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.
Winter listening diary, January 8:
Chris Forsyth & The Solar Motel Band – The Rarity of Experience
I still don't really like this guy, sometimes because his melodic sense seems too corny, but sometimes like here maybe because he plays like someone who's fonder of melodic playing than he is able to write melodically. I dunno though, whatever.
Richard Hell & The Voidoids – Blank Generation
None of the songs are ever as cool as the title cut, which is way too late (at the end).
Rites of Spring – End on End
Ancient enough that you can actually hear bits where they sound like a band who couldn't help but listen to 80s metal.
Ritual Necromancy – Disinterred Horror
Not as much verve as Dead Congregation, but alright.
Obliteration – Cenotaph Obscure
Loose drumming, with a bit more ferocity or unhinged feel in the riffing they would be all the way there.
Soundgarden – Down on the Upside
Idris Muhammad – Power of Soul
Understated drumming, for a drummer.
Rezzett – Rezzett LP
I like how the beats turn up surprises over the runtimes of the tracks, consistently. Lots of techno artists are not that good at transformation.
Herbie Hancock – Head Hunters
I don't know which drum i like Harvey Mason hitting best.
Bardo Pond – Dilate
You should never completely trust anyone who can't like at least some music without vocals.
Coptic Light – Coptic Light
I read a review that complained that mostly all they did was 'jam', that's the dumbest thing I’ve ever heard, people who write record reviews should learn something about other kinds of music so they can say something more insightful than 'jam' when a rock-style band plays three things in 45 minutes and actually uses, like, musical thinking to do it.
('One of our responses to this plurality of definitions has been to rely on “Jamesian Confidence.” James’ (1890/1950) famous phrase: “Every one knows what attention is.” is implicitly (often explicitly) invoked whenever researchers report work on attention without supplying a concrete definition. The presumption is that the researcher’s sense of attention will be clear from context and that James’ exhortation can be taken to imply more than it says, that is that everyone knows what attention is, and they all think it is the same thing. In fact, communal practice reveals that we do not. Attention is subdivided by modality (visual versus auditory), level of analysis (feature versus object), and spatial extent (focal versus global). Attention is invoked as the label for a general preparedness to respond. Attention as vigilance has both a negative aspect (in that one may fail to detect a target) and a positive aspect (where one fails to inhibit a response when presented a non-target item). Attention is treated as a vector where there can be deficiencies in magnitude (implied by the phrase attention deficit) or direction (implied by a term like disengage deficit). Attention can also be given a temporal dimension when people speak of an attention span. None of these senses seem quite what James had in mind as the obvious one. …')
('Benennen und Beschreiben stehen ja nicht auf einer Ebene: Das Benennen ist eine Vorbereitung zur Beschreibung. Das Benennen ist noch gar kein Zug im Sprachspiel, – so wenig, wie das Aufstellen einer Schachfigur ein Zug im Schachspiel. Man kann sagen: Mit dem Benennen eines Dings ist noch nichts getan. Es hat auch keinen Namen, außer im Spiel. Das war es auch, was Frege damit meinte: ein Wort habe nur im Satzzusammenhang Bedeutung.')
(Hence, a natural ground for an idea of 'coming to terms', of discovering or choosing what to say (of things) when; and a natural attraction, in certain proceedings, to ad hoc attention to language.)
It's not that the philosopher, as theorist, is too distant from the world of everyday experience; it's that he imagines he could get the sharpest focus while at the greatest remove from all objects, be at once furthest from, and nearest to, everything; each thing.
Looking around, getting a closer look, a glimpse—none of these sorts of operations form part of the recognized idea of what a philosopher will be up to.
To see more closely you have to get closer; go from here to there. So an account of where you are, and how you go, how you go about going, will form part of what you say about what's there.
'True there was in nillohs dieybos as yet no lumpend papeer in the waste, and mightmountain Penn still groaned for the micies to let flee. All was of ancientry. You gave me a boot (signs on it!) and I ate the wind. I quizzed you a quid (with for what?) and you went to the quod. But the world, mind, is, was and will be writing its own wrunes for ever, man, on all matters that fall under the ban of our infrarational senses fore the last milch-camel, the heartvein throbbing between his eyebrowns, has still to moor before the tomb of his cousin charmian where his date is tethered by the palm that's hers. But the horn, the drinking, the day of dread are not now. A bone, a pebble, a ramskin; chip them, chap them, cut them up allways; leave them to terracook in the muttheringpot: and Gutenmorg with his cromagnom charter, tintingfast and great primer must once for omniboss step rub- rickredd out of the wordpress else is there no virtue more in al- cohoran. For that (the rapt one warns) is what papyr is meed of, made of, hides and hints and misses in prints. Till ye finally (though not yet endlike) meet with the acquaintance of Mister Typus, Mistress Tope and all the little typtopies. Fillstup. So you need hardly spell me how every word will be bound over to carry three score and ten toptypsical readings throughout the book of Doublends Jined (may his forehead be darkened with mud who would sunder!) till Daleth, mahomahouma, who oped it closeth thereof the. Dor.'