State of the World Address.

Shakespeare, read well, is a first rate Dionysiac. What he weaves into his sentences is pure eros, sap of life.
Ive always had something with Macbeth as a boy, seemed to describe the soul of what I always saw around me.

PB wrote

:laughing:

A tragedy or not a tragedy.

No you read Shakespeare only as in which character is your souls worst sin.

See it in context of depth psychology which popular success like this always is born of; the psyche of the middle ages in England was a bit more hardy than to seek what we seek in poetry, it wanted the absolute worst, and laugh about it. Their sins exposed, confessed.

Most modern actors shroud this barbarism, which it essentially is, and is meant is, in a flowery delivery.

I had to put this in your thread, Sauwelios. Something that happened today.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hJCKQllyMIQ[/youtube]

Inspiring!

Nietzschean’s have nutters in white robes too, oh my! #-o

Retard… this is from Zarathustra.

The white robe isn’t a reference to Jesus, but to purity, it is a theatrical means, you savage. The performance of the actor is truly legitimate, especially the part about the Last Man. Which is why people wont like it if they are Last Men!
The most thrilling part of the piece I found where the audience responds - it made me scream out loud in awe, or a sentiment of surprise Ive never felt before as I watched it back, Ive never had that before in my life. I am truly a Nietzschean in my fucking bones. And this piece is the world is a nutshell.

Im going to go ahead and say that this is the best, bravest and most badass piece of theater Ive ever seen performed.
Just picking this monologue, and actually managing to convey the contempt for the Last Man, what a fucking king this guy is.

A Nietzschean “Creation myth” might be: existence began with an act of divine Destruction.

::

The Word, seen in its true Sense, is itself Force, itself Deed. For the Word is a Verb rather than a Noun–a Name for a Work, a Doing–an Act… Must a Writer not be an Actor, a Pretender? Unto the Real World Stage, then!

AT THIS POINT I CAN NO LONGER STAND MY CAPITALS AMONG A LOWER CASE AUDIENCE. AND LOWER CASE, WITH ALL THE SUBTLETY OF PUNCTUATION… BUT NO, I WILL NOT PRETEND THAT I’M ADVANCED ENOUGH TO DO WITHOUT PUNCTUATION, EVEN AS I WON’T PRETEND TO BE ABLE TO WRITE LATIN OR GREEK. THIS NIETZSCHEAN AGE IS TOO MUCH STILL A BEGINNING. LIKE MY SELF-IMPOSED EXILE FROM THE WORLD OF TONAL MUSIC–AND MY TONAL FAVOURITES WERE ALREADY AN ODD SELECTION!–, THIS WAY OF WRITING IS AN EXPERIENT IN TAKING THINGS COLD AND SLOW.*

  • 'TIS A SUBTLETY THAT I’VE BEEN WRITING IN ALL-CAPS FOR YEARS: NAMELY, WHEN WRITING AS OPPOSED TO TYPING–LITERALLY WRITING! MY HANDWRITING WAS JUST TOO BAD. KALLIGRAPHY BE DAMED!–SOMETHING FOR DAMES…

IF MY CAPITALIZATION MAKES ME “SOUND” LIKE I’M SHOUTING, MY “BORINGNESS” MAY SERVE TO COMPENSATE. MY PASSION DEMANDS IT. BUT I’VE BEEN THINKING THIS MAY NOW FINALLY IMPEL ME TO EMBRACE THE ILLUSION OF NEGATIVITY: DARKNESS, DEATH, UGLINESS… I’VE ALWAYS DRAWN THE LINE AT UGLINESS, AND THEREBY AT DEATH. TO ME, DARKNESS, DEEPEST BLACKNESS ITSELF WAS A MOST ATTRACTIVE FORCE EVEN IN THE MOST BEATIFUL COLOUR SPECTRUM. THE SHADOW OF NIGHT… [TYPO IN “BEAUTIFUL” NOTED.]

I JUST INDULGED–WELL, ALMOST COMPLETELY INDULGED–IN A POEM ON THE UNDERGROUND WALL. BUT THOUGH I MAY FLY STRAIGHT BACK TO MODAL MUSIC, I MAY NOT DENY SUCH ROOTS. EVEN NOW I’M LISTENING TO UMA MOHAN, WHOSE WAS THE FIRST MODAL MUSIC THAT MIGHT HAVE MOVED ME TO TEARS. I WILL NOT DENY THAT PASSION, BUT NOR THAT SUCH PASSION IS FOR RELATIVE BEGINNERS. IN THE SENSE OF A HIGH CULTURE ETC…

I’VE SAID IT BEFORE, BUT THERE’S A PASSION THAT HAS LIVED ALL THE PASSION OF DEATH AND CAN ONLY LIVE THE PASSION FOR THE DEATH OF THAT PASSION NOW… AND WHEN THIS PASSION HAS DIED… ONE WITH RELIEF–THOUGH WITHOUT BREATHING A SIGH–WELCOMES SUBTLETY OF PASSION, THE SEEMING ABSENCE OF PASSION… SEEMING ONLY TO COARSE EARS, TO AMBITIOUS HEARTS. BUT IT’S ONLY WHEN THE FOOL PERSISTS IN HIS FOLLY THAT HE BECOMES WISE; AND IT’S ONLY WHEN HE’S THOUGHT WISE THAT HE BECOMES A ROD… BUT THIS FOOL, THIS ONCE PURE FOOL WHO WENT THE PATH OF THE MAGUS WILL NOW BE A ROD BY EMBRACING EVERYTHING THOUGHT NEGATIVE. HE WILL INSIST ON BEING AN IPSISSIMUS WHILE AT THE SAME TIME ONLY BEING A MAGUS TO THE IPSISSIMOSITY CALLED NIETZSCHE. IT’S A PREJUDICE THAT ALL THE NEGATIVE VALUES BELONG TOGETHER, BY THE WAY. EVIL AND BAD ARE NOT THE SAME. BUT POPULARLY, THEY ARE THOUGHT THE SAME: THEREFORE I MUST ALSO EMBRACE THE BAD. YES, “MUST”! AND NOT JUST “WILL”. NEED, THE NEGATIVE COUNTERPART OF WILL, MUST ALSO BE WILLED. THAT THE WORLD IS A COLD AND EMPTY PLACE: THAT ABSENCE IS THE GREAT INSPIRER OF THE GREAT FIRE THAT IS THIS UNIVERSE. FEAR: THAT IS THE AWFUL FEELING INFLAMING ALL OF US. THE HORROR OF THE REAL. BUT WAIT, DIDN’T I JUST DESCRIBE THE REAL AS THAT GREAT FIRE, AS OPPOSED TO THE COLD DARKNESS WHICH IS IDEAL [AN IDEA]? HELL IS OTHER BEINGS. IT ONLY BECOMES HEAVENLY WHEN YOU EMBRACE YOURSELF AS ONE OF THESE HELL-BEINGS. THEN YOU ARE INDEED ONE OF THE SATYRS.

I think you need to go much further with this transfiguration of writing, namely also becoming entirely metrical in the classical sense.

Doesn’t that only go for poetry, though? I mean, I’m always very aware of the rhythm of what I write, but that doesn’t require meter.

Perhaps then it is the small connecting words that we have and the Romans did not.
No I have it. Let me make a suggestion about how to pull this off without punctuation.

AT THIS POINT I CAN NO LONGER STAND MY CAPITALS AMONG A LOWER CASE AUDIENCE
AND LOWER CASE WITH ALL THE SUBTLETY OF PUNCTUATION
BUT NO I WILL NOT PRETEND THAT I’M ADVANCED ENOUGH TO DO WITHOUT PUNCTUATION
EVEN AS I WON’T PRETEND TO BE ABLE TO WRITE LATIN OR GREEK
THIS NIETZSCHEAN AGE IS TOO MUCH STILL A BEGINNING
LIKE MY SELF-IMPOSED EXILE FROM THE WORLD OF TONAL MUSIC
AND MY TONAL FAVOURITES WERE ALREADY AN ODD SELECTION
THIS WAY OF WRITING IS AN EXPERIENT IN TAKING THINGS COLD AND SLOW

this works perfectly well, reads better than a large block with ongoing text in caps with punctuation, which quite simply is too much information per square centimeter for my brain to find pleasant reading.

Your rhythms are indeed the ground, and I say just break up all phrases and let them stand alone.
This way, it breathes like rhetoric wants to breathe. All phrases can be called out in a loud voice over a big square.

HAND WRITING IS RUNIC
A MAN THAT WRITES WITHOUT COCKSLEGS IS NO ROMAN

THREE WOLVES GREET YOU

FC’s changes are huge improvements. Go with his advice.

FCS CHANGES ARE HUGE
IMPROVEMENTS GO
WITH HIS ADVICE

BASICALLY I DO NOT
RECOGNIZE THE
DISTINCTION

BETWEEN POETRY AND PROSE

ONLY BETWEEN FORM AND FORM DO I SEE DISTINCTION
RHYME OR NO RHYME
IS OF NO CONCERN

WORD FOR WORD EACH WORD
IS METAPHOR

Fixed Cross

I have said book, but found it to be of an arcane language and generally without substance or root at a fundamental level ~ or nonsense generally. I might have it all wrong, but even if Nietzsche was a genius he failed to get that across. Not to mention that his philosophy is basically modern capitalism in a nutshell – which sucks really badly. Maybe I got it wrong, but historical and contemporary examples haven’t made a very good case for its missed eloquence, nor et al. I do think Hitler was a Nietzschean, and the jews aren’t far behind him, if we consider how they think they are better than everyone else, and are generally ruling the world, and promoting his ‘stronger than’ philosophy.

Sauwelios

Given that there was some manner of perfection to begin with, or a oneness, then to make anything from that could be seen as an act of destruction yes. However, that oneness contains its seed, no? Ergo the duality is inherent within the fundamental nature of existence. There is no perfect God or perfection et al, then if everything is imperfect at root then nothing was destroyed.

Dear lord don’t you see what this means!? Just like Nietzsche viewed others as degenerate intellectually, you are doing the same, dividing the world into the worthy and the unworthy. Did you create yourself and make yourself more intelligent? No, you make an assumption that others are failing, and I suspect you believe there is a ‘divine integer’ seed, or ‘value’ which denotes whether or not some are low and some are high case as you put it. So let me get this right; you think that a divinity or you yourself decided that you or your ‘value’ is or should be better than others. Then in contrast some people would have shit intellects and shit lives, because they must suck.

I don’t get it!? In this fucking shit world where people have to suffer and die, you think a supreme intellect decided to make things worse for some than others. If I got the whole thing wrong please educate me, because as I see it, it is Nietzsche and Nietzschean’s who require an education.

Indeed, I think the Greeks and Romans had even more (subtle) such words: consider Professor Ruijg’s Autour de “τε épique”. τε is etymologically the same as Latin -que and the ch in Dutch noch (compare και and et to German auch). I’m reminded of ende in Medieval Dutch literature.

I must say that the first time I read your post the whole thing sounded good, but actually it already stops making sense here, as it stops in mid-sentence with no indication as to why. There’s a difference between the end of the first sentence and that of the second. I also miss the comma, it just doesn’t flow the same way.

Here there’s just no alternative for punctuation: this last sentence is neither entirely new nor simply a continuation of the preceding one. Also, the preceding one is now completely cut off from the succeeding one, which is its continuation…

I don’t see how it’s more information than if it was in lower case. I think the same goes for Nietzsche’s aphorisms (as distinct from mere maxims): you’re supposed to ponder every period. By the way, the Greeks and Romans would rather print it like this:

AT THIS POINT I CAN NO LONGER STAND MY CAPITALS AMONG A LOWER CASE AUDIENCE AND LOWER CASE WITH ALL THE SUBTLETY OF PUNCTUATION BUT NO I WILL NOT PRETEND THAT IM ADVANCED ENOUGH TO DO WITHOUT PUNCTUATION EVEN AS I WON’T PRETEND TO BE ABLE TO WRITE LATIN OR GREEK THIS NIETZSCHEAN AGE IS TOO MUCH STILL A BEGINNING LIKE MY SELFIMPOSED EXILE FROM THE WORLD OF TONAL MUSIC AND MY TONAL FAVOURITES WERE ALREADY AN ODD SELECTION THIS WAY OF WRITING IS AN EXPERIENT IN TAKING THINGS COLD AND SLOW

or even like this:

A T T H I S P O I N T I C A N N O L O N G E R S T A N D M Y C A P I T A L S A M O N G A L O W E R C A S E A U D I E N C E A N D L O W E R C A S E W I T H A L L T H E S U B T L E T Y O F P U N C T U A T I O N B U T N O I W I L L N O T P R E T E N D T H A T I M A D V A N C E D E N O U G H T O D O W I T H O U T P U N C T U A T I O N E V E N A S I W O N T P R E T E N D T O B E A B L E T O W R I T E L A T I N O R G R E E K T H I S N I E T Z S C H E A N A G E I S T O O M U C H S T I L L A B E G I N N I N G L I K E M Y S E L F I M P O S E D E X I L E F R O M T H E W O R L D O F T O N A L M U S I C A N D M Y T O N A L F A V O U R I T E S W E R E A L R E A D Y A N O D D S E L E C T I O N T H I S W A Y O F W R I T I N G I S A N E X P E R I E N T I N T A K I N G T H I N G S C O L D A N D S L O W

But precisely that will break the rhythm, or at least make it much more difficult to decipher (to interpret the writing the way it was intended in that regard).

Another reason I still prefer punctuation is, as I meant to convey, that I don’t know whether Greek and Latin writers intended ambiguity with regard to where one sentenced ended and the next began (compare Aristotle’s chiding Heraclitus for leaving it unclear whether an adverb belonged to one part of speech or another or both)–and that I certainly don’t consider myself capable of such esotericism at this point.

Yeah, but this is not marketplace (forum, agora) material at all. It’s perfectly in order if the form discourages “the public”.

::

This works fine, indeed. What’s the meaning of “cock’s legs” in this context, though? I assume it connects the second sentence to the first.

::

MVLIER·TACEAT·IN·LITERARIIS

::

This shows how parsing sentences like this is really of a kind with punctuation: MM never said your changes were huge; minor changes may be major improvents…

::

Well, I think this ironically supports that distinction: for in my opinion, parsing your prose like this does not make it poetry; just bad prose. It’s how the masses who have no talent and no strong inspiration write “poetry”.

I never said anything about rhyme here. I wholly agree with Milton about rhyme, except perhaps that it may serve as a restriction of the kind Nietzsche praises in BGE 188. It turns out, by the way, that the difference between poetry and prose is indeed the presence or absence of meter, respectively–just as I thought it was. Even in my teenage songs I was a master of rhythm, so much so that supposedly more advanced musicians (read: Vincent) could not understand or appreciate my rhythms.

::

One last thing to consider: the Greeks and Romans may not have needed punctuation because, rather than emphasis, they had long and short vowels–unlike us moderns.

My truncating was meant precisely to show how much power there is in that - to force a beautiful new sentence out of another simply by truncating. I do not need to show you that, obviously - but I took the liberty of showing it in general.

I have merely shown the raw potential of your style somewhat.

I still like my own manner of ‘marblizing’ English better - but most of all I prefer what you exampled as pure raw text without spaces. That is truly noble.

I will humbly withdraw.

Yes, what you say about Greek is entirely correct. pos gar ou!!

RIDET ET AFFIRMAT CRUX
But strangers to masculine values in general. As many men as women - some women tend to have an inkling about masculinity, as it is their highest value. But these are value-creating women: women that stand by the man that they have chosen as worthy of their favors, and (sparse and necessary) wisdom.

I do think MM has a good eye (and ear) - but women can simply not understand rank among free spirits.
They are thus in the dark as to how freedom is forged.

That it is forged. Women like to see it treated as a given, so they can give themselves to it with abandon. This is their prerogative qua their own existence. This is the war of the sexes.