stream_of_consciousness Q It was nice, like always. 020112 ... birdmad polluted, rendered toxic by memory runoff, reeking of past sins and present failures wishes, bloated and dead float belly up in the shallows 020112 ... pilgrim The Idea of the Universe The Energetic Exchange that is Reality Swirling Time-Space Alive at the Essential Core Awareness of some degree Exists At Every Level of Organization Particle Atom Molecule Virus Bacterium Invertebrate Vertebrate Reptile Mammal Primate Plant Planet Stellar system Galaxy Gallactic Cluster And On And ON All Aglow In a Bright Turquise Light When veiwed a sufficeint Distance 020112 ... raze the parting made sweeter by the coming together of pawns immune to the flexing of control a concept best left to those who have it an ineffective stab at shelter and you huddled in the sacroiliac joint of the structure reading something golden and small no light your eyes are penlights slouching into the hollow dark honing their craft latching onto the sought things and i can only watch from a healthy distance because an unhealthy distance would eat away at whatever pure impulses remain. 131001 ... epitome of incomprehensibility Very nice. But did you...? Yes you did! You used a word I didn't know. I simultaneously like and dislike it when people do that, you know! 131001 ... e_o_i All right - sacroiliac joint, the joint joining the sacrum and ilium of the pelvis - in other words, the joints at your sides between your back and butt that may get sore if you lift heavy things. The more you know! 131001 ... raze it was a word i didn't know too! at least until the internet taught it to me. i thought "pelvic" sounded a little too pelvis-y, and kind of cheated to find a replacement. 131001 ... e_o_i making no sense What I mean to say is, I liked the poetry of that paragraph. The ability to be descriptive in short bursts of light. Stream of consciousness: if the current is strong enough, you can afford to be burning_bridges. 131001 ... epitome of incomprehensibility On another site, I was trying to explain how stream of consciousness writing is different from free association while trying not to write a really long comment. I had to take out references to Ulysses, so I dumped them here: Writing as if you're representing someone's thoughts and impressions is really hard. I tried to do it a few times, but I'm not James Joyce. I don't think it was easy for him, either. Here's my impression of his thoughts while writing Ulysses: "What do I really think a cat's meow sounds like? How do I put that sound in letters? Okay, I did that as best I could, but now I'm on the next page and I want the cat to meow again for a slightly longer time. Should I add more vowels or more consonants? Wait, did I make the cat go "Mkgnao" or "Mrkgnao" on the last page?" ...Context for the next one: Camille Paglia is a lit-critter who got some mainstream notoriety as an anti-feminist. (There always seems to be a demand for that sort of thing... while many good critics are kept in the relative obscurity of their respective niches... general grrrrr at the world.) AN-y-way. I bet if Camille Paglia analyzed Ulysses, she'd go, "Clearly, this novel PROVES that women think in long sentences and men think in short ones, showing that women are more wishy-washy and men are DECISIVE and SUPERIOR." 180721 what's it to you? who go blather from