Tuesday, October 30, 2007

Fiction Fashions Fact & Faction

Fiction Fashions Fact & Faction

I fiction-ize reality, and then FALL
in love with my fictions.

As per the Pygmalion fiction, the
Narcissus fiction, variants on the
Plato-in-a-Cave fiction. Riddles.
Legends of my FALL.

Or put it this way:

I represent “reality” (Hap Hap-ning
hap-ily) in ways that are common
sense, disciplinary, & traditional.
And these representational systems
become my habits and habitats.

I “love” my ways of talking & seeing.
They are my Procrustean beds: I make
IT ALL fit my frameworks.

Just describing here.

Fictioning fiction.

I don’t normally remember how in love
I am with my fictions, but just watch
what happens when someone challenges
my belief/bias system.

Grrr. O no you didn’t.

Right there:

I know I’m being Narcissistic
protecting my “true love”—
fictions I live by: guarding
with my life.

(Narcissus doesn’t know he’s FALLEN
in “love” with his own reflection.
He thinks it’s some OTHER.
It would demoralize him to learn other wise.)

Unlike Narcissus: Pygmalion
knows it’s his Fiction he’s fallen for:
the Perfect Woman (Galatea).

Sometimes I’m Pygmalion,
sometimes narcotized;
either way: fictioner
fashioning fact & faction.

On teaching composition or any
life-long sport & liberal art: even
though it doesn’t happen the way
I talk about it, I teach the way I
talk about it as if that’s how it
really happens or maybe talk about
the ways we talk about the ways we
talk about it as if that’s how it really
happens & the more ways of talking
the merrier depending on how seriously
I am stuck inside the business. Some
times: seriously. Many times I take
myself seriously. Damnit. Then I talk
about it as if This is the Way IT really

How it actually happens, anyone will
have to figure out themselves, come
to their own terms how much how
is determinable, how much is merely
manners of speaking, so to speak.

But no one is able to tell anyone else,
though we certainly try; we all do, and
it’s easy enough to forget that how-I-talk
about it isn’t actually how-it-happens
even if it happens or happened the way
I like it once upon a time or many.

None of this doesn’t apply doing science
I guess. Maybe, it does: but it don’t do to
foreground the arbitration and the gap
(chaos) between description & explanation
and what’s actually
happening, happily.

Methodology does a good job filtering the
whelm and upside-down flamingo & hedge
hog croquet going on & on so to speak; and
so our hard balls & mallet practical results
confirm our ways of talking, too—wonderfully
self-validating & fulfilling ball park estimations
and predictability: the beauty of Varieties of
Ways of Talking about Hap.

Monumental. Measuremental.
A blessing and a curse.

xxxooo, Presbyter

1 comment: