ἐν δ᾽ ὄνθου βοέου πλῆτο στόμα τε ῥῖνάς τε

Il.23.777/ Butler

[Wasps, 1435]

ακουε, μη φευγ’. εν Συβαρει γυνη ποτε/ κατεαξ εχινον.

*

Listen, don’t rush off. In Sybares once a woman broke a pot.

*
κατεαξ < κατεάσσω (break) — ἐχῖνος (a pot, jug, pitcher; also the urchin, the hedgehog). Sybaris.

how could it be that the person who pursues “only money” participates more in the divine than the person who pursues “only divinity” — (because he’s pursued it rightly.) (I do consider, for example, that the person who pursues money for money’s sake is a more serious person, divinely or eternally considered, than the one who pursues religion for money’s sake.)

and you would also consider the person who pursues money to be more poetic than the one who pursues poetry provided he does it more “correctly” (mind, he doesn’t pursue money more poetically than the poet does poetry, but only more correctly, whatever that may mean, maybe what you mean is that he prefers it “for its own sake”) — (when you put it like that I’m less sure, I admit)

Well, certainly you don’t mean to say something like this: that the greatest general is also the greatest poet or that the greatest computer programmer is also the greatest plumber, something of that kind? (–certainly not–) On the other hand, you do somewhat wonder if the greatest poet might have been the greatest plumber if he had only put his mind and talents to plumbing instead of to poetry, is that right (– yes –) and on top of this you are thinking that there is something good and artful about anything that is done well, whether it be a computer program, an epic poem, or a septic tank repair; so that if a computer program is done very well it is not only a good computer program but also a better poem than a poem which is done poorly, or (no that can’t be right) but… more poetic than a poorly done poem? (…) What I mean is, when the military general or the plummer and programmer performs his craft well, when what they’re doing comes together just right, as you say, there is something good and poetic about that, although it’s not poetry or goodness per se — is that right? Is that what you’d expressed?

Well, I’m thinking now about a criminal. Is there anything good and beautiful about a perfectly executed crime, about what they call the ‘perfect crime’? I’m sorry this is something a little different I’m thinking of. To answer my own question I suspect not. I suspect not, but I can not say why exactly. I feel I might say what a good crime might be but I can not say yet what a perfect crime would involve. A good crime would involve disobedience to an unjust law, I think: the refusal, for example, to kill or punish an innocent person. Or taxes and Thoreau. But ‘the perfect crime’, all morals aside, seems merely to involve having a plan of some complexity. Right, don’t we generally think of diamond heists, art thieves and so on, or rather maybe we should be careful to say, don’t we generally think of movies of diamond heists and of thieves dressed in black hanging from ropes above floors covered with laser beams and weight sensitive plates. Perhaps ‘the perfect crime’ as it would occur in reality, that is, instead of in a movie, would be more a sort of mysterious disappearance than an actual heist, a totally traceless vanishing of a thing. We would never know if somebody took it or if it had just disappeared and maybe no one knew it was there or guessed that it was of any value. Maybe the truly perfect crime wouldn’t be a crime at all: maybe it would be a kind of joke? Or that crime is by its nature an imperfection — the holocaust, a blundering stab for something, Crime and Punishment (But I like what you just said: that crime, to be perfect, should not be a kind of theft or murder or what have you, which are too serious in the end to be perfect, but a joke)

What do you think a cubist or modernist version of a platonic dialogue would be like? It would be like a regular, spoken conversation I mean what would it look like if you wrote it down,

ὣς φάτο, τὸν δ᾽ ἄχεος νεφέλη ἐκάλυψε μέλαινα:
ἀμφοτέρῃσι δὲ χερσὶν ἑλὼν κόνιν αἰθαλόεσσαν
χεύατο κὰκ κεφαλῆς, χαρίεν δ᾽ ᾔσχυνε πρόσωπον:
νεκταρέῳ δὲ χιτῶνι μέλαιν᾽ ἀμφίζανε τέφρη
[Iliad. 18.22-25]

He spoke thus and a black cloud of grief overcame him,
and he took dust up in his hands and poured it over his head
he contorted his handsome face and the black ash settled
on his fragrant shirt.

Megawatt A large residential or commercial building may consume several megawatts gigawatt This unit is sometimes used for large power plants or power grids terawatt The total power used by humans worldwide (about 16 TW in 2006) is commonly measured in this unit […] The average strike of lightning peaks at 1 terawatt petawatt the total power of sunlight striking Earth’s atmosphere is estimated at 174 PW

*

The attack on Orleans was the only Central Powers raid mounted against the United States mainland during World War I. It was also the first time the Continental United States was shelled by foreign enemy guns since the Siege of Fort Texas in 1846. There were no fatalities. The Continental U.S. would be shelled again twice in 1942 by Japanese submarines during the Pacific War … Attack on Orleans

Romans 12:10:

τη φιλαδελφια εις αλληλους φιλοστοργοι, τη τιμη αλληλους προηγουμενοι, τη σπουδη μη οκνηροι, τω πνευματι ζεοντες, τω Κυριω δουλευοντες, τη ελπιδι χαιροντες, τη θλιψει υπομενοντες, τη προσευχη προσκαρτερουντες, ταις χρειαις των αγιων κοινωνουντες, την φιλοξενιαν διωκοντες

φιλοστοργος, loving, devoted; οκνηρος, lazy, troublesome, irksome ; ζεοντες < ζεω, boil ; προσκαρτερεω, devote oneself to, continue in.

in brotherly love devoted to each other, in honor excelling each other, in zeal not lagging, bubbling over in spirit, in the lord being a servant, in hope taking cheer, with patience in suffering, in prayer concentrated, holding the needs of the holy ones in common, practicing hospitality.

(KJV)

Cases pertaining to the Citizens United decision:

Austin v. Michigan Chamber of Commerce
McConnell v. Federal Election Commission
Buckley v. Valeo
First National Bank of Boston v. Bellotti
Federal Election Commission v. Wisconsin Right to Life, Inc.

“We should celebrate rather than condemn the
addition of this speech to the public debate.”
Justice Scalia, concurring, Citizens United

*

“Essentially, five Justices were unhappy with the limited nature of the case before us, so they changed the case to give themselves an opportunity to change the law.”
Justice Stevens, dissent

“Congress crafted BCRA in response to a
virtual mountain of research on the corruption that previ­
ous legislation had failed to avert. The Court now negates
Congress’ efforts without a shred of evidence on how §203
or its state-law counterparts have been affecting any
entity other than Citizens United.” [Sounds like recent Shelby decision]
Justice Stevens, dissent

“The only thing preventing the majority from
affirming the District Court, or adopting a narrower
ground that would retain Austin, is its disdain for Austin.”
Justice Stevens, dissent

[Citizen’s United vs. FEC.]

Darién Gap (Gulf of Darién) false friends . 613. Mezuzah…

Perotinitis Coronary thrombosis salacity apetalous overwinter

peent ; salafist ; doss ; Naoya Shiga ; Lambeth ; battuta;

American Heritage on difference between ‘continually’ and ‘continuously’:

Continual is chiefly restricted to what is intermittent or repeated at intervals: The continual banging of the shutter in the wind gave me a headache. Continuous implies lack of interruption: The horizon is a continuous line.

The Decline of North Carolina, NYT

By day, the brothers did the kinds of work that Francis felt were sanctioned by the Gospel. They renovated churches, tended to lepers, performed manual labor for farmers and artisans, preached, and prayed. They could accept a payment of bread and fruit for their labor, but they were not allowed to have money. Nor could they, in any way, save up for the next day. They could not own any dwelling they lived in. (They rented the church in the Portiuncula from a local abbot.) They could not store up food. They couldn’t soak vegetables overnight.

newyorker

……“[…] ἕλοιμί κεν ἤ κεν ἁλοίην.”

Iliad 22.253; Butler

ἀμφὶ δὲ χαλκὸς ἐλάμπετο εἴκελος αὐγῇ
ἢ πυρὸς αἰθομένου ἢ ἠελίου ἀνιόντος.

Iliad 22.134-135; Butler

In 1854, when the island’s deaf population peaked, the United States national average was one deaf person in 5728, while on Martha’s Vineyard it was one in 155 … Martha’s Vineyard Sign Language , by
……………………………………………………………………….Ossa, Bolide
…………………………………………………………………numismatist
……………………………………………………………….crissum tuff
Ball’s Pyramid population bottleneck black capped chickadee song
…………………………………………………………dispositive; Montague
…………………………………………………..grammar; Ultron;
……………………………………………….Mladen Dolar; caudal;
………………………………………….. latitudinarian Coir Banda
Natural gas is often described as the cleanest fossil fuel, producing less carbon dioxide per joule delivered than either coal or oil and far fewer pollutants than other hydrocarbon fuels. However, in absolute terms, it comprises a substantial percentage of human carbon emissions, and this contribution is projected to grow …environmental effects of natural gas

— can literary fiction (say, a Shakespeare play) be distinguished from commercial fiction (say, a John Grisham novel) on this basis of their word distributions (how many words are repeated in what ways how many times in these different genres)?

–a related question: will a work of literary fiction (a “classic”) have more “repetitions” than a work of commercial fiction?

— how are we to distinguish words that are repeated thematically (‘nothing’ in Shakespeare) from words that are repeated out of poor writing or another reason (is there a need to make such a distinction).

— given x number of words (the “author’s vocabulary” or “all the vocabulary the author is known to have used in print”) and y number of words (“the book”/ the number of words in his book) can we make an informed guess about how many repetitions that work might contain.

–Do people with larger vocabularies repeat words more or less often than people with smaller vocabularies, or about the same?

–Do early English literary writers (Shakespeare) repeat themselves more than late English literary writers (Joyce); how does it compare to the trend in, say, non-literary epistolary writing over the same period?

–How about across cultures as well as times? Does Virgil, Homer, or Shakespeare make more use of repetitions? How do the repetitions in literary work compare to those in a legal document, or to those in a collection of the letters of a college-aged student.

–How about with respect to speech? do we repeat ourselves more when we speak or when we write? Does Philip Roth repeat words more frequently when he speaks or when he writes?

–Suppose literary word repetitions (‘Nothing’ in King Lear) don’t indicate a ‘deeper meaning’ — what else might such repetitions indicate? Is repetition a rhetorical device, a natural consequence of writing with some purpose in mind, or something else? If I were to right down eighty words randomly would it contain more repetitions than a sonnet of Petrarch that had around the same word count?

From the Theatetus (trans. F.M. Cornford) (Perseus.)

Only there is this rule to be observed. Do not conduct your questioning unfairly. It is very unreasonable that one who professes a concern for virtue should be constantly guilty of unfairness in argument. Unfairness here consists in not observing the distinction between a debate and a conversation. A debate need not be taken seriously and one may trip up an opponent to the best of one’s power, but a conversation should be taken in earnest; one should help out the other party and bring home to him only those slips and fallacies that are due to himself or to his earlier instructors. If you follow this rule, your associates will lay the blame for their confusions and perplexities on themselves and not on you; they will like you and court your society, and disgusted with themselves, will turn to philosophy, hoping to escape from their former selves and become different men. But if, like so many, you take the opposite course, you will reach the opposite result; instead of turning your companions to philosophy, you will make them hate the whole business when they get older. So, if you will take my advice, you will meet us in the candid spirit I spoke of, without hostility or contentiousness, and honestly consider what we mean […]

forms of ‘v‘ during late middle ages:

During the Late Middle Ages, two forms of ‘v’ developed, which were both used for its ancestor ‘u’ and modern ‘v’. The pointed form ‘v’ was written at the beginning of a word, while a rounded form ‘u’ was used in the middle or end, regardless of sound. So whereas ‘valor’ and ‘excuse’ appeared as in modern printing, ‘have’ and ‘upon’ were printed as ‘haue’ and ‘vpon’. The first distinction between the letters ‘u’ and ‘v’ is recorded in a Gothic alphabet from 1386, where ‘v’ preceded ‘u’. By the mid-16th century, the ‘v’ form was used to represent the consonant and ‘u’ the vowel sound, giving us the modern letter ‘u’. Capital ‘U’ was not accepted as a distinct letter until many years later.

……………………………
…………………………*OZU page/ late spring

……………………………Pairs
……………………………Locations, Kanagawa
……………………………Locations, Japan
……………………………..Lane Shots
………………………………Directions Scene
……………………………….Speculations
…..

……………………………

ΜΗ.

δια μου κεφαλας φλοξ ουρανια βαιη.

*
φλοξ, φλογος (f.): fire. βαιη: optative βαινω.

*
Through my head walks a heavenly fire.

*
[Should, may, might cross?]