Storystyling : Cityface (three / three)

Ocean of Sparks

When the city is marinated in its own juices, when pollen’s kiss leaks down the thirsty, yet stately barks, it hovers through the avenues of mist. Within unlikely encounters between blossoming flora and overcast gloom, it meanders around the facades’ dreams of the interior they protect. It is a spicy ingredient of the city’s wild dance. It is a mild reflection of the river’s eye. It smells of the sea. It rains.

It rains clouds’ whisper. It echoes the river’s kiss. It dreams rain of buds.

When haze prevails, it withdraws into the protective shield the reflection provides. When the solemn frown of the cloud dissipates, it soaks the city with a spicy kiss of dance. As the breeze feathers the cheeks of the facades, it clothes the city in oily mist. While the river bathes in its own juices, it smiles the smell of its eye. It is day’s dream of moonlight. It is night’s thoughts of radiant facades. It rains.

It rains moonlight clad in oily mist. It whispers the sea bathing in the river. It is the rain it rains.

***

i think i know the smell of that whisper. i think i recognize the sound of that reflection. Because i know what the sea is and how the river looks. Because i know the color of the rain. It’s the color of language. It rains.

***

--how come thou endure when you were born?

--revolution occurs in historical records insofar as time is named time.

--wass yo name?

--belief in the permanence of the constitution of rights is founded in a misnomer.

--how is permanence possible if it is but an instance of proliferated variety of terms used according to the versatility of the perception of (un)realities and linguistic affinities?

--contrary to common wisdom, the revolutionary spirit is not sustained through the hope that there can be as many changes as there are dysfunctional regimes.

--do thou prefer a moniker to misnomer?

--mane is a silver reflection on a wavy, midnight ink surface.

  

я tho subject matter?

 / : whoo-whoo…

u don’t speak sabhilly well.

 / : tho wha?

instantly, i could detect a fascinating degree of aversion to allergies.

 / : while the notion of allergy by no means coincides with the concept of time, the fact has zero impact on declaring either zis or zet being nothing but a manifestation of the proclivity toward performance under the disguise of act.

to insist on the spoken word is no excuse for ignoring the rules of alphabet. having said that, one sincerely hopes that verbal manifestations such as “whoo,” “wha,” etc. indicate no blind spot about the familiarity with the accurate variant in all vocabularies, regardless of their pluralist playfulness, known as “ha”!

/ : exclamations, onomatopoeia, and linguistic tools of their ilk might easily be the most extreme examples of nominalist nature of discourse.

nominalism might not necessarily be related to the concept of name in the narrowest sense of the word.

/ : hey, wass yo name?

if history can be contained by the idea of revolution, it is not because somebody called time time.

/ : how can u endure if tho were born?

duree is like rays. persistence is inherent in such stuff.

/ : may one persevere in resisting being sold marmalade for shit, yo?

not buying into the discursive choice that allows sacrilege such as the notion of innate might enable reducing eathix off politix in cultural realities.

/ : lo!

you mean “yo,” innit.

/ : sure. we take no shitty consolation offered in the idea of reducability, particularly when it comes to the common denominator & some such stuff, ha!

sure. and yet, one shouldn’t be mislead to uncritically equate reductionism with the concept of the irreducible and irreducible concepts for that matter, ha!

/ : like phunk! no marmalade for shit. no concept is reducible to the role of social glue, innit. no marmalade for shit--that has always been the favorite slogan of ours.

who я wee?

/ : in addition to being sensitized to alphabet induced allergies, one certainly shows no predilection for ignoring syntactic rules. having said that, it is noteworthy that one can only ask: “ who am i?”.

if by an awareness of grammar you mean “syntax—off--syntax,” i couldn’t agree more.

/ : meaning wha?

meaning that there is no logical maneuver that can reduce the question “who am i?” to “whoo я we?”.

/ : like phunk! one can only ask ”who am i?”.

do thou declare, or, я thou, actually, asking?

 / .

***

When one was a wee ladd/ssie, at the age of three (while thinking one was still two), one conjured up a piece of the approximately following content:

yo rascalness /

do tho not hourglass

to the omniscient cymbalness?

although me doth not cry,

deep inside, me weepeth /

conversely,

while my face may look like an epitome

of misery to u,

my innerness emanates

glee that you might know, as well /

because it’s the language i can understand & speak.

and so can you.

it’s called the poetics of the remix.