Not a bad approximation..
Deserves a fair response, if I can.
Basically, and given the general state of language of late - its perversion into rampant hucksterism/lies on all fronts, the loss of any 'political' categories which once signified at least *something* about their adherents .. I figure that communication itself has become harder of late, and often impossible.
Though some may see it so, I am not aiming for obscurantism or cuteness (well.. OK - some. times. :-\ufffd which I hope are evident). My belief is that, were JS Bach alive, or Mozart - they would immediately see and grok the insights in the driving rhythms of a Phillip Glass, and within the pure musicality and sweet intonation of a Bix Beiderbecke. Of course these giants were much more than the idea, innovator can suggest.
Similarly, as so aptly satirized by the late great Dane, Victor Borge - punctuation (!) is our crude means of trying to express that body-language which is all the difference between the spoken and written word. Shakespeare.. could be immediately comprehended anywhere! even if his sentences were converted by eecummings andrunalltogether. You'd Know how to reassemble them, from context.. But then - his genius is so far beyond the measurable, that we can't guess anything about his muse (which I have always deemed metaphysical, by whatever name).
Anyway, having no delusions about my place in the pecking order - all I can do is experiment with the rhythm of words as we usually hear them, even though I know the wise admonitions, conventions starkly set out for all time by Mr. Strunk.
Maybe 'script conventions' for playrights is in that direction (astute observation) - that material is after all, intended to be *heard* not read. Yes, I can play by the rules and occasionally have to, for other reasons - I still think we each need to know rules before deciding to break them. Gotta differentiate before you can integrate, maybe?
I expect some of my efforts to fail through ineptness or inattention at the time (mine or maybe other), but I suppose I have to experiment. Nobody has to read. My guess is that written language possesses at least the room for such experiment. It is after all, alive! or we would not need to buy a new dictionary ever..
A sentence reads quite Differently / a Sentence reads quite differently / etc. / depending upon the stressed word. Perhaps we shall sometime invent something beyond the Capital to so indicate .?. for all the rest of us who aren't Shakespeare. Writing, except in great haste forces some recollection and reevaluation in anyone - but the reader always has the option of switching channels. What could be fairer? since most of what we read and write just.. evanesces. It is for the moment.. and precious little for the ages.
Imagine - what was *lost* when the mob flayed! Hypatia and burned the library at Alexandria... THAT act alone encompasses the best & worst of homo sapiens Sapiens, a twitchy beast at best... Poor not-so great scientist Carl Sagan captured that horror well in Cosmos, I thought.
[anti-ad]
Meanwhile, let us hope and lobby in the direction that - no M$-spawned 'encyclop\ufffddia' or 'dictionary'.. ever comes to be taken to be: of any higher quality than that of their software, their ethics and their barbarian leadership (!)
[/anti-ad]
Ashton
all of life is a Play, to coin a phrase
:-\ufffd
