z about the act of blathering, the participants, the effects of, the origins of, the ethos of, the rules or lack thereof, the nature of or the history of. it's like talk about talk, ideas about thinking and images of making pictures. this is meta meta. 050404
milo here where the ultimate proposition is who?

and less implicit, why?
. meta_meta 050404
phil Kubla Khan

Clashing of sounds.
Muttering voices, running feet.
All harmonious in their wanderings.
Swirling, coming and going.
As they please in this disheveled household of innate games.
Initiating games, acts of love and mass outcasting.
Each one of those feet has a story, I'm sure, if only I could look up and see it in their eyes, without feeling ashamed to look. Without the fear of seeing in their eyes the look of disinterest.
Disgusting. Each transaction with teh teacher good rewarded in pleasant language and wry smiles slipped between cherished few friends who take on as many as they see. Untouchable, undamagable... hmpgh unfair if you ask me.
meta meta 051213
mockingbird 051220
would catch more, perhaps.
. like z, i find meta quite interesting. to me recursion is perhaps more bizarre seeming. why is the experience not enough, why is talking about the experience not enough? why do we then proceed to talk about talking about the experience? and what fascinates me the most is that the various factions, the meta_men_convention and the anti_meta_men_convention and the blather_organisation_discussion all constitute talking_about_talking_about_talking_about_the_experience. it's like one of those absurd scenarios one constructs as a child, thinking it too remote a possibility to exist... yet here it is, real and genuine, before our eyes. 080925
() ( meta_meta ) 080925
what's it to you?
who go