words
[a knock sounded on the fourth wall and he rose to face it.]
it was the reader, whom, as an ideal manifestation of a class of phenomenon (including both human and other apprehension), demanded that the method of determining the content(s) of a piece of text should be as close to identical as possible to the physical practice of inscribing the words in turn as a method of initial perception of the concept. see, you just read that whole thing, nice one. the purpose of language, notionally, is the autography of thought via language upon the perception. written language was conceived in the interest of getting that done at some point, but somewhere around windows 3.1 that shit went south for a minute [hard]. the distracting square form of the modal dialog box casts exactly a cubical shadow in the continuing perception of the user, in his linear and right-angled world of language. the operation of the machinery necessary to digitize the linearization of the lingual form of a rather constant shotgun blast of experience to the face is frankly way too much for most current internet users, and, the reader believed, probably should be enforced with packs of feral remotely controlled vultures. the task of manifesting language in text is currently more complicated than farting, which poses serious problems to anyone not canny enough to avoid being convinced of the surface reality of the form of language presented in the daily text of every day experience. for example: spell checking. formatting. proper avoidance of insulting the reader. attributing misspellings to cats. these are all tasks that must be mastered before even a thought can arise, yet none would be sensibly thought of as necessary to thought.
it was the reader, whom, as an ideal manifestation of a class of phenomenon (including both human and other apprehension), demanded that the method of determining the content(s) of a piece of text should be as close to identical as possible to the physical practice of inscribing the words in turn as a method of initial perception of the concept. see, you just read that whole thing, nice one. the purpose of language, notionally, is the autography of thought via language upon the perception. written language was conceived in the interest of getting that done at some point, but somewhere around windows 3.1 that shit went south for a minute [hard]. the distracting square form of the modal dialog box casts exactly a cubical shadow in the continuing perception of the user, in his linear and right-angled world of language. the operation of the machinery necessary to digitize the linearization of the lingual form of a rather constant shotgun blast of experience to the face is frankly way too much for most current internet users, and, the reader believed, probably should be enforced with packs of feral remotely controlled vultures. the task of manifesting language in text is currently more complicated than farting, which poses serious problems to anyone not canny enough to avoid being convinced of the surface reality of the form of language presented in the daily text of every day experience. for example: spell checking. formatting. proper avoidance of insulting the reader. attributing misspellings to cats. these are all tasks that must be mastered before even a thought can arise, yet none would be sensibly thought of as necessary to thought.
--
<< Home