Trach Pt 1 3-8-2024 update

A PLAY (?),
CHIMERATEXT(??),
HYBRID TEXT(???),
NOTES
AND TRASH

CAST LIST
ME:
confused MA student, ‘failure’, visual poet incapable of finding success in an
institutional setting; has been called ‘diatribic’ in their writing style, but deep
down, they are soft-spoken and rightfully insecure about their place in an
academic community; finding it hard to be hard-working and lazy at the
appropriate times and places in graduate school, also finding it impossible to not
be One or the Other in too much of a measure at any given time;
strengths=thinking; weaknesses=doing; every now and then really wants to quit
school
TARA INCOGNITA:
Trash artist (alterego of Me), trash theorist, trash phenomenologist, trash writer,
trash speaker; strengths are blatant, unrelenting self-confidence to the point of
hypocrisy; argues that trash is literally everything everywhere all the time--- it
is all fundamentally, eventually trash!; their rhetoric is similar to the very careful
folding up of a paper napkin, and then the throwing it into a dumpster and setting
the dumpster on fire (literally),… and then the writing about it as though it’s a
special metaphorical experience,
[TARA is also an extension of ME created to place ‘diatribic’ thoughts that
move into dangerous, marginalized spaces that are not academic, not fair
or purportedly ‘unopinionated’, not safe and typically avoided→ Terra
Incognita? Danger, monsters lurk]
YOU:
you

SETTING
You home or office where you have your device with Teams enabled, 11:15am-ish,
Friday 3-8-2024, at a pro development meeting. This wasn’t what You were
expecting, but it’s a typical day- You are likely tired and/or hungry and/ or
discomfited by other material woes, such as having to call your bank before 5pm,
or the immediate wonder of:
“””how long does this last and can I leave early? I have another meeting right
after this. Is it rude if I leave my camera off?? … can I use the bathroom
without anyone noticing? ””” ***peers around surreptitiously***
[Your material wonder makes You all the more appear like a relaxed
observer of this strange art. Rest assured, there are many that feel
just like You. ]
META-SETTING
(This is the primary setting for the entire play. And the setting of this
play’s writing.)
my “bedroom” with ME sitting on “bed” (I have no chair), unshowered for a
couple days, smelly. This is where I do all my work because I don’t have a real
desk. Actually, I have a desk but it’s used entirely as a bookshelf, with books
stacked on top of it everywhere, also unopened packages of books stacked next
to the ‘bed’ ((mattress on floor)). The door is blocked by a laundry basket and a
box of religious statues because the youngest cat is in heat and won’t leave me
alone- it keeps on sitting on my chest and bopping me on the nose, or making
me sniff its butt as friendly cats do- have to block the door bc it can’t close it
completely shut due to foundational resettling decades earlier. I keep her
out because she gets in the way of my laptop, though she meows and scratches
at the small crevice of the door left slightly open AND
[SOUND EFFECTS can and should be used]..

FOR STAGING:
My “room” is actually the laundry room at my parents house. A ku-thunk
ku-thunk ku-thunk that sometimes becomes faster (and concerning
sounding?) hammers through the room from the washing machine
[it has 25 minutes left; the SOUNDTRACK should be 25 minutes of
this inconsistently paced but loud hammering sound; may become
white noise out of necessity].
My “bed” is actually a mattress on the floor covered in papers and a few
books; sheets have cereal crumbs on them that can never be entirely
swept off –
actor of ME should periodically attempt to or even grab a broom and
clean the area around the mattress, giving up halfway when unable to
find a dustbin-
[A a small pile of CRAP/DUST/RUBBISH should be located in
the corner of the bedroom/laundry room- it should continue
to grow throughout the play as further attempts are made to
clean the room and unsuccessful attempts are made to find
the dustpan]
TECHNICAL TEXT NOTES
*asterisks mark action
Some dialogue is internal
[ ] brackets quite literally note things that need to be added to the
playscript AND/OR action to be performed … OR, whatever seems to fit
naturally with that asterisk…(***use your perennial judgement )

SCENE 1
Dust-bin for the head
ACT I: ‘“On time”’
ME: **types furiously, no time to wonder how much of this work will be useful, well-articulated,
not sexist, not imperialist, modernist but not imposing of historicity that I know nothing of.
Tunnel vision and weak editing muscles set in because of weeks with very little sleep; notes to
self: will need to have a caffeine detox when semester is over; **dry scoops 1/3 of a Walmart
brand pre-workout powder**
**on the laptop, we see what is being worked on… **
Zoe Elise Ramos Jmj
Dr. Pro Fessor
ENGL 5343
July 20, 2023
On Time (Graphic Complexity in Aaron Posner’s Chekov)
This paper has two titles: “On Time” and “Graphic Complexity in Aaron Posner’s
Chekov”. I chose the title, ‘On Time’, several weeks ago because I anticipated that I would be
late turning in this paper, and I thought it would be funny. But now that I’m a week late turning
in this paper, it seems like a callous joke. It probably seemed like I dropped off the face of the
planet or something. I am ashamed about that. This work is important to me but,
'One of the symptoms of an approaching nervous breakdown is the
belief that one's work is terribly important.' Bertrand Russell
I also chose the title because I wanted to talk about time and space. Physics is a big
interest of mine and I thought I’d approach a physics-backed interpretation of materiality in
my final paper, given that “materialism” is such an unfinishable construct. I don’t use the word
‘unfinishable’ in a negative light. Like Virginia Woolf, I am aware of the incapacity of
language to capture the totality of something I seek to capture. [[[WOOLF STUFF HERE-
QUOTES?]]
ME (internal dialogue): as always, that’s a great title!!,… but now I’m really off topic because
this is not a paper about physics, time or Woolf…; AND the tone is not working, too honest…;
but with quotes… maybe ill get away with it; I’ll just put that in brackets now and grab Woolf
notes later, but now I need some goddamn transition phrasing… SCENE 2

Trashy transitions
I don’t use the word ‘unfinishable’ in a negative light. Like Virginia Woolf, I am aware of the
incapacity of language to capture the totality of something I seek to capture. [[[WOOLF STUFF
HERE- QUOTES?]]
ME (monologue format): I have a problemà I am a poet and no one listens to me. I have
secrets to share the universe, but no one cares. No one cares that poetry is a living thing that bleeds
out of me and tells me more about myself and the universe than I would ever learn alone. NOBODY
CARES. This is a long, boring essay and it doesn’t have the ornate pictures or neat,
compartmentalized thoughts that Kew Gardens does. Nor does it have the finesse and authenticity of
a performed play. That is why I am honest—because there is no other way to fill in lost shades. Isn’t
this what I am supposed to do here?? Be a critical theorist that is so good at critique that they
critique themselves and the legitimacy of their profession out of existence? Shouldn’t you, Pro
Fessor, celebrate my honesty?
ME (facing audience/ YOU): Wouldn’t it be nice if I could write something like a
children’s book instead of a long, boring essay? Remember how easy it was to connect with
children’s books when you were kids??? It’s like, nothing gives you that anymore… … .. EXCEPT
for unfinished, nonsense, … MY NOTES that betray my scholarly SANITY. trash

ME (monologue format, talking to self): Well at least I’m writing
something, but unfortunately, trash monologues cannot be a part of
an academic essay…. And I learned the hard way that most professors
don’t like being reminded about how colonialis their decolonialist
research practices are.
This style of writing will be considered diatribic, too opinionated, and
suggestive of “inefficacy” and “circularity” in standard academic prose
and theoretization,… … … even though theory literally is circularity in
practice
. … these ideas do not fit in here,… but perhaps they would fit in an
alternative universe?
ME (cont.): I used to be a poet and find it easy to poetry(Verb),
explore and relate senses to senses. But now, ive been trained
well to scrutinize my senses, scrutinize my own scrutiny and the
scrutiny of others and the senses of others. That’s what you learn
in graduate school, skills, student learning outcomes. I’ve been
told that these SLOs are written as deliberately ambiguous. I
appreciate this because there’s space to adapt to different
perspectives of what is essential to a graduate’s skillset/
outcomes. Really, ADAPTATION is a skill everyone should
learn!!!
But ADAPTATION is not a ‘skill’ so much as it is an anti-skill,… it’s
like, similar to Being okay with living in a post-truth situation and
world, … having a million places to be and things to do

at once,… …
ADAPTATION … is the art of Being
The real mystery is why and HOW some people have convinced
themselves that they don’t “”poetry””” (verb)… OR “art” or “create”..
or go off on wild tangents

Like academics, politicians, scientists, and probably Me
and probably You have, at various times, pretended that
they knew what they were doing.
The truth= we are all just making things up as we go… what
matters is what underlying intention upholds that
PRETENSE or inhibition

But also, you are screwed if you try
to be a lone world here … there’s
freedom and captivity in equal measure

_
SCENE 3:
Scooped
________________________________________________________________________________________________
Zoe Elise Ramos Jmj
Dr. Pro Fessor
ENGL 5343
July 20, 2023
On Time (Graphic Complexity in Aaron Posner’s Chekov)
• A trilogy (with always the last part, the best part missing, no conclusions)
This paper is in the form of a playscript. Because I’ve always wanted the opportunity to
give my essays a soundtrack. And quite frankly, this is all I’ve got to share.
I didn’t know how to write this materialist analysis because my tools are complex, much
more complex than placing pixels and digits, and way more complex than reading and reporting.
I use research mostly as a survival tool and I shamelessly talk about what I want to talk about
and work towards a wholistic theory.
This is a post-disciplinary paper meaning that I am looking towards the future, thinking
about the self-mutilation that the commitment to academic parlance requires, and wondering if
there is an alternative path.
Autodidactic as I am, I will be honest about my limitations: the time crunch, my inability
to fully read every text that I am literally analyzing,… the fact that there are limitless ways in
which I could have found contrasts in the text that I am focusing on: Aaron Posner’s Life Sucks;
and too, I already had an argument before I even started reading the literature.
BUT after perusing some literature, I realized that what I wanted to say was way oversaid.
It is a strange feeling when someone 40 years ago has the same thoughts as you, the same
thesis as you. It’s like you’ve met your twin, but it’s only momentary. And you wonder if what
they were thinking is really similar to you or if you are just talking to yourself with everything
you reading, slowing building up your own egotistical thrusts, sensing of a feeling of knowing 1 .
That’s called academic scooping—when you make an independent discovery only to
realize that someone else wrote a paper about the same thing 30 years ago. In fact, there is an
entire field niche field of analysis that does exactly what you are wanting to do: The Journal of
Mathematical Humanities. That’s a thing.
__________________________
ME: **sits back on bed and gets back to typing furiously…;
now this is not academic enough; who is that one professor that
hates rhetorical questions??? What’s so terrible about rhetorical
1
A feeling of knowing

questions?? Is it because I’m supposed to pretend I have all the
answers?? Oh I’ll have to bracket that too
ME (to audience): I just got back my grade in discourse analysis. A ‘C’ with
comments on my final paper that can be summed up with the phrase
“scooped”. In their notes, I was told that my lit review should have included
two key sources that relate complexity theory to discourse analysis. I was
critiqued for writing about a paradigm shift in discourse analysis as though
this wasn’t already an acknowledged change.
The simple truth, I labored over a 20 page paper, moving from
philosophy of language, complexity theory, and math sources, tying these
considerations into a disciplinary applied linguistics thesis. Now I know
(thanks to my professor) that there are entire books written about the exact
hypothesis that I painstakingly built up to via an interdisciplinary reservoir
of sources,.. and these books tell the story waaaaay better than I ever could.
I was deducted points because i was LATE AS ALWAYS and because
any graduate student doing a simple lit review should have found these
sources… shame on me. This is what makes me bad at discipline. I should
have found those sources and geared my work differently, but I had so little
time. I knew it would be a terrible paper, at best unfinished. But I didn’t know
even attempting to write it would be so futile. I didn’t know that FUTILITY
was an option, somewhere between ‘good job’ and ‘bad job’… or between an
A and C.
TARA INCOGNITA: *Enters looking judgmentally at ME while ME continues
to type another terrible, garbage, unfinished paper; TARA talking to ME
while I still keep working on paper:
I’ve been told I lack time management skills- I guess I need to learn how to
train time, manage it, harness it, discipline it just like I am constantly trained
and managed. I don’t think my Time wants to do that though. My Time has a
mind of its own and it cuts itself into pieces on its own rather than me having
to do that for it. It thanks me for this freedom.

TARA INCOGNITA (to audience): A Lit review – what does it even do? Besides
sifting and sorting through texts, I mean. It all seems like something a
computer could do better. And then you have to labor into a “synthesis”
something that adds (?), summarizes (?), coheres (?) all the literature and
info together (??) or something like that, am I right? You basically ORGANIZE,
… no, no you ORDER these texts together so that they fit into a coherent
formula
ME: From my experience, that’s about how it goes.
TARA INCOGNITA: But, look at me for once!, just where the hell does the
magical ORDER come from? Is if from you [***points at ME]? From the
literature and its oh-so “””complex”” [**makes fun of intertextuality…?
ME: hey, complexity theory is the next BIG THING in every field. I just know
it, man
TARA INCOGNITA: bear with me. Is it from the professor, the environment,
enculturation?? Habituation, discipline, self-discipline?? More importantly,
what is your precious synthesis actually enacting, performing, doing with
itself?
ME: umm the lit review? Well… to be honest … [**TARA finally has ME’s
attention/ME stops typing]…
even my professors say that it’s impossible to be original. I guess what we
really do is find literature and put it together like a puzzle. That’s our job,
that’s the academe’s job, to caretake to knowledge
TARA INCOGNITA: Be honest though. Do you really FEEL that unoriginality?
Do you feel like you wave your magic wand that you get from a degree, and
put things together slightly more intelligently than ChatGPT? I’m looking for
things ChatGPT can’t do better than anyone from an academic standpoint
and I cant find many—amassing source information and placing it into a
concise, straightforward passage. I’m certain that ChatGPT would have done
a better lit review than you, that’s for sure. Maybe ChatGPT would have
gotten an ‘A’

ME: ***outwardly pondering; then JOKINGLY*** Ahh, but could
ChapGPT have ever so carefully talked ‘around’ sources that without
making any implications about the findings of the study that I can’t
make? Because 2/3rds of the sources I never had the time read, but I
read the abstract and I got the ‘gist’ haha.
Can you blame me? How am I supposed to magically become an
expert on this abstract topic and find the time to carefully read a total
of 1338 pages of scholarly text? 3 of my sources were full-length
books and let me tell you, I SURE didn’t read them in 4 fucking weeks.
I did that thing a lot where you say “NAME and NAME (2003)
investigated the rodent population following a venereal disease
outbreak caused by the eating of trash. Their findings were
inconclusive, but my own study will advance and contextualize their
findings and question by…” blah blah blah, [sung in an upbeat jingle
tune] using everyone’s research as stepping stones, so I can build
what it?!? I don’t know **smiling now **.
That move^^ gets me away with a lot and I look pretty smart too,
even though I’m literally in danger of being replaced by a thing that
only reads black-white (1-0s)… my, WHAT have I come to?
_________________________________________________________________________________________
[**after this scene, TARA and ME sit together for a
bit, distracting me from the very important final paper
being written… oh, who am I kidding, it’s terrible.
Everyone student knows that you’re not supposed
to “read” scholarly articles, terrible lit, TLDR stuff… you
skim them, get what you need, say thank you, pay the
girl and go home satisfied and unattached.]

TARA finally speaks, this time semi-seriously: Why does
it seem like professors like eating shit? Trash is all it is.
Trash by design, trash theatre, trash all the way down.
I’m telling you, the last living shred of human dignity and
truth is contained in trash. When you finally realize that,
then you are free from the necessities of academic pomp
… … really, the bullshit MATERIAL NOISE pollution that
seems to characterize this little universe
POETRY/ writing/ CREATING,… in its most freed
form is like a million different left turns. A single
move can take you somewhere bizarrely different
from where you wanted to be in the first place. This
is chaos in practice, because language is chaos in
practice. But be careful because if you veer too
much into uncharted territory (Terra incognita,
perhaps?) you will become very unacademic,
probably nonsensical, stupid seeming, incoherent
even [Is that scholarship doing its best work? Or is
that a flaw?
]As the best will say, DESIGN is made by
limitations.

As a biologist would say, the body is a lot of
things, most of which are still mysterious, … but
clear the body is pure LIMITATION too,… so much so
that you have to admit that limitations/
fragmentation are what make poetry/ Art
AND so-called FACTUAL KNOWLEDGE possible!
_____
To be continued
***AUTHOR’S NOTE: this “’play’” is based on a true story. To
tie-up loose ends minus a real ending, I am currently on
academic probation. Because honesty and good poetry is
worth it’s self-mutilatory exploration.***

About me
Zoe Elise Ramos (she/ they), aka ZER, is a visual poet and native Corpus
Christi-an. They are pursuing a Master's in English at TAMU-CC. Their research
is an interdisciplinary, creative, visual poetry thesis that challenges orthodox
tools of analysis in higher education. As a visual poet-scholar, they use
multimedia (i.e. photography, doodles, video, hybrid story-telling) to vividly
elaborate on and study multiple dimensions of complex problems; they value
genre-fluidity and the knowledge retained by ephemeral auditory, visual, and
scholarly components and thus, also experiment with media-engineering,
epistemic engineering, improvisation, nuttiness, and deep intertextuality. Their
thesis will explore how the arts and the phenomenal relationship of the senses
to a text impact empirical approaches to knowledge, especially in a manner that
predicates 'paradigm shifts', or whatever you want to call the dynamic ways of
the world, epistemic shifts that only few can forecast. They are the Creative
Director/ Senior Editor of Windward Review, a creative journal and blog based at
TAMU-CC, fully staffed by students and faculty. A corollary interest of theirs is
the teaching and practice of editing a creative journal and the collection of
creative voices. They are especially interested in freedom of experience, as
conduced through writing/ art, and how it is impacted by editorial structures and
oversight.