Monday, February 7, 2011

Addiction: story of stories (authors authorizing authority authoritatively)

Dear Dialecticians and Colleagues Across the Curriculum

             ADDICTION – literally: to speak to…
                    Addicted to Story Telling

 Reducing IT to Story Telling.  
To once-upon-a-time, a narrative, a knowing: a telling
(as opposed to showing) with a beginning, middle, &
ending— like this here sentence.
A short story. A history: long narrative  explanation,
interpretation time after time.
A word is not a story. A sentence is.  We probably should
argue this  out: the difference between a WORD and a 
SENTENCE—and the relationship.

If we did (argue it out): that would be a story, a history:
how a  word is different from a  sentence but how  they
also Just Get  Along.  It would be a story about opposition
& relationship  as well  as about parts and wholes and how
they get along. A good story. Extrapolate-able.

Imagine a story about a story, or a story about a story
about a story?   How many levels of story can
you handle? Track?

Ever start telling  a story to
someone  and wait a minute—
    digress a level and start
           telling   another
                   [within the original
                     but not on the  same
                       level of importance-
                          just to clarify, maybe
                   (or set up a
                     prior  event)]
and then get back to where
you started from  
       [although it's not EXACTLY
         where you started from because
          it's had additional info added--
          (it's evolved, you could say:
But anyway—be that as it may— you continue to tell
the story, hardly  even  aware (mindful) of the fact that
it has  “pushed down” and “popped up”  several
“levels of logical type” in a hierarchy  which privileges
                 “MAIN STORY”

still evolving in time by looping  digressions and added
information that accrue (so to speak) as the story progresses
and in manners of speaking: the story calls up more and more
of   what it needs to Tell Itself, say. It mid-wives itself,
self-corrects,self -educes.   Auto-poetic, as it were.
Next time you're in Converse-Action, telling a story—watch
yourself tell it, if you can.  You probably can't.  This kind of
self-consciousness blocks the performance unless the
performance  is not the telling-of-the-story but the
telling of the telling of the  story.
Retrospective, after the fact  self-consciousness kicks
back  in and  looks for it's Patterns.  Makes them up.
Which is not the same as telling the story.
Unless one could be telling a history about
the Patterns of Telling A Story.

Even then the actual telling and the patterns naturally
selected looking  backwards are not the same at all. . .
What's the difference?
What's the relationship?
  xxxooo, Sam

No comments:

Post a Comment