No Robin, you shouldn't read more; you should quit reading and writing, it's imposible for you to become fluent in English, ever.
It was the stillness of an implacable force ....
Previous page Pages: 1 2
>>>When someone gives you a glassy look, it as if their eyes have glazed over. That they are looking at you, but their mind has gone dead. <<<
It's like your writing. Your words are glazing at me, but their meaning is dead.
It's like your writing. Your words are glazing at me, but their meaning is dead.
My reply to my anonymous critics Blanc and Guest.
blanc Mon Jan 04, 2010 5:51 am GMT
"It was the stillness of an implacable force brooding over an inscrutable intention" , has a clear and obvious and unambiguous meaning. If you can't see that, you should read more.
My reply: _________So what is the meaning?
Guest Sun Jan 03, 2010 7:15 pm GMT
Dear Robin,
What is being Kafkaesque around here is you. You're exactly the 'Hunger artist'. Nobody understands you and visa-versa. I mean vice-versa, sorry.
It is the story of your life; whenever the teacher tried to correct your poor skills you would perceive that as an attack at your personality. This is the reason for all your troubles in life and I'm sure there were and are plenty of those. You only learn when you get spanked. Your childhood must've been a joy, I almost feel for you.
My reply:___________I have not made a personal attack on you. You choose to have a very anonymous name. Previously, I ignored your comments.
My New Year's Message to Guest and Blanc:
Contribute
blanc Mon Jan 04, 2010 5:51 am GMT
"It was the stillness of an implacable force brooding over an inscrutable intention" , has a clear and obvious and unambiguous meaning. If you can't see that, you should read more.
My reply: _________So what is the meaning?
Guest Sun Jan 03, 2010 7:15 pm GMT
Dear Robin,
What is being Kafkaesque around here is you. You're exactly the 'Hunger artist'. Nobody understands you and visa-versa. I mean vice-versa, sorry.
It is the story of your life; whenever the teacher tried to correct your poor skills you would perceive that as an attack at your personality. This is the reason for all your troubles in life and I'm sure there were and are plenty of those. You only learn when you get spanked. Your childhood must've been a joy, I almost feel for you.
My reply:___________I have not made a personal attack on you. You choose to have a very anonymous name. Previously, I ignored your comments.
My New Year's Message to Guest and Blanc:
Contribute
When I say that you've been spanked a lot in your childhood, it's not a personal attack. It's psychoanalysis. It reveals to you and the world the origins of your enormous troubles with learning and your psychological straying. It's not an attack, it's either true or not true.
<<My reply: _________So what is the meaning? >>
It means:
It has a stillness comparable to the stillness of an unrelenting/unstoppable force that is thinking deeply over a intention which cannot be known.
It means:
It has a stillness comparable to the stillness of an unrelenting/unstoppable force that is thinking deeply over a intention which cannot be known.
<The type of precision that a programmer uses, is different from the type of precision that a poet uses. >
That is a very interesting statement, Robin Michael. What then is the type of precision that a poet may use?
< I gazed a gazely stare at all the millions here ... There is no such word as 'gazely'. ... So, the Artist takes the freedom to break the rules. Whereas the Programmer is constrained by the rules and must operate within the rules. >
My friend, let us examine this a little further. The artist, you say, may break the rule; and that is one point in which he may differ from the programmer. The programmer writes for a machine, which can not process departures from the rules; but the artist writes for human beings, who think that departures from the rules "curious" and "interesting".
But what is this departure from the rule?
It is to create the adjective "gazely", and to employ the new adjective in the statement "he gazed a gazely stare".
Now you imagine "ghastly", when the singer sings "gazely"; but is that not to substitute an ordinary and comprehensible adjective for the "new" and "creative" adjective? So, the human being takes the departure from the rule, and bends it as soon as he can back to the rule?
But do you truly think it is then such a creative departure?
Is "gazing a gazely stare" not the same as "looking a looking look"?
It is a double tautology, no?
That is a very interesting statement, Robin Michael. What then is the type of precision that a poet may use?
< I gazed a gazely stare at all the millions here ... There is no such word as 'gazely'. ... So, the Artist takes the freedom to break the rules. Whereas the Programmer is constrained by the rules and must operate within the rules. >
My friend, let us examine this a little further. The artist, you say, may break the rule; and that is one point in which he may differ from the programmer. The programmer writes for a machine, which can not process departures from the rules; but the artist writes for human beings, who think that departures from the rules "curious" and "interesting".
But what is this departure from the rule?
It is to create the adjective "gazely", and to employ the new adjective in the statement "he gazed a gazely stare".
Now you imagine "ghastly", when the singer sings "gazely"; but is that not to substitute an ordinary and comprehensible adjective for the "new" and "creative" adjective? So, the human being takes the departure from the rule, and bends it as soon as he can back to the rule?
But do you truly think it is then such a creative departure?
Is "gazing a gazely stare" not the same as "looking a looking look"?
It is a double tautology, no?
<<Hey Robin Michael (aka the Hunger Artist), how's the fasting going? >>
Or rather, how's the Contribution and Research going? Are the people still stopping by to read your Posts as they make their way to the good threads like the one about assimilation and elision? When Tom selects his top threads of 2009, I dare say the memory space your threads take up will be emptied to make way for something better.
Or rather, how's the Contribution and Research going? Are the people still stopping by to read your Posts as they make their way to the good threads like the one about assimilation and elision? When Tom selects his top threads of 2009, I dare say the memory space your threads take up will be emptied to make way for something better.
<<Your whole hypothesis that "art doesn't have to mean something" is flawed, because the sentence "It was the stillness of an implacable force brooding over an inscrutable intention" , has a clear and obvious and unambiguous meaning. If you can't see that, you should read more.>>
While your understanding of the sentence Robin Michael stated had no meaning, is correct in my estimation. His statement that "art doesn't have to mean something" is not too far off the mark. For instance, the language school of poets often write poems in which the words themselves have very little to do with the meaning of the poem. Rather, it is the sound that often takes on the position of meaning within the poem. Though, this doesn't eradicate meaning (people will find meaning in a pile of road apples if left to their devices), but it does change the means by which meaning is achieved.
The language poets descend from the New York school, which in return was influenced first by a select group of French Modernists and the American writer, Gertrude Stein. The great intellectual bastian for this type of writing is the renowned Iowa Writer's Work Shop, once home to the late great Kurt Vonnegut. Often, these experimental poets actually cause more fuss and discontent than necessary, but each to his or her own, I suppose
While your understanding of the sentence Robin Michael stated had no meaning, is correct in my estimation. His statement that "art doesn't have to mean something" is not too far off the mark. For instance, the language school of poets often write poems in which the words themselves have very little to do with the meaning of the poem. Rather, it is the sound that often takes on the position of meaning within the poem. Though, this doesn't eradicate meaning (people will find meaning in a pile of road apples if left to their devices), but it does change the means by which meaning is achieved.
The language poets descend from the New York school, which in return was influenced first by a select group of French Modernists and the American writer, Gertrude Stein. The great intellectual bastian for this type of writing is the renowned Iowa Writer's Work Shop, once home to the late great Kurt Vonnegut. Often, these experimental poets actually cause more fuss and discontent than necessary, but each to his or her own, I suppose
As a follow up to my previous post, here is Gertrude Stein's Poem "If I Told Him": http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=miVR91q9HnA
Let us test this again:
<For the poet, it is exactly the opposite. The poet is free to make up words. The essence of modern poetry is creativity. So the poet to a certain extent is breaking the rules, using words in new combinations. >
Let us take two famous quotations:
a. To be or not to be: that is the question.
b. Twas brillig and the slithy toves / Did gyre and gimble in the wabe.
Quotation b contains 5 imaginary words.
Quotation a does not contain any imaginary words. It is 10 words that may be heard in an ordinary conversation.
Robin Michael, is the creativity in quotation b greater than the creativity in quotation a?
<For the poet, it is exactly the opposite. The poet is free to make up words. The essence of modern poetry is creativity. So the poet to a certain extent is breaking the rules, using words in new combinations. >
Let us take two famous quotations:
a. To be or not to be: that is the question.
b. Twas brillig and the slithy toves / Did gyre and gimble in the wabe.
Quotation b contains 5 imaginary words.
Quotation a does not contain any imaginary words. It is 10 words that may be heard in an ordinary conversation.
Robin Michael, is the creativity in quotation b greater than the creativity in quotation a?
<<Robin Michael, is the creativity in quotation b greater than the creativity in quotation a? >>
It is not simply a matter of the amount of creativity; it is largely a matter of the creativity within the artist's particular socio-temporal loci. If, for instance, Jabberwocky contained the words "to be or not to be: that is the question" it would most definitely not be as creative since Shakespeare has already given us that line. Indeed, it might be said that if Lewis Carroll had even adopted an Elizabethan tone in his writing, it would be less creative since the language and patterns of Elizabethan verse were established far before he was born. That people experiment with language in their own time, as both Shakespeare and Carroll did, shows the changing nature of language as well as the changing nature of art. Mikhail Bakhtin, the Russian Formalist, goes over much of this in "The Dialogic Imagination".
It is not simply a matter of the amount of creativity; it is largely a matter of the creativity within the artist's particular socio-temporal loci. If, for instance, Jabberwocky contained the words "to be or not to be: that is the question" it would most definitely not be as creative since Shakespeare has already given us that line. Indeed, it might be said that if Lewis Carroll had even adopted an Elizabethan tone in his writing, it would be less creative since the language and patterns of Elizabethan verse were established far before he was born. That people experiment with language in their own time, as both Shakespeare and Carroll did, shows the changing nature of language as well as the changing nature of art. Mikhail Bakhtin, the Russian Formalist, goes over much of this in "The Dialogic Imagination".
Previous page Pages: 1 2