the God Particle from looking at dust in a late ray of light angling in and founded a new religion based on the elephant. After school, to cut a long story short, I recorded an album on binaural earphones with mates, had an effervescent mobile reverberating the rhythm of ‘William Tell’ through every technological inlet in the room before it rang, hosted the Plough alignment for a rhythm change in the White House, got a First despite the onset of mental illness, noticed a sensory overlay of my name on Piper At The Gates of Dawn, worked at a numinous, purple-bleeding screen, built the Tower as an instrument of philosophy, conducted an experiment into a tape with a pause where cut and resealed in the flimsy reel, and discovered the sheet where pictures (seemingly depicting my own song lyric) grew. Then I falsified the Nirvana barcode in writing and attained visual radio, broadcasting dreams. But what this has to do with philosophy I don’t know except that I’m not one of Nietzsche’s artist-tyrants because I didn’t earn 1p throughout that list and believe in forgiveness, mercy and compassion. It is also instructive to note that although the fact that my dad may have been sponsored by some philosophers might lend me to philosophy, philosophy is a discipline that should be respected and for me that means reading.
58. Descartes is the start.
Descartes and his rationalism gave us Cartesian doubt, founded analytic philosophy and some would say modern science too. Descartes says before you can know anything you must doubt everything, every preconception, every prejudice left over from childhood. He extirpates every trace of falsity from his mind, entertaining that the data of his senses comes from a hideous demon, then realises that he is still thinking, still doubting, and therefore knows he exists. Hence we get “cogito ergo sum,” one of the most famous formulations in philosophy. Descartes also claims to have proven God’s existence by the fact that he can conceive of a perfection greater than himself so God must’ve put it there. It is kind of in line with the Ontological Argument as opposed to the Teleological or Cosmological Argument for God, which simply put is that if we have a word for God He exists. Descartes also says no effect can be more perfect than its cause and traces therefore his own existence back to God.
59. When I read of Descartes on perfection and turn inward my eye to investigate I glimpse a perfect, inner judge whose concerns are grammatical.
Sullen, silken sulks,
we drink the same rain,
spit is clean
and
so is dirt.
*
There is joy in things
and smiles not grins like butter
but
like butterflies.
*
Blessed may be the end at last,
under the sea,
below the soul,
in the upside-down
Oceans above us
(all
that heaven sends is rain.)
*
Semen
spills like silver water,
under
the bridge with the angel’s daughter,
splashing
with laughter in a moon-glow chamber.
*
Down
down
down
down
down
deep
blue
below
“eh
up,
mate,”
says
my
mate
and
is
it
safe
to
say
hello?
*
Leaves that played on the surface of the water,
these are the leaves they have in Heaven,
these
are the leaves of love.
60.
“Your career as a philosopher has already been.”
Well,
that means the three volumes of Transition
To Philosophy
that are available on Amazon, published by Chipmunka, who invited me
to change my name from my poetry writing name (which is my real name)
to
a nom
de plume.
The second of the three philosophy
books is
only available as e-book, not paperback, as
of yet.
I thought the first of the three was the best one. Because I got 100%
in a timed English A-level exam, which was as you can imagine the
highest mark in the nation, I presented 100 points of philosophical
interest. Since those three philosophy books
I brought out a poem collection called Yes
You May
and a further book called Let
The Jews Win,
which was a binary machine comprised of two long poems like The
Lords And The New Creatures. Yes You May
was already my fifth collection of poetry with Chimpunka, and Let
The Jews Win
was my sixth. To
give you the whole story, there
were some collections with Chipmunka
which I published
then had unpublished
to start with. Then I brought out several books under the name John F
B Tucker in a self-publishing capacity. They
included songs, poetry, science and criticism too.
Then I turned back to Chipmunka to get it right this time, bringing
out: Soundcloud
Rain
(a book of songs structured on the new da Vinci circle); my seven
year old collection The
Sunset Child
(which is where the idea of the net was stored in writing in the
attic to give it a chance to grow all the way round the world);
Breath
Trapped In Heaven
(love poems); Brave
New Tense
(about writing off the top of the head to discretely “do the beck”
in the back where the Plough alignment is viable); then I brought out
the three volumes of Transition
To Philosophy
under the name Johannes Bergfors; then the poem collection Yes
You May;
then the binary machine of two long
poems
called Let
The Jews Win.
That
means I have nine
books out with Chipmunka; and before them there was as I say a chain
of self-publications that I think also amounts to nine, meaning I
have eighteen books out there. To
hear that my philosophy career is over validates what I have done,
which is more than merely pay a vanity-press for any old scribblings,
but it also strikes me as a bit terminal and brutal, to think I will
never do any more.
61.
“To deem it like Wittgenstein you’d need to read Frege.”
I
confess it was Wittgenstein who inspired me to try and write
philosophy and that this was without my having read Frege nor getting
to the bottom of Wittgenstein’s difficult book Tractatus
Logico-Philosophicus. It’s
the language of logical symbolism I can’t understand because I have
had no training in that area. It means to a certain extent I am lost
with Frege, Russell, Wittgenstein and Quine alike. I did read in
Simon Blackburn’s fine book Think
about the language of logical symbolism but it didn’t stick. I
would say if your mnemonic for the guitar strings is Even A Dick Gets
Big Erections, and the audience takes a shine to your guitar without
knowing the mnemonic, there is an underlying Logic to the fact that
the audience likes you, more so than had the mnemonic been Every Acid
Dealer Gets Busted Eventually. But I said this already in Transition
To Philosophy,
and am but being rather DIY about the business of Logic.
62.
Barnes is real.
I
imagine turning up to a philosophy exam and bizarrely being faced
with the question “does Darth Vader have a penis?” I imagine one
answer is “you can fuck off, there’s a black dude in the penalty
area and I am running away.” I say that with recourse to euphemism
still so that the overall point can proceed; but we would
nevertheless concede that without
such recourse to euphemism
(a) you give away a penalty (b) you get sent off (c) you show
yourself to be a coward unto the women. We all have a headache at
this moment in time too, all of us, a nauseous feeling. The treatment
continues by saying “Barnes has scored a chicken,” as
if to pacify the situation. Then
we work out that the voice
of the subject
in question is the witness from The
Lords And The New Creatures
and have to assert “just because you’re the witness doesn’t
mean Barnes has scored a chicken.” We
then attempt a re-entry into reality by saying: Luke Skywalker isn’t
real; Indiana Jones isn’t real; James Bond isn’t real; but Barnes
is real. Then
that
is your answer, your result, your hope, your joy, even your E = mc
squared. Barnes is real. So the situation is redeemed and you can
even
then
try and revisit the difficult question. The truth is in Darth Vader’s
suit there is a white actor who naturally does have a penis and the
voice is a black actor who naturally also has a penis. It doesn’t
mean Darth Vader has two penises, it’s just the way it is in the
fiction. But what is gained from all this is the beauty of the
statement that Barnes is real. Barnes is also a member of society. He
probably doesn’t want to be in my book, a book of philosophy that
never had much
hope of being as good as his goal against Brazil, until
I realised Barnes is real.
And Barnes being real for me is a cause for celebration. So the
situation is redeemed.
63.
Words and things should still reconnect.
It
strikes me there is a lot of parade, routine, dress rehearsal around
the idea of God, but that God is an actual thing, or at least a
possibility – that names and things were once connected. The
sunlight blows my mind through the window when I pick up a guitar and
practise for the small religious meeting, and remember this – that
God is not just a word but a thing, a thing beyond things, an
intangible, unknowable, but omniscient and omnipotent and benevolent
thing. Admitting the possibility of God again, not just the same old
philosophical routine of words and their combinations, a) fills me
with wonder and imagination and surprise b) coincides with this great
lance of light coming through the window in a month approaching
spring. Where was I when I stopped praying? I prayed before my first
acid trip, at Glastonbury and had an absolutely amazing trip where
the sunlight was brighter and warmer and clearer then ever. For my
second trip I didn’t pray and that turned out to be a nightmare.
Since then I haven’t got sorted out, have fallen into mental
illness, have been through Hell. To re-establish
faith is not to become bound by the logic of a dusty tome from 1664,
for example, but to reach out towards the light, to feel alive once
more, to love life. If you want to live life as love you can but
through illegal drugs it won’t work, and through genuine faith it
just might. So today I have entertained the possibility of God again
and for it feel better. You
hear of stigma with mental illness and I think the same exists with
God once you befriend a powerful intellectual who doesn’t believe
but somehow still hates God in a very articulate way – and to see
that it is okay for you to believe is a good thing, a positive step,
a step towards recovery.
64.
The
sparetime continuum stretches like insipid, bisexual gum.
I
got a phonecall this morning on my smartphone from my friend saying
the religious music evening in town has been cancelled tonight so
he’s not going to pick me up, so I have the evening free. There I
was ready to turn to God, but worrying more about practical concerns
such as the fact that I would need to wash and find clean clothes if
I were to go out; and when it was cancelled I was glad, glad
because I could get more sleep after the call, glad because I don’t
like leaving the house, glad because I remain insecure in terms of
religious beliefs, someone who likes to hear both sides, almost
reading like a method-actor of different beliefs, from Descartes who
thought he had proven God to John Stuart Mill who thought no doctrine
offers the full picture, the whole truth (I
not only read like a method-actor but find myself pastiching what I
read when it comes to writing.)
So now I have the evening free.
65.
If
I’m not free to write, it’s hopeless.
As
Martin Amis said “writing is freedom.” Freedom meanwhile is Man’s
main, psychic thread, dating back to his nomadic days when he was
tall, lithe and muscular. So often I find I am performing what voices
want me to do, fetching for them like a dog. One really must be free
to write in one’s own home. If
not, then the situation really is hopeless.
66.
The
same object can seem to be two different things when seen from the
perspective of each brain hemisphere.
When
I see the damp patch on the wall I think of the duck-rabbit, or is it
the rabbit-duck in Wittgenstein, which seen from right to left is one
thing, and seen from left to right is another. This time, seen from
left to right the shape is a gazelle leaping; and seen from right to
left, against the grain of Western reading, it is a shark patrolling
the water. I keep thinking I’ll take a photo of it on my phone, or
use it to draw a sketch but I never get round to it. It’s
enough to just lie back and stare at it, drift with the afternoon,
contemplate things. Seen
from left to right, which is the grain of Western reading, the
gazelle is leaping over the book shelves. I
think how music is all written left to right and could be more
holistic; how once I saw invisible sheet music streaming from right
to left in Mother Nature. Meaning in music, furthermore, is faces in
fire or Hamlet’s three creatures in a single cloud-change, in other
words solipsistic. The damp patch, however, is not so solipsistic,
for with a little prompt I am sure anyone could recognise the binary
of animals in the shape.
67.
There
can be a fine line between an accident and a miracle.
I
was reading History
of Western Philosophy
by Russell and writing a book at the same time whose chapters went in
alphabetical order, following
the alphabet chapter by chapter.
I had got down to a chapter called ‘Watch’ where I was noting
down the time a lot. But I did not know what chapter would come next,
for the letter ‘x’. I started to read about Hume on cause and
effect in the Russell book and turned the page, at the exact moment I
wondered what to do for the chapter beginning ‘x’ and found on
the bottom of the page in Russell a calm, mild letter ‘x’ printed
on the bottom of the page, decades ago, without explanation. Was it
an accident or a miracle? It could have been both and the incident
was
a point of intersection that deepened my sense of Fate. I knew then
my chapter after ‘Watch’ had to be about the calm, mild ‘x’
printed on the bottom of the page in Russell. The book I was writing
didn’t survive apart from the incident I mention.
68.
It’s sometimes good to speak freely even if what you say is not
true.
This
text is painstakingly transcribed from defaced bank notes. Some of
the bank notes are damaged, illegible, others ‘missing.’ Efforts
have been made to order the bank notes but were not always
successful. No efforts were made to authorial-fingerprint the voice
or psychoanalyse the handwriting. The text is not necessarily a
critical indictment of embedded liberal capitalism of whom we are
liberal, human subjects and where money, formerly neutral means of
exchange, is becoming a flying, white, electrical spark passing
through borders of osmotic porosity in the dark. Nor is the text
necessarily about an imaginary designer drug called Strictly Free
that does exactly what it says on the tin, is and makes you “strictly
free” to consume. It is but an open-air piece,
comprised of torn and bleeding snapshot-fragments that are given
artificial insemination. Inherent in it is a notion that money is an
Ode to Death, that a fiver is cheese and onion flavour, that work
sets you free.
69.
One should never pay to have one’s poetry published.
I
hate all my books, apart from maybe Let
The Jews Win,
because I went into it, already middle aged, without finding out what
I had been through as a child. I had helped invent the net, been the
witness from The
Lords And The New Creatures,
and been marked by an experiment into the maths of the new colour. So
without knowing what was going on, when I was first bringing out
books, I wasn’t getting them right. Now the situation is an ungodly
mess. I think of having them unpublished but should learn from when I
un-published my first collection Rose
Petals In The Ashtray
that I shouldn’t do that. I just have to accept that I have 18
books out
there now, at
my own expense, and the only half-decent
one from
my perspective is
the one that borrowed a shape from Jim Morrison (Let
The Jews Win).
When
will my career begin? If
you’ve done all these wonderful things – if you’ve helped
invent the net at seven – been the witness at eight – you should
not have to pay for your work to be published. 2025 was a big year
for me finding out a) I really had helped invent the net; b) my
father might’ve been sponsored by some philosophers to provide the
real, human witness; c) I was marked by the maths of the new colour.
Is it any surprise I haven’t come to anything in life being this
old before I was let in? Is it any surprise that I am angry and that
my anger has now given way to a feeling of tremendous sadness, like
sadness is the musical key of intelligence?

No comments:
Post a Comment