"Robert Morpheal" <morpheal@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:42A6679B.FE24E7A3@sympatico.ca...
> john adams wrote:
>>
>> Obscurantist, yes. Whether you risk the chance of talking over anyone's head is
>> another matter. I think you simply have a greater chance of talking away heads
>> with your intentionally obscure - but should I remind you meaningless (by
>> design) - rhetoric. You might think you're being flashy and cunning, but in the
>> end you're only fooling yourself...
>
> I use it as people repellent, and I one day plan to bottle and market it
> to the consumer public who have too many people fleas bothering them.
I guess it should go without saying every practical thing has its purpose.
> Charles Bukowski called the "people fleas".
Fair enough. Pablo Neruda had a different take on fleas:
Fleas interest me so much
Fleas interest me so much
that I let them bite me for hours.
They are perfect, ancient, Sanskrit,
machines that admit of no appeal.
They do not bite to eat,
they bite only to jump;
they are the dancers of the celestial sphere,
delicate acrobats
in the softest and most profound circus;
let them gallop on my skin,
divulge their emotions,
amuse themselves with my blood,
but someone should introduce them to me.
I want to know them closely,
I want to know what to rely on.
- Pablo Neruda
> He was mostly right about that.
>
> Not only that but people expected Charles to be and behave a certain
> way, and he had to comply with that in order to continue to sell books.
>
> Imagine that.
It is said the only thing that he could comply with was the bottle. But on
that I have no comment. Fleas, humans, and alcohol: somewhat of a
volatile combination.
-john
|
| Follow-ups: | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 |
| 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 |
|