title page and purification rite

  

excerpt summing up so far: THE MONGREL DISCOURSE IS, AS A WHOLE, SEEMINGLY ANARCHICALLY ORDERED, LOOSELY LINEAR THREADS ENTER IN FROM DIFFERENT DIRECTIONS AND WEAVE TOGETHER, YOU DON'T HOLD THE THREADS TOO FIRMLY, SOMETIMES YOU BACK UP AND THERE ARE GLIMPSES OR INTUITIONS OF THE WHOLE -- BECAUSE IT IS AN IMAGE OF THE WORLD GRADUALLY COMING INTO FOCUS, NOT A THEORY ABOUT THE WORLD. The image, however, is pretty well ordered, at least enough to be legible. It is not a chaotic splat. It privileges and protects the dream of being and all its parts, respects the permeable boundaries of sentient bodies and atomic and molecularly structured entities appearing in clocked time and space, such as stones and clouds, from which they evolve without definite rupture. It is sympathetic to Howard Bloom's notion of creative universe that moves as much, if not more, toward order, as it does toward chaos, reconstituting itself after every collapse. It moves with and reflects what moves toward life. Though seemingly anarchic in the non-linearity of its overall order, the mongrel discourse does not take a stand on politics or religion. 

breathe stretch

Title Page

with Rite of Purification

the mongrel discourse

or

APOCOTASTASIS NOW


or

the wholey and holey, wholely babble

or

a curious move by the green knight

or

THe oPtioNalLy cApitAlIzEd Wo-fUl 

rEAd MaRksIst CoMmunIOniSt Manifesto

or

love in the ruins

or

the relatively 
sub-microscopic baby 
by a miracle retrieved
from the ocean of dirty bathwater

or

the vorpal blade

or


V
the view from the vanishing point

or


the birth of the romantically enlightened renaissance

or

the finding of the origin of perspective
in a fresco by Giotto

or


the incessant finding of the holy grail

or
(other instruments can do as well 
when musicians give it everything they've got; 
but if you've got one handy)
why not just let the Stradivarius play itself?

or

the origin of the modern world
in a mystic's dream

The reader is referred to the work of Slavoj Zizek and Jordan Peterson, who, among others, carefully elucidate the terms of a non-necessarily theistic approach to Christian symbology, explaining why this symbology, the stuff itself, not what it might or might not signify, is so essential to non-theists too,

as it reduces the over-arching, interpenetrating first principle to love in action between sentient beings, the subject known only in its relation to the object like two sides of a Mobius strip (see wiki) or two characters evolving and then marrying in a typical love story and then achieving a novel autonomy but still intertwined (as when you slice a Mobius Strip down the middle) -- 

as per the latest findings in physics and philosophy, uncannily crystallized or Christalized two millennia before their clear articulation as a scientific finding about the nature of things, 

where maybe the mythos centered on the story of all divinities crystallizing in one divinity, love, within the self (as is taught in the Gospels) and further crystallized in a perfect embodiment of love in action appeared to give birth to the autonomous individual and free inquiry that created the science than then bends around backward (as light beams curve and theoretically eventually, if unimpeded, return to where they set out from) to it -- 

as the church anchors the origin of science to its pre-science origins, often playing the mother told to wait outside the gates.

in re-rooting the scientific paradigm and restoring its sentient heart, the world and self grow whole, transparent, and clairvoyant, privy to many mystical confluences and manifold synchronicities  -- words begin singing of themselves as the ones that sound alike in rhymes or puns find each other and lock together and the locked lovers of those lovers lock to them, all lovers being jigsaw puzzle pieces all locking together to rearrange the world in a novel pattern, one made and ordered by love in a visual order crystallizing in the image by Giotto at which I arrived in seeking and finding the phenomenal birth of perspective as a paradigm of knowledge.  

Maybe the aforementioned thinkers play Moses, unable to enter the promised land, but grant honor to those two voices crying in the wilderness, digging into the dust, suffering the stifling darkness

that we may begin anew, I'm sure they'll be among the first

to be raptured up in the rapture.

Let us all kneel to be baptized.

*****

A portrait of the philosophononsophers
(lovers of knowledge and unknowing)
(the eager fetchers of far flown bouncing spheres)
the artist sibyl architect poet mathematician logician Veronika 
and her late companion Callisto 
by Moise Samon
for The New York Times