Sara, this is for Darryl.

[leondacter]

Since he asked to read it once I had described it to him, here is the final section of Jaynes' book; it's the section titled "The Auguries of Science". This way, if you like, you can click the cut to get the full transcription, copy/paste it, and print it out to read in your own sweet time, Darryl. Enjoy, homeslice!

Comments

[le_bonheur]

Corey

A reply to the wonderful Sara Scannell.

[leondacter]

It wasn't sure how quickly you'd get to this post, especially since I'm not sure how frequently or often my sit gets checked. I figured I'd post this so that Darryl could read it without going to the trouble of tracking down the rather large book for a single chapter of it; this way he can print it off and have his own copy, as long as you two have access to a printer; in Microsoft Word it came out at about nine pages

Part II of reply.

[leondacter]

Maybe a thorough psychoanalysis would help, but I can't afford it. I have to find it within myself to focus my attention away from these fears, or to conquer them and step from behind the ornate curtain whose shadow I speak in. I don't know, Sara. The thing is it has begun to bother me, and I feel myself moving away from the events of my writing as I try to describe them, moving toward language and conceptualization, metaphor and simile, and away from the reality which should instead mesmorize me. I hate addressing it, because it's difficult to fight a strong habit and even so I'm only telling myself what NOT to do, which seems distracting and mostly fruitless. It's like spending seven years studying the wrong aspect of your field; in fact, that's what I've done. Not that I haven't picked up much from enveloping myself in language, but it's daunting to start from scratch stylistically, suddenly realizing that you only shift so easily between one voice and another because you are actually only commentating on that voice by

Re: Part II of reply.

[ulyart]

(Sorry to butt in on your discussion like this, but...)

You amazed me in this comment with your self-perceptiveness and your willingness to be open and vulnerable. It's inspiring to see and I do not take it for granted.

I think if we have conversed so much on LiveJournal, it's because we are dealing with similar issues in our writing.

I feel myself moving away from the events of my writing as I try to describe them, moving toward language and conceptualization, metaphor and simile, and away from the reality which should instead mesmerize me.

This is the kind of thing I remind myself often.

But you see, these summations are easy and clear in this didactic tone I have.

Again, we've had numerous discussions about didactic tone, so I risk repeating myself here, but anyway... The didactic tone definitely has its place-- in a textbook or a pamphlet, or in a personal essay, a casual letter or a work of philosophy. I greatly enjoy catachrestic's posts, many of which are didactic, because they are so clearly laid out and rich in metaphor. They are

Re: Part II of reply.

[leondacter]

Ha! You're not "butting in" on anything. I'm glad you commented.

I'm ostensibly moving to Los Angeles to become a writer professionally, a writer of screenplays, treatments, of stories, and eventually I'd like to publish a novel. I'm trying to be practical about it all. I honestly strive for some sort of virtue in an ability to adapt and grow as a person and as a writer. I think I have some rather beautiful ideas for television. Doing them justice is a primary goal, and it is necessary to remember that I am not my ideas, and my ideas are not me, and so too with my words. Your Henry Miller quote seems entirely applicable. I write a tremendous amount of text, and most of what I post here is me either flying in the face of or falling prey to this sort of instant audience; the internet is not a tremendous garden for a writer to bloom in, he loses himself in all the voices, the expectations, the immediate deflections and distractions that arise. Indeed, we should all be writing our novel