"Panama nightlife piece de resistance explode oeuvre of naked redcaps - Sweedish flipped from his facitlity - millet in his crowd - young factoids melts dead nitrous stress - naked branch splintered on empty flood - bleeding drier and the drift is lying there - last rout - the bogey without a shale, without remembrance - brevity of the trade windjammers on his factoid healed and half-healed, in the awareness of evolutionist" -
The Ticket that Exploded (67)
Tuesday, January 27, 2009
Logos: reason vs. chaos
Perhaps my professor was right. Logos does not have to mean reason in the form of order. The chaos Burroughs creates within the "logos group" is meant to give the reader a certain kind of comfort in reason. Not from the seemingly endless amounts of disturbing albeit creative sex, but from our harsh reaction to it. Rhetorically, logos is used along side pathos and ethos as styles and methods of writing. Each are used to captivate and persuade the reader.
Logos uses reasoning to persuade the reader. Burroughs presents the actions of the logos group to be quite reasonable. "Clearing" the mind and conscious of every human being, I have to admit, is an effective and reasonable way to harvest man kind and use it for whatever purpose you chose. With the clear slate, so to speak, one can really do anything with it.
So I find myself crediting the logos group for their reasoning and quite simple way of taking over the human race. However, I must give even more credit to Burroughs. By presenting the Logos group to be this reasonable and efficient group, Burroughs also uses logos himself in knowing that the readers reaction to the atrocity of the group will lead them away from such actions. It is in the the spirit of logos that Burroughs calmly presents this "logos group" and reasonably points out that the logos of this group cannot be the logos of the human being.
Logos uses reasoning to persuade the reader. Burroughs presents the actions of the logos group to be quite reasonable. "Clearing" the mind and conscious of every human being, I have to admit, is an effective and reasonable way to harvest man kind and use it for whatever purpose you chose. With the clear slate, so to speak, one can really do anything with it.
So I find myself crediting the logos group for their reasoning and quite simple way of taking over the human race. However, I must give even more credit to Burroughs. By presenting the Logos group to be this reasonable and efficient group, Burroughs also uses logos himself in knowing that the readers reaction to the atrocity of the group will lead them away from such actions. It is in the the spirit of logos that Burroughs calmly presents this "logos group" and reasonably points out that the logos of this group cannot be the logos of the human being.
Thursday, January 22, 2009
The Morality of The Ticket That Exploded
The Ticket That Exploded by William S. Burroughs is a book, at face value, of random and disturbing homoerotic sex. He does not shy away from hitting the reader right in the gut with one example of this twisted and unheard of eroticism after another. Upon reading Burroughs, one must ask the simple question of why? What's the point of all the sex with slim to none detectable plot? One is constantly bombarded with almost sickening sex scenes that prove to have little value when which ever character has ejaculated. So again, Why?
On page 21 of the work one is introduced to the Logos group. This is a group that tries to infiltrate the human race by manipulating their behavior. The subjects experience traumatic scenes and feelings until they are immune to the feelings. They reach a point where the once disgusting or sad or infuriating feeling no longer exists and they became what the book calls "clear". The "clears" can then be used as almost droids for the Logos group.
There are two points about the Logos group that I find interesting. The first, and smaller of the two, is the name of the group. In Greek philosophy "logos" was a term used to represent the order of the universe and also the reason of a human being. It was a term used by philosophers in slightly different ways (Heraclitus, Aristotle) but all had a sense of order and reason and purpose to them. The opposite of Logos would be chaos. Perhaps the Logos group was named such to represent the order they created by wiping all human emotion clear and leaving the human race blank. I don't know why Burroughs used this allusion but I'm certain it was deliberate.
The second point I want to make is the similarities between what the group was trying to do and what the book does for the reader. When reading Burrough's work, one cannot help but be disgusted. The amount of outrageous and putrid sex that is in the novel is almost overwhelming. It seems there is no plot, just emotionless sex. This makes the reader want to stop reading all together. The Logos group is a representation of the overexposure our society is undergoing to things, events, places, and feelings. This overexposure makes us immune to it. We are no longer bothered by seeing people murdered or raped or abused. Perhaps Burroughs made the novel so utterly over-the-top and in-your-face to call attention to the fact that humans are losing their value, they are losing their ability to feel. By our reaction we prove that we are still disgusted by raw lust and sickening fornication. Ultimately, it could be Burroughs way of warning us of what could happen but also reassuring us that we are still human and we still have hope in preserving our emotion and conscience.
On page 21 of the work one is introduced to the Logos group. This is a group that tries to infiltrate the human race by manipulating their behavior. The subjects experience traumatic scenes and feelings until they are immune to the feelings. They reach a point where the once disgusting or sad or infuriating feeling no longer exists and they became what the book calls "clear". The "clears" can then be used as almost droids for the Logos group.
There are two points about the Logos group that I find interesting. The first, and smaller of the two, is the name of the group. In Greek philosophy "logos" was a term used to represent the order of the universe and also the reason of a human being. It was a term used by philosophers in slightly different ways (Heraclitus, Aristotle) but all had a sense of order and reason and purpose to them. The opposite of Logos would be chaos. Perhaps the Logos group was named such to represent the order they created by wiping all human emotion clear and leaving the human race blank. I don't know why Burroughs used this allusion but I'm certain it was deliberate.
The second point I want to make is the similarities between what the group was trying to do and what the book does for the reader. When reading Burrough's work, one cannot help but be disgusted. The amount of outrageous and putrid sex that is in the novel is almost overwhelming. It seems there is no plot, just emotionless sex. This makes the reader want to stop reading all together. The Logos group is a representation of the overexposure our society is undergoing to things, events, places, and feelings. This overexposure makes us immune to it. We are no longer bothered by seeing people murdered or raped or abused. Perhaps Burroughs made the novel so utterly over-the-top and in-your-face to call attention to the fact that humans are losing their value, they are losing their ability to feel. By our reaction we prove that we are still disgusted by raw lust and sickening fornication. Ultimately, it could be Burroughs way of warning us of what could happen but also reassuring us that we are still human and we still have hope in preserving our emotion and conscience.
Thursday, January 15, 2009
No one's favorite song
HALF BREED by cher. O MY GOD. Most rediculous. I just can't handle it. The thing about the worst song ever is that it has to be the song that no one can listen to all the way through. I've never heard the whole thing. No one can claim this as a favorite. I've attached the video as proof. Note the crackling fire at the beginning. REALLY?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z6E98ZRaU1s
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z6E98ZRaU1s
Tuesday, January 13, 2009
Pataphrase
I posted my pataphrase on plurk but it was in two increments and I'm no sure if it got picked up...so here it is:
Peter and Kyler revelled in the the elastane of amity. The girl with big thighs walked hard, wearing little holes in the inner seam so the two never saw eye to eye again.
Peter and Kyler revelled in the the elastane of amity. The girl with big thighs walked hard, wearing little holes in the inner seam so the two never saw eye to eye again.
Would I want to know Morel?
I'm not sure. Mainly because I'm not sure how willing I would be to be a part of the experiment. I mean for all I know I was already made a part of the experiment. Maybe Casares is from another dimension who knows all about our unfortunate fall into the hands of this great tyrant and has somehow slipped this piece of literature into our libraries to tell is about what's happened. Maybe I'll start yelling "I Love You, *insert name here*" to people just to make sure Morel doesn't yet have a hold on my soul.
But really, would it matter it I was living that life? If I was some reproduction of myself a few years or a few centuries or a few days ago and have just been living a week over and over again would I be that upset? Again, not sure. If so, I'll be honest, I'd have to hand it to Morel. I've had a pretty good repetitious week. I feel my emotions (or what i think are my emotions) rather strongly, well strongly enough that I would be afraid to know if they were watered down from my previous self.
Is it possible that the main character invented Morel to maybe make peace with the mysterious Elisa and the fact that he was not able to make a life with her? Maybe he is mad and the invention of Morel was really an offshoot of the invention of Morel. Had he created this world it would counter what he might have hinted to about no wanting to live. The back and forth the main character has about life and death is very interesting. Looking back at certain passages of the book I can't help but wonder if there was some sort of hint at his life and or death in regards to the intruders.
"I was not dead until the intruders arrived; when one is alone it is impossible to be dead. Now I must eliminate the witnesses before I can come back to life. That will not be difficult: I do not exist, and therefore they will not suspect their own destruction" (54)
Maybe our main character is really dead and a ghost inhabitting the island and the presense of the intruders shows him that he is, in fact, dead. By inventing Morel and his machine and the others, the main character finds a way to "eliminate" them. They are no longer real and so they cannot witness his being dead. The invention of Morel is the key to staying alive.
But really, would it matter it I was living that life? If I was some reproduction of myself a few years or a few centuries or a few days ago and have just been living a week over and over again would I be that upset? Again, not sure. If so, I'll be honest, I'd have to hand it to Morel. I've had a pretty good repetitious week. I feel my emotions (or what i think are my emotions) rather strongly, well strongly enough that I would be afraid to know if they were watered down from my previous self.
Is it possible that the main character invented Morel to maybe make peace with the mysterious Elisa and the fact that he was not able to make a life with her? Maybe he is mad and the invention of Morel was really an offshoot of the invention of Morel. Had he created this world it would counter what he might have hinted to about no wanting to live. The back and forth the main character has about life and death is very interesting. Looking back at certain passages of the book I can't help but wonder if there was some sort of hint at his life and or death in regards to the intruders.
"I was not dead until the intruders arrived; when one is alone it is impossible to be dead. Now I must eliminate the witnesses before I can come back to life. That will not be difficult: I do not exist, and therefore they will not suspect their own destruction" (54)
Maybe our main character is really dead and a ghost inhabitting the island and the presense of the intruders shows him that he is, in fact, dead. By inventing Morel and his machine and the others, the main character finds a way to "eliminate" them. They are no longer real and so they cannot witness his being dead. The invention of Morel is the key to staying alive.
First reactions to The Invention of Morel
I would like to call to attention slash maybe just ask about the memory cpabilities of Morel. I understand the machine, the various possible motives behind it's invention and also the way in which he is now forced to live (or not live). However the one thing I cannot understand is how he revealed the machine to his peers. When he sat them all down, were they in the process of dying? Had the just died and the moment was still relevant enough for Morel to convey to them what was/had happened? Or had then not yet died and Morel was telling them what was going to happen in the very near future. This argument makes sense because it would give him a a chance to explain before hand any discomfort they may feel like we saw with the main character.
It does not make sense that he would tell them after the fact because how would he remember? On page 85 it is discussed how the subjects have no memory of what happened before. So if Morel is explaining his invention after they have been transmitted to their eternal ghost-like state, he should have no memory or what happened before. Also, Stoever and the others should have no memory of Charlie or any misfortunes from their old job.
Also, had Morel transmitted the ship and its crew as well? In which case was the phantom ship floating around the ocean without being seen by anyone else? If this is correct, I SINCERELY hope there are ships and planes and giant Cyclopes roaming the earth that I cannot see.
It does not make sense that he would tell them after the fact because how would he remember? On page 85 it is discussed how the subjects have no memory of what happened before. So if Morel is explaining his invention after they have been transmitted to their eternal ghost-like state, he should have no memory or what happened before. Also, Stoever and the others should have no memory of Charlie or any misfortunes from their old job.
Also, had Morel transmitted the ship and its crew as well? In which case was the phantom ship floating around the ocean without being seen by anyone else? If this is correct, I SINCERELY hope there are ships and planes and giant Cyclopes roaming the earth that I cannot see.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
