Ordinary language is all right.
One could divide humanity into two classes:
those who master a metaphor, and those who hold by a formula.
Those with a bent for both are too few, they do not comprise a class.
There's like one joke in Nelson Goodman's Languages of Art but I will grudgingly admit that the man had a sense of humor. In The Philosophical Review, Volume 61, Issue 2, he wrote: 'The explanation in terms of resemblance is very good except for being so wrong.'
The university takes the shotgun approach to knowledge.
Jess writing about Kompakt.
'Schaffelfieber' sounds like a German muppet. On German Fraggle Rock.
None of this is to say that I just read 'Personism' just the other day. For the first time, I mean. I have read it many times. I like to reread it like the English Candy Drill scene in Gravity's Rainbow, because it's funny. Also it makes me feel like I have allies. I have not, however, ever given actual thought to it in the three years since I first read it at the tender age of twenty-two (no thought then either). This is part of my 'methodology'.
Also, incidentally, I had to look up 'Lucky Pierre'. I am like the guys in Office Space who look up 'money laundering' in the dictionary.
By comparison, I mean. Comparatively. My thematical acumen is of course still astounding in its own right. Really.
P.S. I'm not totally sure what 'a poetics' is but it sure has sounded exciting since I read Perloff's book and found Silliman and all these other poetics people blogging. It was even scarier when I saw some old person somewhere complaining that people in English never care about 'thematics' anymore, since I don't exactly know what that is either and definitely don't know if 'poetics' and 'thematics' have any other friends. Sometimes the interweb really bites, as a research tool. In the hands of the lazy and apathetic and swivel-headed.
(This is tied to my recent uncertain revelation, if you can have those, that in just about any area of life or thought you could think of, I am all up in poetics' ass and am totally retarded about thematics.)
K., my blog is one part journal, one part commonplace book, one part Philosophical Investigations, one part research program development lab, one part purple teenage-girl diary with little pink hearts and a cheapass lock on it, one part dumping ground, one part sophisticated excuse for laziness, one part homework assignment, one part improvisation, one part classroom + hallway Frankenstein's monster, one part list repository, one part Arcades Project, one part Magnetic Fields PR agency (well not really), and also other parts to be named later. I don't totally know which part(s) quoting 'Personism' fits into, but I'm clear on one thing: a great deal of the material I quote is quoted because I just read it and think it will be useful for something, or think that it gives me another angle on or contributes to thoughts I've had in the past. (I don't always say how, in any of these cases.) Insofar as these kinds of posts are educational for others, I mostly intend to learn them on what I want, what I mean. If I'm quoting something they haven't thought about in a while, or have never read, that's just extra. Anyway, they're primarily educational for me. Noticing a theme here? That's right, it's all about me (and I - all of us).
That Frank O'Hara, he's like a six year old. Somewhere in my notes to myself from this spring, deep in a period of fruitlessness, I wrote 'voice of a child'. I don't remember what for anymore but man was it good. So I'll tack it onto this for now - I could do worse than 'Personism'.
A computerized whizbang gadget has proven remarkably ambivalent when guessing my gender based on writing samples. I am large, I contain multitudes.