J. H. Prynne
- Thread starter version
- Start date
-
- Tags
- 100 god damn pages butchering sontag cooking with propane corpsey why are you so thick deaths from bromo-dragonfly enjoy your journey enjoy! everyone! gravity bong happy to help! jamaican voodoo gang from predator 2 lads vs. dudes martin anus shaun from delaware stoned modernism teat. the albert ayler of the recorder the bee is the messiah the path clears by the use it gets thick as fuck to pollen traitor cow-juice west coast dudes
linebaugh
Well-known member
Gaddis is in this zone but Im talking about texts where you can read a 100 words and have absolutely no clue whats going on. With Gaddis youve always got a sense of setting, time, character and etc. (at least what Ive read)
To be fair, there were sections in Carpenter's Gothic where I had no clue what was going on. There's a sex scene where the TV and a storm outside mingle with what's going on in the bedroom so one minute you're in the garden watching a tree get struck by lightning then you're looking at the head of a penis then Orson Welles falls off a horse then he's suddenly in bed in a castle and the room's on fire. Took me another read to realise what was happening.
constant escape
winter withered, warm
I read Ulysses, but not in an analytic or academic way. Looked up a ton of words, but primarily just went along wherever it took me.
In it, Stephen seemed to fixate on some of the things mentioned here (Nebeneinander and nacheinander as german for "side by side" and "one after another" although I forget which is which). But the linguistic application of these dimensions aligns well with the
"Learn to think laterally, to consider what language can do rather than what it does." bit.
The words "side by side" (langue? metaphor?) make up the dimension of parallel or forking realizations, similar to how autofill provides a line of suggested words. This is what language "can do"
The words "one after another" (parole? metonymy?) make up the dimension of sequence, order, similar to the chain of chosen words that autofill leaves behind its current set of suggestions. This is what language "does"
Edit: the bit from Ulysses I have in mind is at the beginning of chapter three, I believe. Don't know the name of it.
in other words, "side by side" as synchronic, harmony
"one after another" as diachronic, melody
In it, Stephen seemed to fixate on some of the things mentioned here (Nebeneinander and nacheinander as german for "side by side" and "one after another" although I forget which is which). But the linguistic application of these dimensions aligns well with the
"Learn to think laterally, to consider what language can do rather than what it does." bit.
The words "side by side" (langue? metaphor?) make up the dimension of parallel or forking realizations, similar to how autofill provides a line of suggested words. This is what language "can do"
The words "one after another" (parole? metonymy?) make up the dimension of sequence, order, similar to the chain of chosen words that autofill leaves behind its current set of suggestions. This is what language "does"
Edit: the bit from Ulysses I have in mind is at the beginning of chapter three, I believe. Don't know the name of it.
in other words, "side by side" as synchronic, harmony
"one after another" as diachronic, melody
Proteus. When he's going on about Aristotle, the diaphane and whatnot.
linebaugh
Well-known member
He never goes off the deep end like that in The Recognitions, but theres still a little of that there. I think you might have originally linked it, but I read something on Gaddis as a psychedelic writer: always giving due diligence to the entire setting, everything as a happening. No ones ever just in a room, the room is happening around them.
INELUCTABLE MODALITY OF THE VISIBLE: AT LEAST THAT IF NO MORE, thought through my eyes. Signatures of all things I am here to read, seaspawn and seawrack, the nearing tide, that rusty boot. Snotgreen, bluesilver, rust: coloured signs. Limits of the diaphane. But he adds: in bodies. Then he was aware of them bodies before of them coloured. How? By knocking his sconce against them, sure. Go easy. Bald he was and a millionaire, maestro di color che sanno. Limit of the diaphane in. Why in? Diaphane, adiaphane. If you can put your five fingers through it, it is a gate, if not a door. Shut your eyes and see.
Stephen closed his eyes to hear his boots crush crackling wrack and shells. You are walking through it howsomever. I am, a stride at a time. A very short space of time through very short times of space. Five, six: the nacheinander. Exactly: and that is the ineluctable modality of the audible. Open your eyes. No. Jesus! If I fell over a cliff that beetles o'er his base, fell through the nebeneinander ineluctably. I am getting on nicely in the dark. My ash sword hangs at my side. Tap with it: they do. My two feet in his boots are at the end of his legs, nebeneinander. Sounds solid: made by the mallet of Los Demiurgos. Am I walking into eternity along Sandymount strand? Crush, crack, crick, crick. Wild sea money. Dominie Deasy kens them a'.
Won't you come to Sandymount,
Madeline the mare?
Rhythm begins, you see. I hear. A catalectic tetrameter of iambs marching. No, agallop: deline the mare.
Open your eyes now. I will. One moment. Has all vanished since? If I open and am for ever in the black adiaphane. Basta! I will see if I can see.
See now. There all the time without you: and ever shall be, world without end.
I said something about that on the Pynchon sub. I was on about everything operating on the same plane, so the TV, radio, newspapers, people in the street butt into the text and are afforded the same attention as snatches of dialogue from the characters. It reminds me of how psychedelics flatten everything so a chair or bit of fluff can be as compelling as a painting
There's a really strange bit in Carpenter's Gothic where a character randomly doodles some shit on a piece of paper without thinking and chucks it in the bin or leaves it on a table then another character appears maybe a chapter or two later and offhandedly remarks that someone's drawn the exact layout of some historic battle on this piece of scrap paper.
I read this as either the first character drawing it unwittingly, but definitely drawing it, or the second character, who's CIA, seeing what he wants to see in a bunch of squiggles. Also seems like Gaddis yet again commenting on the writing process, perhaps taking jabs at himself.
Just found another thing on To Pollen.
intercapillaryspace.blogspot.com
"Intercapillary Space": Warring Inscriptions: J. H. Prynne's <em>To Pollen</em>
linebaugh
Well-known member
Yah, and another where info/communication can be called a major theme.
Is there any 'wait, what?' author where that isnt the case? I think if I was more familiar with poetry we'd find some there
linebaugh
Well-known member
I was in fifth or sixth grade and this girl, very nice and quiet, was doodling in class and got caught by our teacher. He asked what she was drawing, a dog, and if he could see it. When he gets his eyes on it he absolutely keels over laughing- red faced, complete loss of control. This girl had drawn a dogs face in a way that looked exactly, exactly, like an overweight naked fat woman and she had no idea.
Mark E. Smith? Bob Dylan?
linebaugh
Well-known member
Yah, exactly why I mentioned poetry
And certain Burroughs passages too. Its a little undermined by being placed in the larger context of a book that is largely about comm/info, but I think if you were to take certain passages of Naked Lunch, forcing that interpretation onto them would feel forced.
linebaugh
Well-known member
eh? I think its primary object is history, which is closely related. But I didn't find The Tunnel all that indecipherable. Its actually pretty straight foward for the most part, at least what I read