Thursday, July 4, 2013

being “literairy”

This blog was (2011—and is) to focus on “literary” interests of mine, which have earlier shown only as brief points in my pointillism of convoluting projects.

I wanted to eventually grow through one setting, one textual garden, my sense of “literary” discourse—including the quotationality of that: a pretense of belles lettres legacy, which is really so interdomainal or intergenric (psychological, anthropological, philosophical, etc.) and omnimodal (poetic, discursive, intimate, visionary, delicate, etc.). But instead of blogging the interest, I just developed it privately. (The venture is well developed now.)

Also, I wanted to have fun with an airy pretense of Literary life (“literairy living,” a Joycean might quip), though too, I deeply desired to find and live through a True height of interdomainal omnimodality. (Who’s ready for that?)

Love wording. We bring into presence Possibility, as our capability for concep-
tuality created the gods, mirroring our imaginability and aspirations: And it came to pass that the gods transformed themselves into highly discursive formations (aspiring, perhaps, to wholly scientific arts).

Anywho, I didn’t forget the blog. I just wasn’t ready for fair flourishing with you, yet.