Quantum Field Poetics (CCafe 8/21)


(Ed Mahood) #22

We infer (which is a skill) and interpret (which is an even more challenging skill) what others (some are, what you are implying, “smart” and some not so. And these inferences and interpretations should be, to my small mind, rooted in more than their opinions (and by opinions I mean the results of thought, not a substitute therefor). I’m sure we agree that this is not always the case. Be that as it may, this does not mean that we cannot gain a stronger, perhaps clearer, understanding of what they are saying if we are open enough and willing enough to make the sizeable effort needed to attain that.

However, your following statement is a non sequiter. There may still be a “supermind” and there could be “superhumans”, and there might be something we could call a “Noosphere”. Just because some smart people are sometimes stupid (where I would say they simply overshoot their intelligence), it does not follow that ALL smart people suffer from this malady.

If you mean by “amoral”, “free of morals”, then I’m with you. Without human beings, there is no notion of “morality”, but I’m not clear on what morals has to do with “smart”, “inalienable rights”, what constitutes a “person”, or “equality”. Once those notions are clarified and agreed, we can start thinking about potential “shoulds”.

(Mark Jabbour) #23

Oh, @madrush - here’s the photo. [IJ|240x320] you’d have to bring up the text, but as I recall the author said “they” did a poem with the skewered words.

(Mark Jabbour) #24


Here it is. (I need an intern.)

(Mark Jabbour) #25

And there you have hit the nail on the head. Who among us is willing to do that? If one is lucky, one may run into such a person. And then what happens? A deal/contract is made - You show me yours and I’ll show you mine - and then a cost/benefit analysis is done, consciously or unconsciously. Now, we’re getting into infinite jest territory. … which binds @madrush & I together.

(Mark Jabbour) #26

See - I would take the “conversation” into “parts unknown” … yet connected.

(Ed Mahood) #27

Not really … or perhaps in your own so-constructed reality. In my world, once the connection is established, we would mutually explore our views in search of what is sound, lasting, and perhaps even enduring, knowing full well that another could enter the conversation and take it in other directions. It is called the pursuit of knowledge, but, as I’m guessing you’re about to say, “who gives a shit about that”?

To put it in Gebserian terms, the focus these days is on being right and so a deal is struck. We’re all the poorer for it. And we remain poor as long as we yield to that.

(Ed Mahood) #28

I believe – in spite of the System’s admonition not to reply to you again – that a poem was generated by the skewered words. I also believe that it wasn’t a very good poem.

A poem can be made of any words we like, but that does not make it a good poem. Who cares?

Where @madrush and I concur, I believe, that it should be worth our while to read (hear/experience) that poem. I don’t see how skewered words pass that simple test.

(Mark Jabbour) #29

Wrong, w/r/t giving a shit. W/r/t Gebser “these days” on being right. The behavioral ecologist/naturalist/evopsychologist/paleopsychologist (me) would say: is that “being right” has survival benefits that supersede proximate reasons for “agreeable”. I.e. We (humans) would not be here (and dominate the environment, to some extent) had not we (some of us) been risk adverse, and that that trait was attractive to females.

Not true. We, as a species, dominate. We are rich, abundant, in amoral biological terms. I suspect, predict, that even if we kill 99% of our species, we’ll rise to dominate again. Just saying …

(Heather Fester) #30

A couple of things that this post made me think of:


Also, I can understand the disagreement in point 2. I teach writing and so also see that writing and thinking are intimately related, and one develops the other in both directions. A lot of the “right word” talk, I think, was more or less pointing at a “felt sense” (more on “felt sense” at the bottom of the page) or “thinking at the edge” form of creativity (to use Gendlin’s terms–ones which I find very helpful–both in tension and in resonance with the other ways of writing and thinking. …if that makes sense. :slight_smile: ) I’m not saying that @madrush was exactly using Gendlin’s ideas in his descriptions. He seems to have his own bodily semantic system for choosing the words as well. But, I think the two systems might be simpatico.

@madrush, I wondered if the word you were looking for was erasure… wasn’t available to me on the call for some reason. And, then, after the call, I thought of the word “verisimilitude” in relationship to some of what we were discussing (and then toyed with “objective correlative” too).

(Marco V Morelli) #31

Well…just Googling it, the method (which varies slightly) seems to go by at least three terms:

  • erasure poetry
  • redaction poetry
  • blackout poetry

Neither of these, however, is what I was thinking/feeling! Yes, from the poet’s perspective, there is a ‘right word.’ But of course, it’s completely dependent on all the other words in the local (and cosmic) field.

(Mark Jabbour) #32

So, as background, one of my “students” (2013) was one of Chogyam Trungpa’s “girls” @ Naropa (back-in-the-day). She wanted me to teach Creative Writing @ Naropa. I said “not for me.” She was working on a memoir. Anyway … It (Life) is all very interesting, and I wouldn’t change a thing, w/r/t to my experience. Cheers, m

(Mark Jabbour) #33

So, where do you teach? Perhaps we (you @madrush & I) could get together? I suggest, if Marco had taken my class - he wouldn’t be so conflicted, but by now a famous, NYT’s best seller. Kidding of course, but then again … quantum physics and what not, who knows?

(Maia Maia) #34

While listening to this group experiment, (9/4) I wrote , too, lines that flowed out or seemed to flow out
of what you all were doing, which was like raising a cloud of complex flavors and energies…
Thanks for being playful in a most serious vein.
More to come, I hope!