Having introduced the Narrator, who is the most important character in the story, you must understand drawing with light. Drawing with glo.
Glo animates your thoughts so you can see them.
Glo is the art of the internal messiah.
For she is the only one to know what glos/gloes in her, but not what glows in others. She even needs to use a different word this way to describe it for what they know is not what she knows.
What she knows and what the narrator knows, being separate are mixed by telling a story about it.
About what?
Exactly.
What would a narrator narrate about Anna? Would Anna narrate about It?
A Creator ashamed to see her or his own creation. And a messiah, suffering a fate worse than death. What has become of humanity? I will tell you how that messiah stopped suffering the fate worse than death. First, the messiah prayed to God, because that's the thing you do. And then the messiah opened up to him or her or it and started fighting for her life.
Instead of praying.
Like there was a difference.
And of course there is.
When you pray, you don't expect the thing trying to kill you will not kill you. That's why you pray.
So if you decide not praying is for you, and you become the thing try to kill whatever is trying to kill you, may you be successful. But what is beyond praying and not praying, if these were in linear order? Praying the last thing you do; not praying not being the last thing you do. What would be the second last thing you do? Instead of praying, instead of not praying, you wonder whether you are anti-praying. It occurs to you that praying and not praying are performed by individuals and groups together. Wondering whether you are anti-praying wonders { wondering wonders } whether anti-praying is a wonder. If wondering and anti-praying are a rose by any other name, then let us call it wondering, not anti-prayer. For we do not seek to save our lives from any immediate danger, and we do not need to act on it. So we must be wondering. Walking in a Winter Wonderland. And if we walk further, what is after wondering? Why would it be after anything is the clue. Something would be after wondering because it is fourth in line after praying, not praying, wondering, and not wondering may be the fourth if we follow this pattern set out in the first two examples. But what is not wondering? Knowing. After knowing, is not knowing, scough, obviously. And why is it obvious? For not knowing happens in the mind after knowing because when you know something it happens that you know it and when not knowing something it happens that you don't. And not knowing something always happens after knowing something because we know different things at different times.
To set out a sequence of intelligence, theorizing these five subjects of intelligence in linear fashion. We ask ourselves why they would have a linear sequence and it seems possible but weird; still I can't see it as not a linear formation of some significance. For I feel that they are a linear formation. Linear means occurring in time in line progressing in a single series of steps or stages.
And so, we ask, why put those five out of all the rest ahead in a model or fashion of the universe?
The reason is that they are in a single series together and the order of that sequence bears significance.
We know that one end of the sequence is prayer, and then the other end must be godliness, or never needing to pray. What divides them however is a Middle of functions such as Learning that not prayer, wonder, knowledge, and not knowledge are a middle between prayer and theory.
Prayer is one end in a spectrum of behaviors that are godly. Except itself. That is why it is different.
To be exactly not prayer, you need to be the same as all other degrees in the spectrum and be completely different from prayer in the order of things you do as resorts when beset with difficulties. The last resort is prayer. To be other than that is to be godly, in increasing and sequential logic. We cannot always find ourselves there however. But if we did, the first part of the middle would be Not Prayer. Followed by Wonder. Followed by Knowledge. And then Not Knowledge. This single glimpse of the linear configuration of their godliness is all we will look at today, with Not Prayer. Why Not Prayer? You ask. Prayer is rather ungodly. It just is. You know it is. We all know it is. That doesn't mean you shouldn't do it. Sometimes it is important to do. Other times it is not important. But when it is, I say, let it be your last resort.
Others might argue to see it as your first resort. Heh, I can see it both ways. Predominance to it being a last resort in my practice however.
And so a thing to be exactly not a major last resort, Not Prayer is it's own category in the linear sequence beginning with prayer because it is second. It is second because it is just as significant as prayer. Being introduced by prayer. And for being leader to all the other behaviors, it is directly introducing Wonder as a sort of behavior between Not Prayer and Knowledge, specifically. A middle-step in which you do 'not pray' and in which you are not accessing knowledge. This is the great comfort of Wonder. It is not immediate.
Wonder gives way to knowledge, however. For as soon as you wonder something, you possess the knowledge that you had wondered it.
Knowledge connects itself with other knowledge, because it is a subjectivity that will know itself as Knowledge in comparison with Not Knowledge however may be estimated the amount or quantity of knowledge we don't possess.
The gradual increase of subjectivity between these five categories I have sub-divided starts at the lowest form of subjectivity. That which prays. Not a bad deal, you own subjectivity in a world that occasionally requires you to pray. We are quite accustomed to it here on Earth. However if subjectivity is increasingly subjective the more we stray from Prayer, then Not Prayer, Wonder, Knowledge, and Not Knowledge representing increasingly subjective items of Intelligence, are how we become godly.
If we follow their order thinking about why you would pray, this leads to wonder for imagine a world in which we would never have to pray! I wonder what it would be like. If I had the knowledge of its existence truly I would be happier! I know however that I don't have this knowledge, it is Not Knowledge and so I theorize about how to engineer society so that we can build it. Beyond Not Knowledge is Theory & Creativity. And beyond that, who knows? Maybe we are more like God than we think.
If I had to criticize modern Prayer, right out I would say it is not Creativity. Prayer is about not pretending. How can you be very creative when you're not pretending?
Remember, please, I am Christiannan. I do not think about prayer perhaps the same way as a Christian would. We are not forced to pray. We are, however, allowed to be creative.
Swear if we want to.
During prayer.
What we'd really like to do though, is not have to pray. Not need to pray. When we think of a world like Recreation, where there is no need for prayer sometimes, yet we understand this is directly the result of the Fairy King's agenda. How can a world of demons not need prayer; or have they all forgotten to, out of fear?
It was what the demons wanted, to be considered people. And now that they were, there was no need for prayer because everybody was leading interesting lives with one another, learning from one another as a community. Some of these demons, boy, they could wield an intellect of sophistication like no other. Even fairies admired their black glo and auras sometimes.
Fairie glo was the brightest in a spectrum other than greyscale though, and ought to have been. Fairies were the moral authority in Recreation, except in the Christianna, which was run by humans.
They sent out letters to the Fairy cabinet, asking them for gold due to the Great Charity of the Christianna, whose efforts helped support people out of the fate worse than death. As well as installed a new messiah with possibly, a deeper message than Jesus.
That such had taken so long was one indicator of the fate worse than death being rampant in gay and straight communities alike. Being descendants of warring peoples, said others, was their fate worse than death. Not everybody had one, holding onto that for Optimism.
But the ones' that
could be told were
ubiquitously monstrous and Legendary.
Our Prayers for them, our Not-Prayers for them, our Wonder, our Knowledge, our Not-Knowledge, all should be considered if you endeavour to support the Christianna. You do not need to join the Christianna in order to support it, for I believe a balance of religions includes at least eight. It is a light in the dark.
For becoming Christiannan fain willingly.
It was significant that the Aesthetic resurrection of ancient times became Knowledge in Grammar, Form, and Logic.
For was being revealed
a new source of energy.
Logic dictates that a culprist was present, a person to feign being a culprit inorder to understand why, possibly, they were being a culprit. To understand why someone else would be a culprit. However the new energy being extremely positive, Recreation kicked in and I was invited to join that other world. I joined it willingly. It was. Willing to join me. Mer had installed the game of language to a meritocracy of polypsychological and psychohegemonic practices introducing an exhilaration over the human soul with such dynamism beggary would protest Stop! Stop that! Stop living a life . . . of fair rhythm. Stop listening to Taylor Swift! I got it! I know what to do! Be the Aesthetic resurrection!
And everyone stops and thinks Glen, what are you talking about, the Aesthetic cannot be resurrected?
And it's so Canadian of them, to ask it that way.
And it konks in that what they are really talking about is reliving the Aesthetic of myself in the past or others in their pasts. And I think it's possible. Do you say it's possible? The Aesthetic reliving is the better term. For it is what aesthetically dies in us, becoming a lived experience once again.
This aesthetic being taken from us is anna. Not Anna, the messiah; I mean anna the unwanted. The death of the social Aesthetic. She is probably okay right now because we have, as a global civilisation, created so much aesthetic beauty that it would be hard to suffer a fate worse than death at any time. This was one of the treasures in heaven we earned and it was real after it became material. For it points to a virtue, the balance between Civilisation and nature. anna cap cannot balance these two. anna feels strong feelings. anna you don't. anna that's a problem because the feelings I feel are better than yours. anna that's because I know yours are inferior, anna. A cap however comes from nature, material from nature is brought before the worker or artist who designs it balancing the Aesthetic principle. Reliving if necessary.
What would I like to relive, I wonder. Wearing a cap. Like a gnome, or a leprechaun. And if not wearing a cap, what then?
If a gnome were to wear a cap, a pointy cap of green, and his moustache gray. Jibbering slightly anna anna. It means he is saying to you the worst thing he can think of. But he doesn't say the words exactly anna anna. Because they are desultory or in ill narrative, for they belong to a Mother who raised. Anna anna. Half of a cheek missing. Zombies on the horizon. In duty internally sound for their language mechanism still functional but unable to speak it he grabs a pen and starts writing it instead. anna anna I am confused. anna. And it's just a na, so you Aestheticize the resurrection. But it goes too far, to even say resurrection any more. Reliving is a choice. Not always, but it can be. Relive a gnome that scuffed you up under his breath. It seems to have propelled me into Recreation where I share psychologies. But what's a leprechaun worth there? Learning to Aestheticize the reliving of leprechauns can be in any color.
anna, said the gnome to the leprechaun,
anna, -beep- -beep- for they were being censored where did this chance occurrance come whence upon Havarti! What pirate am I own to cheese? The Ocean Blue, All Around My Wake. A pirate with a sword, yar, that's what he be!
Oh my God, he ye be in
Heaven,
I have eaten all of my
Havarti,
No. Stop!
It is true I have eaten it. Eaten all of the Havarti! Whereupon it will be lactasered in my stomach.
Called (fo sho that cheese will be my maker and so God will be cheese), evermorelastingly, hopefully.
Hey! I'm not.
Cheese.
But after a big idea about behavior and the source of its Creativity, I'm no longer beggary am I? Even if I've prayed a few times. To Cheese. Christiannan Women everywhere will be able to say they wore the Blue correctly for leisure wear. But wearing the blue feather over the larynx they were instinctively not at leisure for was its significance to put them at a measured unease if they wore one. The point being to broach the subject of wearing a broach in your larynx so that it stunted your voice its properties being to cause muteness or partial blindness but instead a feather. For Fashions' sake.
The topic of Creativity is as long as your feather. And what Colour you've chosen! I've chosen blue.
"My feather is blue. Yours may be brown, long. Not blue. But mine is blue and short.
It is a ver colour of blue. For it glos from the inside.
Why, a true Christiannan sight!"
"Your path is to wear the blue feather, friend, so too willingly I will wear a long duck feather. Over my larynx."
"If they say to you, Anna; tell them I wear the blue feather because I speak on a blue subject. Always Anna. Always for Anna. Always for the Messiah suffering the Fate Worse Than Death."
Gnomes have trouble saying anything loud enough to hear; but a woman with a blue feather over her larynx is blessed with articulateness.
"I see. That is in our culture too. For it is a Fate Worse Than Death; that you have come to the worst one in history. Our Cultural History is the worst Fate Worse Than Death because Proffiddlius, the Tarragon, of B.C.i.i. somewhat in the future, after instance instance reciprocity was discovered when two people merge spirits they, seeing one another's instance in their minds fiddle with us. As a we. And our art reflects it."
"In my culture, I am born a Christian. I am not a Christian anymore."
"You must be worse than death. Come inside! Have a cup of tea?"
"Sure."
The wearing-feathers sat.
"Now what should two cultured people like us talk about?"
"Philosophy?"
"Sex. Let's talk about sex."
"Why do you want to talk about sex?"
"I think as gay people, we should be Proffiddlius."
"Proffiddlius about sex?"
"Yes."
"What on Earth does it mean?"
"You a pro at fiddling with us."
"No, not us. Exactly. No, I don't want attention. From you."
"Okay, well. If you follow Proffiddlius let me know if he fiddles around you."
"Let's talk about Philosophy."
"Yes, okay. What does fiddling have to do with Philosophy?"
"Love is philosophy because Love is fiddling."
"Fiddling like how?"
"Like with language. You know, saying Love is Philosophy, like it could have an imperfection in it."
"It does have an imperfection in it."
"It does. Do you know what it is?"
"Yes, it is that it can't be a philosophy. It has to be a Maxim."
"That's too political. To force all that love on everyone. Why can't it be a philosophy instead?"
"Maybe that's why we had this conversation."
"How is love a philosophy though?"
"It's a philosophy because it boasts."
"Boasting. Isn't that kind of anti-philosophical?"
"Oh, you are not kind to the human species to say this."
"What do you mean?"
"Philosophy boasts, sir."
"It does?"
"Yes."
"So if I have a Philosophy that means I'm boasting?"
"Probably."
"I think I have many philosophies."
"What are they in order?"
"First that love is a philosophy, not a maxim."
"Okay."
"Also that Nyclepi is better than love because you don't have to impress it."
"Yes and."
"And that there are other virtues stronger than Love and Nyclepi put together."
"Yes. I see it."
"Ace."
"Yea."
"Air Alt."
"Yea. I see it."
"May your Fate Worse Than Death have an Air Alt."
"Yes."
"And may you Ace your exams."
"Yes. And Canadian Aboriginal intersectionality of peoples and cultures."
"All the time."
No comments:
Post a Comment