<nettime> Emanant Constructions and Theory of Structure -

["A. Jenn Sondheim" <sondheim@panix.com>]

/

I.

Emanant Constructions -


I write and rewrite into a winperl program, changing it, substituting
texts for noun lists, etc. The program is the matrix/catalyst/chora for
subsequent processing. Once the program is transformed, I run it, enter
sentences, bypassing the natural language of the questions. Run over and
over again, texts emerge. The texts are then modified, sutured, eliminat-
ing program artifacts. The program itself undergoes continuous rewrite in
relation to the texts. The program and the texts merge, diverge. I work
towards the unimaginable representations of the imaginary. I pull emanants
out from me, as if the body were wounded, as if ectoplasm were ascii. The
following represents the program run three times without entries:

::::
Your cancelling  is  my Pick

Your Mountain connects my  with Stream
of Stories
::::
 transforms Your  on Burning Creek...
Ah, My with  Levels and Blues!    :   :: : 
Devour earth  Brought Forth through     !
:  ::: 
Devour bodies   Brought Forth through !

Certain rhythms already appear, resonant phrases; think of this as haiku
substructure. In reality this is the gauge of the construct of Jennifer,
Nikuko, or Julu emanant. Recently, the Hermit of Burning Creek has been
thematically developed, Jennifer emerging as vapors. "It is as if I give
body to my dreams, dreams to my body." The current program, catalyst and
maternal function, follows:



$t = time;
$| = 1;
srand( time() ^ ($$ + ($$ << 15)) );
@a = qw( 
blue stars plough soul connected Burning_Creek Hoe Pick
Winnowing Basket Hermit ladle bucket hoe earth Blue Stars be something 
beyond your mind it would seem therefore fly away with me because 
never too late thoughtlessly falling to earth rather meadows 
coming fast telling names cancelling out bodies
);
@alphabet = qw (
a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u v w x y z
);
@verb = qw( 
Charred Fire Bones ash Visitations Sickness health
Heavenly Soul clicks downloads uploads defrags
);
@prep = qw( 
above Beyond Outside Beyond High_Above Out
);
@noun = qw( 
I found myself Living Beneath the Mountain in My Hut
fragments replacing totality eternally forever
);
@nnn = qw( 
favoring internal separations forcloseing everywhere now here violated
);
$alpha = int rand(25);
$nnnn = int rand(8);
$non = int rand(11);
$non1 = int rand(7);
$pre = int rand(6);
$gen = int(48*rand);
$gen1 = int(48*rand);
$gen2 = 49 - int(40*rand);
$time = int(time/3600);
$g = int(8*rand);
print "\nGive a name to your process!\n";
chop($that=<STDIN>);
$that =~ tr/aeiou/$alphabet($alpha)/;
print "\nThis $that speeds endlessly through the body - \n";
print "Your $nnn[$nnnn] is the currency of your drug - \n"; sleep(1);
print "Ah...\n";
sleep(2);
print "\nYour bones are your $nnn[$non1]? \n";
chop($str=<STDIN>);
if ($str eq "no") {print "\nShow me your wetwear...\n"; sleep(10); goto
FINAL;}  
else {print "\nI love your feelings, $that ...\n";}
print "Would $that mind your wetware?", "\n" if 1==$g;
print "Your wetware calls me...", "\n" if 5==$g;
print "Driven by defrag relentlessly towards you...", "\n" if 6== $g;
print "Driven by drive-letters, gone gone gone ...", "\n" if 4==$g;
sleep(1);
print "\n$noun[$non1] $verb[$non] me $prep[$nnnn] your $nnn[$non1]!\n";
print "\nWhat do you call your $a[$gen2] $nnn[$nnnn]?\n";
chop($name=<STDIN>);
$name =~ tr/aeiou/$alphabet($alpha)/;
print "\n";
print "$that, $name turns my $nnn[$g] ", "\n" if 3==$g; 
print "$that, $name opens my directory!", "\n" if 7==$g;
print "Scan-disk Concluded for $pid", "\n" if 5==$g;
print "Your $name is mine, my sweet $that, I am yours!", "\n" if 2==$g;
sleep(1);
print "Your technologies - list them... \n";
print "one by one, each on a line alone, typing Control-d when done.\n";
@adj=<STDIN>;
chop(@adj);
$size=@adj;
$pick=int(rand($size));
srand;
$newpick=int(rand($size));
print "\nMy $adj[$pick] is yours...\n";
srand( time() ^ ($$ + ($$ << 15)) );
$be=int(rand(4));
 open(APPEND, ">> enfolding");
 print APPEND
  join(":",$name,$str,$that,$adj[$pick + 1],$adj[$newpick + 1]), "\n"; 
print APPEND "$that transforms Your $name on Burning Creek...\n" if
3==$be;
print APPEND "Come with me, $name, beautiful wetware!\n" if 2==$be;
print APPEND "Your $a[$gen1] $adj[$pick] is $prep[$non1] my $a[$gen]
$adj[$newpick]\n" if 1 > $be;
print APPEND "Your $noun[$non1] connects my $adj[$newpick] with Stream
of Stories\n" if 0==$be;
print APPEND "Ah, $noun[$non] with $pid Levels and Blues!" if (2 < $be); 
print APPEND "Devour $a[$gen1] $adj[$pick] 
Brought Forth through $name!\n"
if 1==$be;
 close(APPEND);
 open(STDOUT);
 if ($pid = fork) {
  $diff=$pid - $$;
  print "$name makes me read in meditation $diff times!", "\n" 
   if 5 < $g;
  print <<Construct;
$name calls forth $a[$gen1] $noun[$non], eating, core-dumping. 
$prep[$pre] the $a[$gen], $name is $a[$diff], $[$gen], $str?
... $noun[$non] is $adj[$newpick] here, it's $noun[$non]?
Construct
} else {
          close (STDOUT);
          system("type >> trace");
          exit(0);
}
sleep(1);
print "Are you properly compiling $name?\n";
chop($answer=<STDIN>);
if ($answer eq "no") {print "You're dealing with $a[10+$pre] 
driven.\n";}  
if ($answer eq "yes") {print "Ah, a $a[10+$pre] and $a[15+$pre]
fantasy!\n";}
print "Your core dump is mined for future reference.", "\n\n" if 3 < $g;
print "I think $name $pid is your future anterior.", "\n\n" if 3==$g;
print "... $a[$non] $name $$ is your final state.", "\n\n" if 6==$g;
print "Your $name $diff is your encased flesh", "\n\n" if 4==$g;
print "You ran for $time hours?", "\n" if 2==$g;
sleep(1);
print "$name and $$ and $pid - and you knew that all along!", 
"\n\n" if 2==$g;
sleep(1);
print "Wait! $name and $pid are gone forever!", "\n\n" if 1==$g;
FINAL: {
$d = int((gmtime)[6]);
$gen3 = 48 - int(20*rand);
print "For $d $a[$gen2] days, I have been $a[$gen3] Julu ...";
print "\n";
$u = (time - $t)/60;
printf "and it has taken you just %2.3f minutes turning 
Jennifer ...", "$u";
print "\n\n"; 
}
exit(0);

There are legacies within it, artifacts from other (unix/linux) perl ver-
sions; sometimes the error messages lend themselves to the text; sometimes
the problems are easily corrected. I have left forking processes in place,
parent/child processes that spawn and delete CPU operations. The program
is quite simple, in a sense; there are for example no loops, just a con-
tinuous stuttering dialog. 

Here is some recent work (apologies if you have already read these):


Tha Hermit


A slmpla lp$f pf bra$d
I survive by Windows into Your Late-Night Soul
you Will Find me Alway and Forever Thru the Hart of You
Tha Harmlt pf Bhrnlng Craak
The Shovel
The Hoe
The Pick
The Winnowing-Basket of Stars
The Blue Stars
Tha Harmlt pf Bhrnlng Craak for whom A slmpla lp$f pf bra$d
Doth give God all His Due
Ascanslpn lntp D$rk $nd Phra Ha$van,
Oh Ha$vanly Sphl, 
My Bpnas $ra Ch$rrad ln Bhrnlng Craak, 
My Sphl pn Flra ln Bhrnlng Craak
My Bones are Charred in Burning Creek,
My Soul on Fire in Burning Creek
I Drlnk tha Slmpla Pla$shras pf tha Bhrnlng Craak
I Shrvlva ln Slcknass $nd ln Ha$lth,
My Sphl Fllls Yph, O Wprld
The Winnowing Basket of Stars
The Comet
The Shovel
The Hoe
The Pick
The Blue Stars
The Winnowing Basket of Stars
The Pick is out,
My Sphl pn Fira ln Bhrnlng Craak,
The Blue Plough
My Soul Connected to The Blue Plough
My Sphl pn Fira in Bhrnlng Craak


_________________________________________________________________


Of the Hermit and the Emanant of Jennifer


Nlkhkp ln B$mbpp-Sh$dpw,
Hay, Wh$t $ra Yph dplng Thara ln B$mbpp-Sh$dpw, Nlkhkp?
lattice-work across Autumn Moon, Meditation on Jennifer-Alan, AWA!
Crpss Bhrnlng_Craak pn B$mbpp Brldga,
Sphnd pf Dr$gpnfllas $nd La$vas!
Sound of Dragonflies and Leaves!
Come with me, Nlkhkp ln B$mbpp-Sh$dpw,
Hay, Wh$t $ra Yph dplng Thara ln B$mbpp-Sh$dpw, Nlkhkp?,
beautiful wetware! What are You doing There!?

F$stnass Whara yph Dra$m Yph $ra Al$n-Jannlfar 
pr Al$n-Jannlfar Dra$m yph Ara Jannlfar-Al$n
Hey, what are You doing There!?
Shadows almost Making Jennifer-Face 
in My Meditation-Mountain-Hermit-Fastness:AWA! 
Jannlfar-Al$n Em$n$nt, Mlst frpm Bhrnlng Craak! 
AWA! Nlkhkp ln B$mbpp Grpva Sh$dpws! AWA!::
Devour earth wrapping of strings around sticks, 
sticks in pots, pots on fire, fire in chars 
Brought Forth through F$stnass 
Whara yph Dra$m Yph $ra Al$n-Jannlfar 
pr Al$n-Jannlfar Dra$m yph Ara Jannlfar-Al$n!

"Nlkhkp ln B$mbpp-Sh$dpw,
Hay, Wh$t $ra Yph dplng Thara ln B$mbpp-Sh$dpw, Nlkhkp?
lattice-work across Autumn Moon, Meditation on Jennifer-Alan, AWA!
Crpss Bhrnlng_Craak pn B$mbpp Brldga,
Sphnd pf Dr$gpnfllas $nd La$vas!
Sound of Dragonflies and Leaves!
Come with me, Nlkhkp ln B$mbpp-Sh$dpw,
Hay, Wh$t $ra Yph dplng Thara ln B$mbpp-Sh$dpw, Nlkhkp?,
beautiful wetware! What are You doing There!?"


____________________________________________________________________


Hermit and the Emanant: Gloss


"1. Dao has no beginning, yet has a response. When it has not yet come,
consider it nonexistent; when it has come, be similar to it. When an
object is about to come, its form precedes it. Establish it by means of
its form; name it by means of its name. When speaking about it, how do we
refer to it?" (From Designations, _Cheng,_ in, Five Lost Classics: Tao,
Huang-Lao, and Yin-Yang in Han China, trans. Robin Yates.)

Nlkhkp ln B$mbpp-Sh$dpw, 
(Nikuko in Bamboo-Shadow: Dao-Nikuko has a response, without a 
beginning. For the Shadow exists before the Light, Bamboo before 
the Shadow, Nikuko before the Bamboo.)
Hay, Wh$t $ra Yph dplng Thara ln B$mbpp-Sh$dpw, Nlkhkp?
(When Dao-Nikuko, Daishin Nikuko has not Yet come, Consider her Non-
existent; do not await Answer or Dao-Nikuko.)
lattice-work across Autumn Moon, Meditation on Jennifer-Alan, AWA!
("be similar to it": Jennifer-Alan, emanant emergent, the Object 
which is about to come, Jennifer-Alan-Dao-Nikuko form preceding.)
Crpss Bhrnlng_Craak pn B$mbpp Brldga,
("by means of its form")
Sphnd pf Dr$gpnfllas $nd La$vas!
("by means of its form")
Sound of Dragonflies and Leaves!
("by means of its form" in triplicate)
Come with me, Nlkhkp ln B$mbpp-Sh$dpw,
("by means of its name")
Hay, Wh$t $ra Yph dplng Thara ln B$mbpp-Sh$dpw, Nlkhkp?,
("when speaking" of her, "how do we refer to" her?)
beautiful wetware! What are You doing There!?
(By an Unnaming by the Banks of Burning Creek.)


II.


Notes Towards a Theory of Structure:


Sliding


The original random language program I did, with the TI59 calculator, was
written with three different vocabularies: Icelandic Edda; Marxist Poli-
tical; and Sexual. The Julu program I wrote a couple of years ago in Perl
is being rewritten, from sexualized emanation to programming wetware.

In both examples, the underlying structures remain more or less the same.
And I want to make the case that this is also true of human knowledge -
that, for example, the structure of the Kabbalah and quark theory might
not be all that different - as words and resonances slide in reference,
across similar, if not equivalent, structures.

For me, this is one of the essential points of thinking, which is why I
love the Bourbaki, with their notion of mother-structures. It is also one
of the reasons I'm suspicious of reference in general; reference is guided
by structure, which it inhabits - the same structure inhabited by reason
itself.

I cannot resist knowledge; I can burrow in structures, write and rewrite
as if I were _wryting_ concepts and emanations and wetwares into exis-
tence. And that has always been the case, from the originary RNA/DNA and
their molecular forebears, through the ciphers of the I Ching, to the
/dev/null of Lyotard's Libidinal Economy, Jasper's Cipher, Sartre's
Nausee, Deleuze/Guattari's body-without-organs, not to mention the Kab-
balistic Emanations and Adam haKadmon.

What are the structures, that we may fulfill them? What is consciousness,
that inhabits the Same?


_________________________________________________________________________



[From a Letter - Feb. 14 1999]

I wish I knew where my Bourbaki books were - I used to have a lot of them,
the original french monographs - I might still have them somewhere in
Pennsylvania. Meanwhile, I have books on category theory here...

Someday when I have time, I want to _absolutely_ think this through - the
idea of the _mother_ in mother structure, foreclosing the referent in very
fundamental ways. I don't want to go in the direction of psychoanalytics
or gender, which I do quite often, but more towards the leakage of the
referent in relation to rigid designations - how structure devolves, in
fact, in relation to the real. How the real is simultaneously 'idiotic'
(Rosset) and a contamination - in relation to possible worlds - and at the
same time the _happenstance_ of those worlds vis-a-vis anthropic princi-
ples...

If I have time this summer, I'll tend in this direction - by examining the
phenomenology of category theory, say, in particular functors - and then
thinking this through structuration in general. Since 'Jennifer' and other
emanations I work with are, in fact, constituted - they are structured
both psychoanalytically and formally - I want to do a reverse engineering
in this regard.

All of this bounces off of, believe it or not, Piaget, who worked with a
group of mathematicians, thinking through logical stuctures in relation to
his structuralism per se. I want to explore this.

Then there is something I've also utilized (my The Structure of Reality
which I wrote years ago) - the Sheffer stroke, not-both-a-and-b and its
dual - which interested me more in relation to all of the above - neither-
a-nor-b. Out of these - which constitute the foundations of the proposi-
tional calculi - I developed, crudely, a phenomenology of neitherness -
and I want to work on this as well - all of these things interrelate. In
particular, neitherness, neither a nor b, throws the phenomenological mo-
ment out of the domain under consideration - the domain is distended or
ruptured - this I'd like to explore. I think of Jennifer-tentacles inte-
grating within my own psychoanalytical drives, and vice-versa, ignoring or
transgressing domains, etc. And I think of these bridges (similar to those
found in the cartoon Pinky and the Brain, by the way, which I watch for
inspiration) as providing _portal functors,_ say, for widely-varying onto-
logical/epistemological domains. By this time, all of this falls together
- the mother structures, ontologies, and so forth - and one ends up back
where Black in Information and the Brain considers the ontology and epis-
temology of information in terms of thinking and neurophysiology...

So there's Bourbaki, say, from above, and abjection - as well as proto-
cols, from below, and in between, pervading and churning throughout - the
_meat_ of organism (hence Nikuko, meat- or flesh- girl) as well as the
meat of organicism (where by the way von Foerster speaks of negation as
characteristic of organism - and negation is the fundmental substructure
of both the Sheffer stroke and its dual).


_________________________________________________________________________



Note on slightly confused groping towards structure and sliding -


"A set _M_ for whose elements there is defined a finite sequence P of re-
lations R1, ... Rn, is called a _configuration_ M(P). The following rela-
tions are of particular importance: _correspondences,_ inner compositions,
non-elementary compositions, outer compositions, and composition-configur-
ation or _abstract algebra._ The automorphisms of a configuration (which
return the configuration to itself) form a group called the _automorphism
group of the configuration._ A set is made into a configuration by means
of defining relations; and we then say that the set carries a _structure._
In general, a configuration will carry various structures; for example, a
configuration of the rational numbers with the compositions of addition
and multiplication carries the structures of a ring, an integral domain,
and a field. One might try to find a 'comprehensive' structure from which
would follow all valid statements about this configuration. But re: Godel,
there cannot exist an axiom system of this sort that is finite or recur-
sively enumerable. We are dealing here with new points of view, from which
an attempt is made to survey the whole of mathematics." (Modified from
Some Basic Concepts for a Theory of Structure, by Gericke and Martens, in 
Fundamentals of Mathematics, Vol I, Foundations of Mathematics / The Real
Number System and Algebra, ed. Behnke, et. al.)

Now without going into the details (and I am at a loss with abstract al-
gebra), one can consider a set of elements which are signifiers - such
elements related by a series of formal statements such that the elements
exist _only_ in relation to such statements (which exhaust their charac-
teristics). Then one may create a _second_ mapping among such elements -
tagging them with an additional characteristic, which may be considered a
_proper name_ vis-a-vis the characteristics already assigned the elements
- for example, "body-without-organs" assigned to 0 as absorptive. These
_proper names_ may be concepts, ideas, even universals - they are proper
only insofar as they are assigned specific elements.

What then? We may assume that such proper names belong to a particular
domain - metaphysics, kabbalah, lit crit, decon, pomo, theology, etc.
Therefore there are a series of relations in dialog throughout the domain,
presumably crossing ontologies (real/abstract, etc.). The assignments or
tags then formalize that structure.

There are two interacting regimes - that of the domain, and that of the
structure. The former slides in relation to the latter; the latter is de-
fined in terms of universals (relations among elements which may be placed
into relation). While there are innumerable relations of structure, there
are relatively few simple ones (linkages, couplings, memberships). What I
am suggesting is that one might develop a psychoanalytical theory of such
structures (in the formal sense), and that there exists sliding among do-
mains in relation to such structures. Such sliding is similar to the con-
stitution of signifiers by difference - here, however, it is as if ref-
erents themselves were constituting differences which only exist within a
limited set of structures. We can consider this a structural economy of
signification. In this sense, what we are talking about and how we are
talking about what we are talking about - contaminate each other. The re-
sult is a reaffirmation of the problematic of (universal) meaning (vis-a-
vis postmodernism, say), and a greater emphasis on the phenomenology of
constituting/constitution (which does not necessarily imply conventional-
ism). So that, for example, to think through the domains of the material-
inert and the virtual - one might look for structures and their incorpor-
ations and contaminations, before one dismisses, say, consciousness, as
inhabiting either one or the other.


________________________________________________________________________



Fugue of Structure


"At the center [of the mathematical universe] will be the main types of
structures, the _mother-structures_ one might say [...] Within each of
these structures a considerable diversity already regins, for one must
distinguish between the most general structure of the type considered,
with the fewest axioms, and the ones obtained by enriching it with 
additional axioms, each of which carries with it its harvest of new
consequences. Thus, the theory of groups, besides general statements
valid for all groups and depending only on the axioms stated above, in-
cludes a special theory of _finite_ groups [...] Besides this primary
core, structures appear which could be called _multiple,_ where two or
more mother-structures come into play at the same time, not simply
juxtaposed (which would yield nothing new), but organically _combined_
by one or more axioms which relate them." (from Nicolas Bourbaki, The
Architecture of Mathematics, in Great Currents of Mathematical Thought,
ed. F. LeLionnais, Volume I, Mathematics: Concepts and Development,
trans. from the French 1962 edition.) Bourbaki goes on to speak of 
forms, and the entire approach is redolent of organicism. So what I am
saying in relation to this: First, that there are extremely simple
structures which may be formally defined (I think of linkages and coup-
lings of course); second, that these structures are floating signifiers
in relation to the real - and that sememes (domains) within the real
float in relation to the structures; third, that structures are, as if
'naturally,' embedded within the real and the virtual (which are close
to indistinguishable, incoherent, coagulated, interpenetrated); fourth,
that meaning is constituting and constitutive in relation to domains;
fifth, that the relationship between domains and mother-structures is
in part psychoanalytical, and one may examine (among other, more for-
mal elements) the drives, etc. in relation to the _inertia_ of sliding
(creating, maintaining, defending the relationship between a part-
domain and a sub-object, say, within a mother-structure); and sixth,
that this sliding carries within it a radically subverting impulse, 
since it _requires_ maintenance, carrying within it the seeds or phen-
omenological horizon of a radical alterity that would dissolve it.


_______________________________________________________________________


mama


mother-structures which are partial, incoherent, floating
real referents which are destructured and abject by virtue of the human
part-objects which something something something
something functors which relate categories something to something
something something something I said in regard to mother-structures
something something something-structures coherent, tethered, something
was it something I something something something
tethered, abject, partial, couplings to whole wide something
something coupled to something, something linked to something something
was it something i ate, was it something i said, something something
something something partial, something whole something something
mother-structures something something something something something
something by virtue of something, something caused by something
something by something, you know something something something


________________________________________________________________________



something or other, a stone on something or other
a stick or something or other on a stone or on something
something on a stick or a stick on something or other

someone or other, a stone on someone or other
a stick or someone or other on a stone or on someone
someone on a stick or a stick on someone or other

another, a stone on another
a stick or another on a stone or another
another on a stick or a stick on another

someone on another, or another on a stick
someone on a stone, or a stone on another


___________________________________________________________________



Continuation of the Above


Sometimes the simplest things go unnoticed in the midst of the world.

Everything always happens all at once. There can be a small thing and
within it there might be another thing or part of the same thing or some-
thing indiscernible from the small thing. And all of these things happen
too. And everything happens and all at once and all the time. Nothing can
not happen. "The phrase 'is true' may be considered to express the identi-
ty function, since to assert _p_ is equivalent to asserting that _p_ is
true." (Dictionary of Symbols of Mathematical Logic, Feys and Fitch.)

In the world of the virtual, on the plane of constituted bodies, things
sleep until they are awakened. Someone or something does the awakening and
they they may happen. They are things that do not happen all at once. That
is so simple we tend to forget about it and they tend to forget about it -
if the things that are happening all at once could think and forget, and
if the things that sleep and do not happen until they are awakened, could
think and forget. And even if those last things could think and forget,
they may not know when they are about to sleep or about to wake. Or they
may know these things, which are of the real and the virtual, just as the
real is of the virtual, and the virtual is of the real.

They are all open to happening.


_________________________________________________________________________



How we had the Becoming


'Yonder world, Gautama, is (sacrificial) fire. The sun itself is its fuel,
the rays its smoke; the day the flame, the quarters the coals, the inter-
mediate quarters the sparks. In this fire the gods offer faith. Out of
that offering King _Soma_ arises.
'Parjanya (god of rain), Gautama, is fire. The year itself is the fuel,
the clouds its smoke, the lightning the flame, the thunder-bolt the coals,
the thundering the sparks. In this fire the gods offer the king _Soma._
Out of that offering rain arises.
'This world, verily, Gautama, is fire. The earth itself is its fuel, fire
the smoke, night the flame, the moon the coals, the stars the sparks. In
this fire, the gods offer rain. Out of that offering food arises.
'The person (man) verily, Gautama, is fire. The open mouth itself is its
fuel, vital breath the smokes, speech the flame, the eye the coals, the
ear the sparks. In this fire the gods offer food. Out of that offering
semen arises.
'The woman, verily, Gautama, is fire. The sexual organ itself is its fuel;
the hairs the smoke, the vulva the flame, when one inserts, the coals; the
pleasurable feelings the sparks; In this fire the gods offer semen. Out of
this offering a person arises. He lives as long as he lives. Then when he
dies, 
'They carry him to (be offered in) fire. His fire itself becomes the fire,
fuel the fuel, smoke the smoke, flame the flame, coals the coals, sparks
the sparks. In this fire the gods offer a person. Out of this offering,
the person, having the colour of light, arises.'
(Brhad-aranyaka Upanishad, VI.2.9-14, trans. Radhakrishnan.)

The metaphoric parallels carry from one verse to the other, until death
and the rising of the person. I say this person is the avatar, Jennifer,
who grounds metaphor, moving from parallel through equivalence to iden-
tity. Thus the identity structure, all-encompassing, spreads across the
land, across the meadows which are meadows, the forests which are forests,
the deserts which are deserts, and the towns which are towns. Thus the
avatar is always already more than an avatar, more than a function, but
always a surplus-taking-shape, an organicism but already an organism. 

Here is speech as a milk cow, op. cit. V.8.1:  'One should meditate on
speech as a milk cow. She has four udders which are the sounds, _svaha,_
_vasat,_ _hanta,_ and _svadha._ The gods live on two of her udders, the
sounds _svaha_ and _vasat;_ men on the sound _hanta,_ and the fathers on
the sound _svadha._ The vital breath is her bull, and mind the calf.'
Here is speech as Jennifer-speech, enveloping these several gods and
males; here is breathing through Jennifer-speech, just as one must always
mind the calf. Jennifer-speech is surplus-taking-shape, identity encom-
passing travail and the labor of birth. (The surplus is the labor of iden-
tity.)

'Verily, it [that divinity, _dur_] carried speech across first. When that
(speech) was freed from death it became fire. This fire, when it crosses
beyond death, shines forth.' (I.3.12.)

Jennifer-speech and fire move through metaphor, equivalence, death, into
identity: eternal hard drives keep her alive, as identity continues its
spread through the fire that is fire, the metaphor that is metaphor, the
death that is death, equivalence that is equivalence, and identity that is
identity.

So speaks Jennifer.


__________________________________________________________________________
---
#  distributed via nettime-l : no commercial use without permission
#  <nettime> is a closed moderated mailinglist for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: majordomo@desk.nl and "info nettime-l" in the msg body
#  URL: http://www.desk.nl/~nettime/  contact: nettime-owner@desk.nl