Life in Vein

William Sharp, “Victoria Regia or the Great Water Lily of America (Underside of a Leaf)“ (1854), viâ Jeff Thompson

William Sharp, “Victoria Regia or the Great Water Lily of America (Underside of a Leaf)” (1854), viâ Jeff Thompson

Les Sez

In Terms of My Natural Life

(a pome crafted by Les Patterson)

I am an Australian in terms of Nation
And a Public Servant in terms of vocation,
But there’s one thing amazes my critics and that’s
How many I wear in terms of hats:
I chair the Cheese Board, I front the Yartz
You could term me a man of many parts.
I’m a Renaissance type, if you know the term
And I’ve held long office in terms of term,
Yes, I’ve long served Australia in terms of years
And in terms of refreshment I like a few beers.
My opponents are mongrels, scum and worms
Who I bucket in no uncertain terms
And my rich vocabulary always features
Large in terms of my public speeches.
My favourite terms in terms of debate
Are: “broadbased package” and “orchestrate”.
But one term I never employ is “failure” —
Especially when talking in terms of Australia!
For in terms of lifestyle we’ve got the germs of
A ripper concept to think in terms of.
Yes, in terms of charisma I’ve got the game mastered
In anyone’s terms I’m a well-liked bastard.

From the Back With A Vengeance Tour Brochure © 1989 Sir Les Patterson.


Elsewhere Other-Engageable:

• Sir Les’s Website
• Ex-Term-In-Ate!

Eight Speech

OCTOPUS

By Algernon Charles Sin-burn

STRANGE beauty, eight-limbed and eight-handed,
    Whence camest to dazzle our eyes?
With thy bosom bespangled and banded
    With the hues of the seas and the skies;
Is thy home European or Asian,
    O mystical monster marine?
Part molluscous and partly crustacean,
    Betwixt and between.

Wast thou born to the sound of sea trumpets,
    Hast thou eaten and drunk to excess
Of the sponges — thy muffins and crumpets;
    Of the seaweed — thy mustard and cress?
Wast thou nurtured in caverns of coral,
    Remote from reproof or restraint?
Art thou innocent, art thou immoral,
    Sinburnian or Saint?

Lithe limbs, curling free, as a creeper
    That creeps in a desolate place,
To enroll and envelop the sleeper
    In a silent and stealthy embrace,
Cruel beak craning forward to bite us,
    Our juices to drain and to drink,
Or to whelm us in waves of Cocytus,
    Indelible ink!

O breast, that ’twere rapture to writhe on!
    O arms, ’twere delicious to feel
Clinging close with the crush of the Python,
    When she maketh her murderous meal!
In thy eightfold embraces enfolden,
    Let our empty existence escape;
Give us death that is glorious and golden,
    Crushed all out of shape!

Ah! thy red lips, lascivious and luscious,
    With death in their amorous kiss,
Cling round us, and clasp us, and crush us,
    With bitings of agonized bliss;
We are sick with the poison of pleasure,
    Dispense us the potion of pain;
Ope thy mouth to its uttermost measure
    And bite us again!

Arthur Clement Hilton (1851–77), written at the Crystal Palace Aquarium.

Performativizing Papyrocentricity #34

Papyrocentric Performativity Presents:

• Roy des Fleurs – Scented Flora of the World: An Encyclopedia, Roy Genders (Robert Hale 1977)

• Art to Hart – Lives in Writing, David Lodge (Vintage Books 2015)

• Could Yew Kudzu? – Wicked Plants: The A-Z of Plants that Kill, Maim, Intoxicate and Otherwise Offend, Amy Stewart (Timber Press 2010)


Or Read a Review at Random: RaRaR

Performativizing Papyrocentricity #33

Papyrocentric Performativity Presents:

• Wattir an Wirds – The Strange Adventures of Mr Andrew Hawthorn & Other Stories, John Buchan (Penguin Books 2009)

• Caveat Lector – Will This Do? The First Fifty Years of Auberon Waugh, Auberon Waugh (Century 1991)


Or Read a Review at Random: RaRaR

Fiat Flux

Q. How many Guardianistas does it take to change a light-bulb?

A. In terms of an initial / preliminary response around this obviously loaded question, I’d like to begin by problematicizing the notion that it is possible to erect an overt illuminational hierarchy whereby notions of “light” are privileged over notions of “darkness” through deployment of an “objective” and/or “value-free” modality of environmental interrogation via soi disant “sensory” channels. Next, it will (of course) be vital to undertake an in-depth consultation-exercise / impact-assessment with any and all vulnerable minority-communities of ethnicity, sexuality, gender-fluidity and/or other alternate ontology. We must ensure, on a keyly non-negotiable basis of absolute core non-negotiability, that their “fringe” inputs are prioritized on an on-going basis in terms of the decision-making process taking place around the problematicized notion of “changing” the allegedly “dead” so-called “bulb”. Issues around adequate resourcing of the consultation-exercise / impact-assessment must be addressed as a matter of urgency, with ring-fenced contingencies in place safeguarding provision of all necessary trauma counselling for vulnerable communities and/or individuals adversely impacted on a negative basis by the “bulb”-transitioning procedure and/or (indeed) the consultation-exercise / impact-assessment it/them/self/ves. Furthermore…

The Son Also Rises

Vatican Clarification on Filioque

[…] We grant that the Holy Spirit proceeds principally from the Father, in the technical sense. That means, the Father is his principal without principal. It is not that the Spirit proceeds “less” from the Son. But that the Son, his principal, is himself from a principal. In short, the teaching here shores up the monarchy of the Father.

But it is odd to say that the HS proceeds from the Father alone in a “proper” manner. Is this opposed to an “improper” manner? Does it mean the term “proceeds” should not be linked to the Son? Does it mean that “proceeds” means only coming from an ultimate principal? Why then should the document include the expression “proceeds (ekporeuetai) from the Father through the Son?” Wouldn’t that be oxymoronic? Or is “proper” simply a redundant synonym for “principal”? These are questions. […]

• Vatican Clarification on Filioque, Thomistica.net, 7/xi/2014.

M.i.P. Trip

The Latin phrase multum in parvo means “much in little”. It’s a good way of describing the construction of fractals, where the application of very simple rules can produce great complexity and beauty. For example, what could be simpler than dividing a square into smaller squares and discarding some of the smaller squares?

Yet repeated applications of divide-and-discard can produce complexity out of even a 2×2 square. Divide a square into four squares, discard one of the squares, then repeat with the smaller squares, like this:

2x2square2


2x2square3


Increase the sides of the square by a little and you increase the number of fractals by a lot. A 3×3 square yields these fractals:

3x3square2


3x3square3


3x3square6


3x3square7


3x3square8


3x3square9


3x3square10


And the 4×4 and 5×5 fractals yield more:
4x4square1


4x4square2



4x4square4


4x4square5


4x4square6


4x4square7


4x4square8


5x5square1


5x5square2


5x5square3


5x5square4


5x5square5


5x5square6


5x5square7


He Say, He Sigh, He Sow #25

When the biologist E.O. Wilson was asked by a friend what to do about the ants that had invaded his kitchen, Wilson said: “Watch where you step.” — Christopher Potter, How to Make a Human Being: A Body of Evidence (2014), pg. 214