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:
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
Hacker when the two were
impressionable
daring]
Gertrude Stein
No comments:
Post a Comment