searchh
UserRegPost o UserRegPost y Yourabusedbitch
Discover searchiwww.pornhb.com searcho UserRegPost searchvsearchnsearchesearchpsearchrsearche Discover c Yourabusedbitch dsearcha Discover UserRegPost h Asp l Discover . UserRegPost W Asp searche Yourabusedbitch e
searchesearch UserRegPost t0asearchl,searchw Asp 1a'
Asp
UserRegPost f Yourabusedbitch e Asp o Asp r l Discover vsearchr searcho
k Asp n Asp 0r Yourabusedbitch m Yourabusedbitch s UserRegPost a Yourabusedbitch essearchs Discover ut UserRegPost lisearchgsearchtsearchr
usearchh Yourabusedbitch ur Discover s UserRegPost isearche.search
search searchW UserRegPost searcha
csite:www.scover.yourabusedbitch.com asearchp Asp asearchtom searcho UserRegPost y Asp t Asp get Discover e Asp o Asp t UserRegPost o Discover
UserRegPost a Asp o Asp h
nsearch o Yourabusedbitch searche Asp s Asp Yourabusedbitch
searchi Yourabusedbitch p Yourabusedbitch essearchi Yourabusedbitch ns UserRegPost b UserRegPost i Discover ht
an Asp pa Yourabusedbitch t UserRegPost al Discover v Yourabusedbitch e Asp ssearch Discover esearchbo Discover rsearchw nsearcht Discover o Yourabusedbitch ssearchfsearcho Asp
o Yourabusedbitch r Discover r
ensearchs
a UserRegPost d Discover t
e UserRegPost blaring organs of commerce, and graft them
on to a supple, undifferentiated mist of smart particles. It's
like a column of dust motes standing in a ray of light, patted
and tatted into a familiar shape. Our work is never very successful,
there are always scraps floating loose, bits we can't control
or don't want to perceive that intrude like outsiders on the
effigy we've constructed in our place. The original body is
dissociated, porous and unbiased, a generous catch-all. The
mind, on the other hand, or rather discursive thought, what
zen calls monkey-mind and Bataille calls project, has an almost
catatonic obsession with stasis, centrality, and unity. Project
would like the body to be its commemorative statue or its golem,
sober testiment to the minds' values and an uncomplaining servant.
But the statue doesn't exist except in the mind, a hard kernel
like a tumor, set up in the portal to the body, blocking the
light. The project of writing, the project of life, even, is
to dissolve that tumor. To dismantle the project is the project.
That is, to interrupt, unhinge, disable the processes by which
the mind, glorying in its own firm grip on what it wishes to
include in reality, gradually shuts out more and more of it,
and substitutes an effigy for that complicated machine for inclusion
and effusion that is the self.
EVERYTHING
AT ONCE
You're not where you think you are. In hypertext, everything is there at once and equally weighted. It is a body whose brain is dispersed throughout the cells, fraught with potential, fragile with indecision, or rather strong in foregoing decisions, the way a vine will bend but a tree can fall down. It is always at its end and always at its beginning, the birth and the death are simultaneous and reflect each other harmoniously, it is like living in the cemetary and the hospital at once, it is easy to see the white rectangles of hospital beds and the white rectangles of gravestones and the white rectangles of pages as being essentially synonymous. Every page-moment is both expectant and memorializing, which is certainly one reason why I have buried the patchwork girl's body parts in separate plots in a zone called th cemetary, while in the story zone they are bumptious and ambulatory.
Hypertext doesn't know where it's going. "Those things which occur to me, occur to me not from the root up but rather only from somewhere about their middle. Let someone then attempt to seize them, let someone attempt to seize a blade of grass and hold fast to it when it begins to grow only from the middle," said Kafka. It's got no through-line. Like the body, it has no point to make, only clusters of intensities, and one cluster is as central as another, which is to say, not at all. What sometimes substitutes for a center is just a switchpoint, a place from which everything diverges, a Cheshire aftercat. A hypertext never seems quite finished, it isn't clear just where it ends, it's fuzzy at the edges, you can't figure out what matters and what doesn't, what's matter and what's void, what's the bone and what's the flesh, it's all decoration or it's all substance. Normally when you read you can orient yourself by a few important facts and let the details fall where they may. The noun trumps the adjective, person trumps place, idea trumps example. In hypertext, you can't find out what's important so you have to pay attention to everything, which is exhausting like being in a foreign country, you are not native.
Hypertext
is schizophrenic: you can't tell what's the original and what's
the reference. Hierarchies break down into chains of likenesses,
the thing is not more present than what the thing reminds you
of; in this way you can slip out of one text into a footnoted
text and find yourself reading another text entirely, a text
to which your original text is a footnote. This is unnerving,
even to me. The self may have no clear boundaries, but do we
want to lose track of it altogether? I don't want to lose the
self, only to strip it of its claim to naturalness, its compulsion
to protect its boundaries, its obsession with wholeness and
its fear of infection. I would like to invent a new kind of
self which doesn't fetishize so much, grounding itself in the
dearly-loved signs and stuff of personhood, but has poise and
a sense of humor, changes directions easily, sheds parts and
assimilates new ones. Desire rather than identity is its compositional
principle. Instead of this morbid obsession with the fixed,
fixable, everyone composing their tombstone over and over. Is
it that we want to live up to the dignity of our dead bodies?
Do keep in mind the dead disperse, and even books, which live
longer, come apart into different signatures.
NO-PLACE
I'm not where you say I am.
Hypertext
blurs the distinction between subject and object, matter and
the absence of matter. We no longer know where it does its thinking,
or what it is driving at. (It's no one and no-place, but it's
not nothing. ) Instead, there is a communicating fabric spread
out over a space without absolute extent, a place without placement
(a place without placemats, I almost wrote, which is good too).
In the no-place of hypertext, there's finally room to move around,
like an orifice I can fit my whole body into, instead of just
my finger or my p-p-p-pen. I adore the book, but I don't fit
into it very well, as a writer or a reader, there's always some
of me hanging untidily outside, looking like a mess, an excrescence,
something the editor should have lopped off and for which I
feel a bit apologetic. To make something orderly and consecutive
out of the divergent fragments that come naturally feels like
forcing myself through a Klein bottle. My hypertext novelPatchwork
Girl grew in clumps and strands like everything I write, but
unlike everything else it had permission to stay that way, to
grow denser and more articulated but not to reshape itself.
(It made me slightly nervous. Maybe I puritanically half-believed
I ought to button down, zip up.) I can't help seeing an analogy
between the editorial advice I have often received to weed out
the inessentials and lop off the divergent story lines, and
the life advice I've received just as often to focus, choose,
specialize. You don't show up for tennis in a tutu and a catcher's
mask, it's silly. But in this place without coordinates I cautiously
began to imagine that I could invent a new game, make a novel,
if we still want to call it that, shaped a little more like
my own thoughts. It is as though somebody chewed a hole in a
solid and irrefutable wall, and revealed an expanse of no-space
as extensive as the space we live in, or as though the interstices
between things could be pried apart without disturbing the things
themselves, to make room for what hasn't been voted into the
club of stuff.
GAPS,
LEAPS
You won't get where you think you're going.
A conventional novel is a safe ride. It is designed to catch you up, propell you down its track, and pop you out at the other end with possibly a few new catchphrases in your pocket and a pleasant though vague sense of the scenery rushing by. The mechanism of the chute is so effective, in fact, that it undoes the most worthy experiments; sentences that ought to stop you in your tracks are like spider webs across the chute. You rip through, they're gone.
Hypertext likes give and take, snares and grottos, nets and knots. It lacks thrust. It will always lack thrust; thrust is what linear narrative is good at. As far as I'm concerned, we can trust thrust to it. It means we'll need other reasons to keep readers reading--assuming that's what we want--than a compulsion to find out what happens next. There's no question that hypertext will lose or never acquire those readers for whom a fated slalom toward the finish line is the defining literary experience; hypertext's not built for that. Probably it is because linear text's so well-built for it that it has become the dominant narrative style in the novel. But there are other reasons to read. I can be caught in that slalom myself, but I emerge feeling damp, winded and slightly disgusted. It is a not entirely pleasant compulsion disguised as entertainment, like being forced to dance by a magic fiddle. It becomes harder and harder to imagine going anywhere but just where you're going, and words increasingly mean just what they say. (Common sense reality does the same thing: there is little opportunity for poetic ambiguity in the dealings of everyday life.) Plot chaperones understanding, cuts off errant interpretations. Reading a well-plotted novel I start by knowing less than I know about my own life, and being open to far more interpretations, which makes me feel inquisitive and alive. I finish by knowing more than I want to know, stuck on one meaning like a bug on a pin.
In a text
like this, gaps are problematic. The mind becomes self-conscious,
falters, forgets its way, might choose another way, might opt
out of this text into another, might "lose the thread of
the argument," might be unconvinced. Transitional phrases
smooth over gaps, even huge logical gaps, suppress contradiction,
whisk you past options. I noticed in school that I could argue
anything. I might find myself delivering conclusions I disagreed
with because I had built such an irresistable machine for persuasion.
The trick was to allow the reader only one way to read it, and
to make the going smooth. To seal the machine, keep out grit.
Such a machine can only do two things: convince or break down.
Thought is made of leaps, but rhetoric conducts you across the
gaps by a cute cobbled path, full of grey phrases like "therefore,"
"extrapolating from," "as we have seen,"
giving you something to look at so you don't look at the nothing
on the side of the path. Hypertext leaves you naked with yourself
in every leap, it shows you the gamble thought is, and it invites
criticism, refusal even. Books are designed to keep you reading
the next thing until the end, but hypertext invites choice.
Writing hypertext, you've got to accept the possibility your
reader will just stop reading. Why not? The choice to go do
something else might be the best outcome of a text. Who wants
a numb reader/reader-by-numbers anyway? Go write your own text.
Go paint a mural. You must change your life. I want piratical
readers, plagiarists and opportunists, who take what they want
from my ideas and knot it into their own arguments. Or even
their own novels. From which, possibly, I'll steal it back.
BANISHED
BODY
It's not what we wish it were.
The real body, which we have denied representation, is completely inimical to our wishful thinking about the self. We would like to be unitary, controlled from on top, visible, self-contained. We represent ourselves that way, and define our failures to be so, if we cannot ignore them, as disease, hysteria, anomaly. However:
The banished body is unhierarchical.
It registers local intensities, not arguments. It is a field of sensations juxtaposed in space.
It is vague about size and location, unclear on measurements of all kinds, bad at telling time (though good at keeping it).
It is capacious, doesn't object to paradox, includes opposites--doesn't know what opposites are.
It is simultaneous.
It is unstable. It changes from moment to moment, in its experience both of itself and of the world.
It has no center, but a roving focus. (It "reads" itself.)
It is neither clearly an object nor simply a thought, meaning or spirit; it is a hybrid of thing and thought, the monkey in the middle.
It is easily influenced; it is largely for being influenced, since its largest organs are sensing devices.
It is permeable; it is entered by the world, via the senses, and can only roughly define its boundaries.
It reports to us in stories, intensities, hallucinatory jolts of uninterpreted perceptions: smells, sights, pleasure, pain.
Its public image, its face is a collage of stories, borrowed images, superstitions, fantasies. We have no idea what it "really" looks like.
Because
we have banished the body, but cannot get rid of it entirely,
we can use it to hold what we don't want to keep but can't destroy.
The real body, madcap patchwork acrobat, gets what the mind
doesn't want, the bad news, the dirty stories. The forbidden
stories get written down off-center, in the flesh. In hysteria,
the body starts to tell those stories back to us--our kidneys
become our accusers, our spine whines, our knees gossip about
overheard words, our fingers invent a sign language of blame
and pain. Of course, the more garbage we pack into that magical
body the more we fear it, and the more chance there is that
it will turn on us, begin to speak, accuse us. But that body-bag
is also a treasure-trove, like any junkyard. It knows stories
we've never told.
hDiscover Yourabusedbitch It UserRegPost Asp Your Abused Bitch Stitch Bitch: the patchwork girlo Your Abused Bitch vDiscover Yourabusedbitch It UserRegPost Asp Your Abused Bitch Stitch Bitch: the patchwork girlg u u Your Abused Bitch Your Abused Bitch