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.
Why leave off the Neubauten just because it's long? Because the track becomes a world unto itself, click whirr whirrrrr scrape blixa. When shorter the other songs make it easier, inside each song, to be aware of the song's relation to other songs on the tape, which is partly like the entire fucking idea on the tapes I usually make. Long tracks breed forgetfulness.
Which is why some of my choices for the tape-in-planning below are dangerous. The James Brown and Miles Davis are very long, and the Digable Planets track might be pretty long compared to some others. I also have in mind to put either "Love's in Need of Love Today" on, or "I Love Every Little Thing About You", and the former is pretty worldlike.
Judicious use of symmetry may help.
Also, I would also leave off the Dylan and Betas.
Hm, it seems I never posted a tracklist for this tape that I enjoy a lot. At least, I can't find it anywhere.
(I think I should have left the Neubaten off, it's too long here.)
Also, proof: I only make tapes from the same 10 CDs.
Also, I am still stuck on the same tasteful aesthetic. Mitch, I own you. Hello. Welcome to our planet, Rocketman. Please do not eat us.
Also, I think maybe this is a copy of a tape I made for F. And I bit the Specials from Ethan. And the Juno and Nirvana tracks are covers. Of DJ Shadow and Devo. And there is a skit. It is hiding.
James Brown - "I Got You (I Feel Good)"
Sonic Youth - "Purr"
Missy Elliott f. Ludacris - "Gossip Folks"
Einsturzende Neubauten - "NNNAAAMMM"
Juno - "High Noon"
Sleater-Kinney - "Milkshake 'n' Honey"
Naughty by Nature - "Naughty by Nature"
Massive Attack - "Be Thankful For What You've Got (Perfecto Mix)"
Foo Fighters - "Everlong"
Bob Dylan - "Highway 61 Revisited"
The Beta Band - "She's The One For Me"
Cee-Lo - "Closet Freak"
The Specials - "Nite Klub"
Burning Airlines - "Wheaton Calling"
Stevie Wonder - "I Wish"
LL Cool J f. Kandice Love - "Amazin'"
The Magnetic Fields - "It's A Crime"
Green Day - "Going to Pasalacqua"
Neutral Milk Hotel - "Holland, 1945"
Nirvana - "Turnaround"
Basement Jaxx - "All I Know"
A quote I stole from oblivio's revolving header:
"I am like those children who take a clock apart to find out what time it is." - Roland Barthes
A reason for being disappointed, that I failed to anticipate: "Calypso Frelimo" starts fast, and with a big squall, and the more leisurely pretty parts don't come until some point later which I didn't have the patience to wait for.
Now I'm pretty certain I want to listen to "Calypso Frelimo" but I expect: 1) the sound won't be as impressively shifting and colored as I remember it, 2) the enormous length will lead me to either a) quit early and feel bad because I didn't give a serious listen to the whole thing, or b) listen to the whole thing and get irritated because it's so long and I don't have the patience for it right now. All I really want is that strange, er, thing. With bendy chord tonal wobbly cheesy pastel uneasy bliss.
Stuff to put on a tape.
Miles Davis, "Wili (Part 1)", from Dark Magus
Ms. Jade, "Big Head", from Girl Interrupted
Sonic Youth, "Catholic Block", from Sister
Killer Mike, that one that samples "The Whole World"
My Bloody Valentine, that one that I don't know the name of
that one UKG song on Pure Garage Platinum
maybe just possibly Firewater, "So Long Superman" which I haven't heard in years
something from Blowout Comb
Kardi's "Belly Dancer", if only I hada copy or had even heard it
the demo of "Wish Fulfillment" from the deluxe Dirty
that one Stereolab song from Emperor Tomato Ketchup
a Pete Rock track, dunno which
Ted Leo and the Pharmacists, "Together or Parallel?"
something from In Utero
Nas, "NY State of Mind"
Ice Cube, "Down for Whatever"
Sleater-Kinney, either "Call the Doctor" or "I Wanna Be Your Joey Ramone"
that one JB track I always forget the name of where he tells the guitarist to play like BB King
Now, here I am listening to the Miles track, and near the end I was worried that its meandering away the groove would ruin it as a choice (though I have considered the fact that once I get my CD changer fixed, I can make the tape on my new tape deck and thus have a recording level knob to edit with). But the track ends in a wonderful cloud of percussion and drum machine clicks. (Drum machine clicks!) Saved, gloriously saved.
Jordan: You know I didn't even notice that when The Bad Plus goes disco on "Heart of Glass", they're playing the riff in 7/4. That changes everything. Or doesn't.
Josh: Yes it makes it worse.
Josh: Real disco only needs 4.
Jordan: B-b-but this does it in less beats! Seven quarter notes instead of eight!
Josh: Well MAYBE disco is all for EFFICIENCY.
Josh: But that seems to be counter to DISCO = EXCESS.
Josh: They are admittedly contradictory urges within its cold pleasure-seeking heart.
In his introduction to Pierre Hadot's Philosophy as a Way of Life, Arnold Davidson recounts an important discovery of Hadot's concerning Marcus Aurelius' Meditations: "Hadot's discovery of the ternary schema [adopted from Epictetus' three topoi] underlying the Meditations not only allows us to give structure to its merely apparent disorder. It also allows us to keep from falling into misplaced psychological judgments about the author of these spiritual exercises."
The three topoi are, according to Hadot, the "three lived exercises that... are in a certain way the putting into practice of the three parts of philosophical discourse," those parts for Epictetus being logic, physics, and ethics, corresponding respectively with the disciplines of assent, desire, and inclinations. Those disciplines may be pursued, or not, as a means of improving the state of one's soul. Hadot's claim about Aurelius' Meditations is that each of the seemingly disjointed entries - written, notably, day-to-day, as hypomnemata - develops one, two, or all three of the topoi.
Now, Hadot appreciated and studied Wittgenstein, but I don't know what he thought of him based on the books I have available. So perhaps he's already said something like the following. (I kind of hope not, because then I can write more about it. I also kind of hope so, so I can get help.)
It seems that in keeping with Hadot's insistence that we read philosophy not only "philosophically" (that is, in the modern way, looking primarily for arguments) but literarily, an understanding of later Wittgenstein as in the Investigations is incomplete, or maybe just wrongheaded, if it doesn't say something about what the form of the writing contributes. Edwards helps with his comparison of Wittgenstein's method to Wittgenstein's conception of aesthetic argument as a kind of persuade-by-showing, or maybe better put, effect-a-change-in-sensibility-by-showing. But his focus there is on the use language-games are put to. Wittgenstein isn't talking about language-games in every entry of the Investigations - so what about the rest? About the "average" entry? We might be able to make many of them more or less conform to Edwards' account, since even though Wittgenstein isn't always talking about invented language-games, the list in section 23 does tempt us to start construing plenty of day-to-day parts of language as language-games, and when Wittgenstein seems to be simply talking about some ordinary thing, like understanding, or intending, or meaning, he still often uses a kind of aesthetic argument, with the object of comparison being the strange way the thing appears when we follow our (philosophical - in the "illness" sense) inclinations to regard it a certain way rather than paying attention to differences. But. I still feel like something is missing. Couldn't he have written something more like vignettes, self-contained little objects of comparison for a number of different philosophical problem zones? Why does he so tenaciously pursue a line of thought, or keep answering new objections from the interlocutor?
Part of Edward's reading is that the later Wittgenstein's goal is to let no pictures of the way language works mislead us. And there seems to be a consensus that Wittgenstein's later work is overwhelmingly negative. So following Hadot I think we should read that later work's form as contributing to that critical drive.
Wittgenstein is often taken to be anti-theoretical, in the sense of "theory" as a systematic theory, like Kant or Hegel. But he's sometimes then reproached for attempting to make his writing mirror that anti-theoretical stance in form. Artistically speaking, there would seem to be nothing wrong with this - it may even be a good idea. But it's taken to be somehow deceptive that a philosopher might write like this, because of course writing your book as a big series of sometimes-connected fragments is not an argument that there can be no (or that one should not pursue a) theory, now is it? It's a rhetorical trick! Meant to hornswoggle us! Listen here, Wittgenstein, you tricky motherfucker, either you give us an argument or we can't even be bothered!
Well. My. Anyway. Recall Wittgenstein's remark, somewhere, about wanting to write books that were "machines for thinking". (I still can't find the reference.) Like stoic philosophical writing may have a certain practical purpose - to help one bring about or maintain a certain state of being - so the focus on the form here should be on the reader, and what that form might help bring about for the reader, not the extent to which the form is effective in securing a philosophical position (in the world where only arguments do such a thing). And if Wittgenstein's work is overwhelmingly negative, perhaps the point of the form is to help one manage that negativity somehow - to help one live in such a way that the ever-returning demand for theoretical explanation (of thought, of meaning, of language, of whatever) is quieted, or at least dealt with, somehow, even if only by means of the learning of a technique (the technique being "thinking like Wittgenstein, only not, because it would be distasteful to try to think exactly like he did").