eriktrips

today is a free day so i could spend all my time here if i wanted. nothing to do and no one to see until later this evening when auditorium and i are slated to go out on the town.

so far the schedule has been go see film then go see another film and hang out in between films and then after second film with same people then go have coffee with steve while leaving a message with another steve that you would like to see him then afterwards driving lisa here and there because she is too tired to drive then go to bed at a decent hour last night and actually wake up before noon today. then tomorrow night you get to go see the mariners play and after that leave friday morning for the ocean to visit with non-immediate family returning saturday night and after that nothing inked in until wednesday morning when your train leaves to take you back to san francisco.

busy busy busy. sort of. except for right now when you are waiting for s and k to call you back. and you are borrowing computer time and thus you feel you shouldn't get too heavily into anything here because really at any moment you might have to relinquish the computer to its rightful owner. so you decide to spit out short multiple entries and see how that works.

to see is to be penetrated. there is no space for representation here but rather only events occuring at the boundary between outside and in. s and i were talking about representationalism and what is wrong with it and i thought to myself well what really is wrong with it and then it came to me that one thing that is wrong with it is that it still assumes an interior, separate subjective space for the representation of the real, something which itself only shows up as event between inside and outside.

to hear is also to be penetrated and to touch is to be overcome by something like the transmigration of souls.

perception becomes an event occuring at zones of interpenetration and the i that says i is an enfolding which occurs around the interpenetrations. the i is blind but sees nonetheless. too close to touch but touching nonetheless. enmeshed but able to say i nonetheless.

[upon taking a long walk and thinking about this]:

no this is not right. there is no reason the i can see or say i but certainly the i which is not is touching. it is more than that. it is enmeshed to the point where saying i is an absurdity but something the i which is not stubbornly does anyway.

i

i

i

this was supposed to be a certain autobiography and so it shall be i suppose. it will be story number two or at times maybe two and a half since i am thinking of launching story number three from within it.

i have a friend, the very k whose call i am awaiting, who has suggested to me that i write an account of What It Is Like and that i do it in reasonably easy to decipher prose rather than in that garbled poetic voice i am so fond of.

so i have started it now about three times and each time it doesn't do what i want it to do so i leave that file to languish on my hard drive and i am thinking maybe i could start it again here and then extract it later from what that which should properly be here and only here.

the question is whether to start it today or get myself dressed and out of the house now that the sun is shining a little and i am feeling somewhat underfoot here.