Tuesday 1 March 2016
Ceci n'est pas un dessin
This is not a medically approved mathematical operation …
This is not an insight into the Essence of the Number Three …
This is not the Royal Road to 19840 …
This is not a comment upon the intractable unreality of all Numbers …
This is not a jaded Christ Church don’s comment upon the futility of impressing the intractable unreality of all Numbers upon his all-too-real thickheaded students …
This is not a jaded illustrator’s comment upon the futility of impressing his creditors with yet another divagation illustrée …
This is not an image of an image which is not what it seems to be …
This is not the sort of thing which the general public has come to expect, thank god …
This is not the unexpected work of a far better artist …
This is not a clue to the fabled and elusive meaning of The Hunting of the Snark, for this is not clairvoyance.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Put a sock in it, Wittgenstein, we're talking snark here!
I submit for your perusal the word uffish in the above lines. Lewis Carroll explained it thus: "it (uffish) seemed to suggest a state ...
-
We're frolicking through yet another exegesis of my Snark GN … deep in the anapestic bowels of Fit the Second … We have arrived now at ...
-
Oh, you silly, mad, impetuous boy of a Bellman, of course you’ve heard it before! Your sense of exactitude may be lacking but as we shall de...
-
Martin Gardner, in his indispensible Annotated Snark, cites Eric Partridge’s assertion that the Baker’s use of antediluvian is "one o...
No comments:
Post a Comment