Re:TheAshLad - Sandbooks

tekst og omforer til. drmmendesimiler. ... kle er som et symptom p en
lidelse der. medfrer irritationsom af huden. ... der findes en lang rkke.
hudlidelser hvor kle er somdet mest fremtrdende symptom. ... kanskje.
kan den bare slenge inn noensom p tilfeldige steder. ... det var som.
nettopp under som enklatreekspedisjon i det hele som begynte for hans
del. som i en hulei meters som hyde fant tokuhashi nemlig.
menneskeaktige somfotspor lagd av som et ganske stort dyr som.rhsh.
noemata. Re codework (KristevaEco). long reply I just got back from
aconf. with messages I have to deal with. not spam. But if you look
atKristeva's Revolution in Poetic Language you'll see. a lengthy
treatment ofMaldoror especially the unabridged Fr. version and a. great
deal of thisis a combination of psychoanalytics and semiotics which
she. You'd have to look at the book it's hardly reductionist. Same with.
Greimas etc. Alan I have read it and I find Eco and all such semiotic.
models of language reductionist. Where does a text like Lautreamont's.
Maldoror fit into Eco's scheme Where do the texts of the insane
Language is. not only aboutsignals (Eco's signfunctions) and their
corresponding. behavioral responses.There is a form of dark matter in
language that never. gets touched upon by semiotics. It is where signals
get crossed elided. broken down and too often dismissed in semiotics as
gibberish or noise.. Eco's approach isgood for analyzing highclass
linear detective novels like. the ones he writes but it falls apart on texts
that don't make the rage of. interpretationtheir goal. Like all models of
the world semiotics fits some. things well and other things badly and
the things it fits badly happen to be. precisely the things I care most
about right now in the making of art. Maybe. somebody could propose
a new nonlinear model of semiotics or better a. chaotic one that would
extend the field into a place that might be. interesting. But Eco's views
on language are too restrictive for me and. don't carry me to the places
I want to go. Greimas deals with a much. wider range of issues than
semiotics in his work and I prefer him to Eco.. Even so there is still
much in the making of art that Greimas doesn't take. into account. (Not
that I can recall anything specifically that I could. critique off the top of
my pointy little head. . .) Linguistics still only. skims the surface of
art's deepest concerns so I guess the question is. should an artist be
content with merely skimmed surfaces Or should he dive. headlong into
the deep waters where theories fear to tread I guess some of. us are
Ahabs and some of us are Ishmaels. I favor the crazy Ahab impulse.
speaking for myself despite my wooden leg. I am taking a breather
here. let others get into the conversation if they wish. Feel free to tear
350