Numerics 4

Concluding our study of the "proto-numeric" inscriptions, a conclusion that must come quickly because of certain tendencies in the Consciousness, that if pursued, can only lead to individuation, we will briefly consider the image on the right. As with the Lists that we viewed earlier on, this particular page seems to exhibit the same kind of structure that depends on discrete items holding the meanings open. Next to each item, we find sets of the "proto-numeric" inscriptions. Unlike the cipher system that was earlier described, these inscriptions in black as well as in green do not seem to Code the "Language" in the same way.
What then, might the "proto-numerics" mean?
Consider the following transcription:

As ever - J Kyger - 20.00 - amazon used / $4.25

The "$" sign must indicate some kind of "transformation formula" that tethers the "proto-numerics" to the rest of the items on the List. Why then does "$" only occur once on this page? Perhaps that is not the right question to ask. Perhaps the question that would benefit our investigation is why it occurs at all. Did something happen in the construction of this List that caused the "Writer" to first forget what linked the "proto-numerics" to the list, recall, and thus anxiously inscribe "$" as a reminder? Is it right to say that the lone occurence of "$" does not represent the singularity but the ubiquity of the value hidden, or assumed in ALL the items on the List?

What burden of meaning and correspondence of Value does "$" carry and how are the rest of the inscriptions transformed into its terms?

Numerics 3

Continuing our study of Numerics, we should qualify that "proto-Numerics" (how foolish to assume an Ancestral mind able to deal with anything as complex as Numerics before the Networks and the Machine), we turn to what appears to be yet another us of these inscriptions. In the image on the left, we find two inscriptions that are by far the most common of the "proto-Numerical" inscriptions found in the "notebook". These particular markings -- "1" and "2" -- occur in almost every instance when the "proto-Numerics" appear. Perhaps they designate a fundamental conception of Being, akin to the building blocks of Our Consciousness: "Self /Other", "Other/Us" and "Us/Self". Of course, our Third Term closes the Loop.

Another characteristic we noted about these markings was the fact that they appear with an eliptical shape around them, almost like "➀" and "➁". Notice the difference between our attempts to replicate the image and the image itself. Our lines complete the encircling of the primary inscriptions but the encircling in the original is incomplete and its repetition in BOTH instances suggests a deliberately deferred circle. Perhaps there is an effect sought by all this: markings striving against each other, extruding, breaking into, holding spaces open.

You take the train silly, you take the , the or even the

Numerics 2

Then there are other forms that these "proto-Numerics" take. Instead of forming the regular permutations of the previous example, the "proto-Numerics" here seem to hold space together, in a manner that is not exactly clear. How, for instance, does the pattern "1145-145" bind space differently than "[3305]" does? Is it far too speculative to suggest that the gaps between the figures may suggest different significations? For example, how should one even transcribe the figures: as a single chain -- "0800-940S106101.089" -- or as discrete units -- "0800-940 / S106 / 101.089"?

Working on assumptions that
Cannot be proven true.

Numerics 1

In our discussion of the "paper notebook" we have not tried, as yet, to decipher the "meanings" or the Thought behind the inscriptions. We explained earlier that the general lack of familiarity with the stuctural interface of meaning called "Language" makes it difficult for our intended readership to appreciate how the inscriptions work as "imprints" of "'Language".

However, there are several images that use a signifying principle that we will be more famliar with. PANSHIN has traced bits of ancient code loitering the in recesses of the Network and has developed a theory that before our Systems of Numerics became as complex and multi-dimensional as they have been for at least 200 beats, there must have existed more primitive systems (6570.2). We propose that the following images contain representatives of these earlier systems:

Note the dark black markings on the image. There are 7 columns of inscriptions that then repeat themselves in a range of permutations. The rightmost column seems to be emphasized with a Graphic cordoning off. Why? Does it represent a privileged manner of using these inscriptions?

Then, beside that boxed of column we find these inscriptions matched with the more commonly used units of "Language". Is there some kind of cipher at work here, where the value of one kind of marking turns on its ability to stand as substitute for another?

Indeed, the markings from the page facing this, scratched in with the same dark consistency, seem to bear this theory out:

The Red Group

By now, our methods in catergorizing the "paper notebook" should have struck the reader as requiring some explanation: we are merely grouping the pages as they appear as images and somwhat arbitrarily making up catergories as we go along. This does not pose difficulties for us, obviously, for we never need to apprehend in part but it does tempt us to think about whether our Ancestors deliberately thought in catergories that we might approximate. Take for example, this next "group" (now self-conscious, the noun, it starts to assert itself and had to be tamed), which we have labelled the "Red Group".

The inscriptions over the next few images appear pre-dominantly in Red. There is material that seems to be writing in the margins and in the blanks that the initial Red inscriptions do not fill and we must presume that these markings were written in at a later Time. It is indeed a strange assumption to make, afterall, a "Writer" could have simply "written" in Red at different times as well, or "written" simultaneously in different colored stains. But we make this observation to draw an attendant conclusion: the "later" markings are significant because they do not occupy the same "semantic" space as the "initial" Red marks. Perhaps the markings in other colors are comments on the first Red markings or corrections.

The image may be examined more closely by Thinking on it.

These marks in Red have another interesting property. They seem to be composed of short bursts of "writing". Also, even the lay-out of these markings differ from the earlier undecipherably fuzzy images in that they do no seem to constitute a continuous extension of thought. A quick transcription of some of these Red markings will show this to be true:

Robert Burns
Thomas Carew
Thomas Chatterton
Kate Chopin
William Cowper
John Dos Passos
William Faulkner
Henry Fielding

While it is difficult to understand exactly what these markings may have meant in the larger Consciousness, it seems evident that the Red Group consists largely of a LIST of Names, much like our own Registers of Identity. Does this mean that our Ancestors had separate identities while they still inhabited bodies? We must not be too hasty to adopt conclusion. After all, some of the most meaningless conglomerations -- "States" -- also had names without having any distinct or discernable identities. In Manuscript studies, one must constantly be vigilant about the dangers of projecting into the Past our assumptions of Being.

In the spirit of description, here then are more transcriptions. If anything, they indicate the richness of this image "group" for further research and inquiry:

From Image Right:

Virginia Woolf -- A Room of One's own
Chekhov's plays
Gene Genet
Upton Sinclair
John Berryman
Thomas Chatterton
Fitzgerald - character names
Auden [ who met Delany .n Marilyn
Hacker when the two were
impressionable
daring]
Gertrude Stein

Stranger Still

The first "pages" that contain visible inscriptions seem to be written over several moments, as if the "writer" actually read the first inscriptions, was not entirely satisfied with them then went back and commented on them. The commentary is a strange mix of fact and desire, as if the "writer" wished that the initial imprint would inspire something more. This particular move seems necessitated by a culture that still existed in the singularities of linear time, unable to cycle through the moments as we now do.

Our unfamiliarity with "Language" makes it pointless to try to decipher what the inscriptions actually try to "mean". But that is perhaps less important than realizing that our ancestors actually even bothered to inscribe, bothered with the redundant replication and duplication of thought. It must have been a strange thought indeed, if in fact this practice was widespread, for our Ancestors to come to grips with the notion that their "Languages" and their techonology of mimicking thought in "Writing" would one day be erased and not even properly retained in the Determined Consciousness. As strange, perhaps, as the belief that humans were defined by what once was called "bodies".

Images 4 to 11

Images 4 to 11 are difficult to discuss because it is almost impossible to make out the inscriptions. For some reason, the relatively sharp imaging of the first three images is not replicated in these eight. This is a significant blow to our research because these eight images seem to contain a dense pattern of inscriptions. One can only imagine what these images would have said.

Still, in lieu of absolutely clear meaning, we should be still able to draw several observations that are useful. First, these pages demonstrate the dominant orientation already discussed in our introduction. Only Images 4 and 11 reflect a deviation on the left side of the "book". Perhaps it was conventional to rotate a "notebook" 90 degrees after filling in a certain number of pages, according to the Primitive Ritual of Superstition. One must remember that the workings of the Primitive Ritual of Superstition is so arbitrary that it is a pointless waste of Thought to try to work out its causes or ramifications.

Also note the strange shock of Image 8. The colors off that page indicate an inability to control the image, an inability to feed the right Density Index to the Network. It seems clear that these images must have existed on some precursor to the Network but one whose Information Nodes were not yet aligned with the Dominant Consciousness.

Finally, Images 7 and 11 exhibit markings that do not seem to be of the same system as the rest of the "writing" which are made in "Language: English". What system that these "othered" markings belong to is not clear, though SYMONS has made the conjecture that they may be akin to a form called "diagramming"(4733.13).


Images 4, 5 & 6


Images 7, 8 & 9


Images 10 & 11

Found

Item: 59 Images of what appears to be a "small paper notebook". These "books" (we shall call them that even though they are nothing like the "books" we are familiar with) were made of a material called "paper" and came without any markings on them (unlike their counterparts "published books"). Their function is obscure an one of the tasks of this study is to make speculations that will shed light on their use.

Actual physical books are now very scarce. In fact, most libraries only house images of "printed books" -- a more institutionally regulated sub-catergory of the "paper book". Thus, although these are images which seems altered and incomplete at points, they are the best extant indication that before the Networks and the Great Formatting, our ancestors did indeed have thoughts, recorded facts and feelings and considered it important to use inscriptions to mimick thought. Some preliminary work has already been done by our team of researchers, and we use that work where it intersects with our goal: to make these images accessible for further discussion.

Approach: This can only be an introductory survey of the images. We are fortunate that some individual, for whatever reason imaginable, thought that making images of this "notebook" would be a worthwhile enterprise. Of course, we should not immediately assume then that the Maker of the Images had an intimate relationship with the "book". Also, one must bear in mind that our lack of "physical evidence" makes it difficult to ascertain how widespread the phenomenon of keeping a "physical notebook" such as this one was. Thus, we shall leave those issues aside for the moment and focus on a description of the contents of the "notebook", as well as the physical physical properties of the markings.

Physical Properties: This is difficult to determine. However, given the resolution of the images and the pattern of pixellation KLOTZ has estimated that unopened, the notebook would have measured about 6 inches by 4.5 inches (3303.89) Opened up, the width would be naturally doubled. The book seems to have only a single hinge consisting of a set of dark wire-like spirals. Each page would thus have been folded over, filled in, and then turned over again. We assume that the book is 6 inches high because most the inscriptions make "sense" only when they are read in that orientation, However, there areparts of the "book" that are not aligned in this manner. Instead , the markings reverse the "height-breadth" relationship. KAM has made the argument that these adominant orientations are reveraling proofes of the basic spatial sense of our ancestors: that the "horizontal" and "vertical" dimensions of space were far more important than "depth", the "circular" or the "temporal" (4510.16). However we must caution ourselves against assuming that those spatial orientations form a continuous line with our own sense of "Space".

Inscriptions: Most of the inscriptions on the "notebook" are "written". Our ancestors used objects called "pens" and "pencils" and manually "wrote" out phonetic forgeries of thought. The act was thus called "writing" and so was the product. Thus "writing" (because it is both verb and noun) seems to be an early attempt to synthesize the Parts of Being. These phonetic attempts to reprsent thought derived from highly conventionalized and rule-bound systems called "languages". The "writer" (we assume a single producer in this study) thus "wrote" in a particular "language" system. The "language" system that is presented to us in this "notebook" was called "English". "English" was a dominant "language" of our ancestors from at least early in the Second Millenia, having been dispersed through the then known world by a small group of individuals who managed to lure and seduced less-evolved langauge users to adopt "English" (HINCH 3320.59). It probably remained the "language" of choice until about a hundred beats before the Networks were finally fully established. As with all "languages" it had its variants and this was apparently a source of considerable anxiety for this "writer".

The "Writer": Manscript studies often try in vain to re-constitute the ancestral consciousness that produced a "writing". The temptation is even more alluring given the nature of these inscriptions: there seems to have been a physical body actually making these markings. "Printed books" do not allow for the same possiblity as it is obvious that earlier versions of the Machine produced the inscriptions -- not our ancestors. It might be possible to argue that the "writer" actually commissioned some defective Machine to do the writing, but the sheer inconsistency of the inscriptions makes this suggestion unweildy. We thus might plausibly conjecture that this ancestral conscience did actually manually inscribe. Furthermore, the inscriptions seem to have been produced over successive "writings". We are thus lured into believing that an Actual Ancestor lived "in the flesh", that he "experienced" as he "wrote", in time and space. But these speculations border on the Metaphysical and cannot be the central concern of this study. Trying to answer who or what this "writer" was, and how he "lived" is not only futile, it is also a dangerous attempt to re-enter that forbidden zone: "Reality".