Relatively recently I had a few conversations in which it was pointed that writing comes For some reader in the writers mind.
Who do you have in mind when you write?
Who will come to read this text?
Who is this writing for?
For my own future?
For someone who is into toilets or toiletry?
For a wind that never comes?
For someone who tried to translate this text?
For a lover?
For a pet?
For someone clueless in english?
For the space that kills time?
Who is this Text for?!?!?! Someone always asks.
to put it in AhaNese:
Who this text Lives for?
Yet.. (..and yets always peck my mind..) Considering this or any text devoured of meanings, devoured of language (hold on with that WTF thought please), nude in its bare attempt to engage, entangle with
thoughts, imaginations and wonderments – all meaningless –
Can we not claim that the writing comes to life
in Between a From and a Towards?
A naive way of thinking, sure. However, the animated is linked with life in human minds. Life as a movement.
Yet perhaps the life of text comes through a between movements? Between the animated to and fro?
a Between that may live as some kind of a cluster rather than a sequence?
a bunch of elements connected by convenience rather than necessity. A way of living that allows them to come into sequences.
Like spoken language elements, that live as a connected by nothing else but circumstances and therefore can, by various language speakers, find themselves re-sequenced?
Me go native
lives as well as
I go native
Lets’ indeed check the Native. The quality of using a language as a native, i think, offers a hint at the life between
From and a towards of a language since no human comes to life with what they may later call “native language”.
As an idea, native language rolls around questions from some quality a person is born with, something inherited, and some kind of raw, unspoiled qualities. Such ideas of Native seem curious since with language we can discover
that a person always learns to live as a native.
that which is “your language” was learned. A person may come to live with 2 parents who speak to them 2 different languages, and within an environment speakers of a 3rd language.
Which of the 3 languages are Native?
Perhaps a rare possible case, yet, the point is
that perhaps language, like how one eats, dresses and indeed moves with their body – are learned, developed and possibly evolving elements.
How all this connects with
Who do we write For?
For living as a moving, ever changing element, and
the other part that in case the writing has any curiosity to spend time with –
the reader may indeed alter through the very reading!
Is this the simplest way to put the idea??
here’s a simpler one:
Some readers, by the time they read this, may have already changed a bit since the beginning of this text. Indeed, this text too, may have changed since these lines were typed.
Does it mean all writing is For Supplementarity?? Or that writers write For inCompleteness?
Does it mean all writing is From Supplementarity?? Or that writers write From inCompleteness?
Does it mean all writing is through Supplementarity?? Or that writers write through inCompleteness?
Does it mean all writing is With Supplementarity?? Or that writers write With inCompleteness?
Zizek talks of toilets as exhibiting national characteristics.
Yes – however these come as an illustration of how ideologies operate. No suggestions all german, english, french and so on – are indeed such and such.
Yet, the fact we all do toilet one way or another to keep alive, however have various ways of thinking about the activity, ways that are learned –
does it not point at native learning rather than native one specific thing or another?
Write a writing for..?
Writing for Bulgarian speakers? – or should we ask about bulgarian culture speakers?
note – the name Bulgar as in Bulgaria, has to do with Mix. A mixing of people, a place of many people come together – or something to that effect.
How to write for english speakers?
English and native language #1
How to write for viruses?
How to write for humans?