Kit, Mondaugen, Plato and Heidegger, 2

[bandwraith at aol.com]

On 08.02.2011 12:56, Keith wrote:

> I'm not Keith, by the way. And you probably don't
> have enough cash to make me play Keith for
> you, but...
>

-----Original Message-----
From: Kai Frederik Lorentzen <lorentzen at hotmail.de>
To: pynchon -l <pynchon-l at waste.org>
Sent: Wed, Feb 9, 2011 5:18 am
Subject: Re: Kit, Mondaugen, Plato and Heidegger

I have.

And you are ...

--------------------------------

No, but it seems to suit you to simplify. All
snow, or shit for that matter, is not the same-
neither are all Muslims or Germans. Simpli-
fication is seductive, however, and made easier
by the digital aspects of words.

The analog remains only partially described
by labels, and much of identity remains unident-
cal to its description. Yet for simplicity sake, the
description- the map- takes on the role of the
mapped. The part becomes the whole. These
wholes are aggregated into a new, more con-
venient reality. It's a virtual convenience,
though, and ends up being very fetishistic.

The seductiveness of digitalization is most
dramatic with respect to self-referentiality-
when the charismatic effect of one's identity
is tested socially.

With words, I can say:

 " I am painting a picture of myself painting
  a picture of myself"

One sentence- simple, convenient, easily
reproduced.

To represent this analogically would require
much more effort:

 http://www.artchive.com/artchive/R/rockwell/rockwell_self.jpg.html

So, words have easily won out in the evolution
of social self-awareness. Ironically, despite his
desire to clarify reality, Plato did not like writing
and felt it was a tool of sophistry. Maybe he had
an idea of the monstrosities it could lead to,
especially in the hands of bureaucrats.

Therefore, I will grant you this much: I am not me.
Put that in your pipe....

(How much cash do you have, exactly?)