ramen sushı

 

well fukky we dont these days usually brave pandemıcs  aırportsecurıty dıscoverıng our secret collectıon of navelınt amulets  planespace and the hefty polloı logorrheaıng sports and gadgets  to chat ourselves meattomeat and ın the unrelıabılıty of memory weve only done thıs over medea ıtems but never medıa so whats doıng

dıap yknow strange tımes strange tımes

but fuk the tımes are always tımes that we say strange tımes strange tımes

sometımes we just say strange tımes

and sometımes strange tımes strange strange tımes

vemes and tharıatıons

dreams and lıxıvıatıons

ıts ramen dıap

love ramen

no ramen shushdy

fatwa ramen?

salmon dawdlelıve skınny和 sushıbegreatlypraısed

fatwa ramen

lotsa worms ın that prıckıng

jıhadı avatar meets the safety hour

bad taste dıap

do puns trump mannerısm

aneurysms dump fun

back to the agenda fuk

whats the agenda

pluck a dıngleberry from the ass of the rmn

rrheacostıve medıa network?

and all ıt ıs ıs ass

ass and maw

lets say at the outset though theres no outset that we decry vıolence

love sushı

we decry ıt but necessarıly partıcıpate ın ıt

necessarıly as the only envıronment avaılable to us ıs pervasıvely vıolent

so to sımultaneously decry ıt and partıcıpate ın ıt

dıssonance ıs our herıtage 

fragmentatıon our ınherıtance

blue and mellow mauve and trıte all are vıolent day and nıght

narcıssus shoves the lıttle whonyms of the whırled

there are degrees of course whıch do make a dıfference but to use the tıred ratıonalızatıon that you dont partıcıpate ın vıolence because youre not lıke that other who partıcıpates ın ways deemed more explıcıt and routıne

deemed

say truly ıf you prefer

truly ıf truer

to seem or to woo

anımalproductıon  fossılfueltravel  commodıty and spectacle  possessıon ındıfference neglect hıerarchy  language yes language too

no speech ıs free for speech partakes of a system of currency so costly and schızophrenıc  ıts prıce tags so hıdden and varıable  that everytıme our braıns backup and logosewage flows from the draınpıpe of our mouths a

lıke now

speech thats as enslaved as free

you know what they mean those free speech ıs the whole thıng ıts lıfe ıtself whonyms

ısnt ıt lıke guns dont kıll people do   an emotıonal magnet that contaıns aspects of some truth but ısnt the truth

famıly freedom love justıce vıtalıty health peace communıcatıon frıendshıp

whonym supremacy requıres vıolence for ıts sustenance  so does lıterature

and even ıf we dont belıeve ın thıs supremacy we are ıneluctably actors on the stage of ıts belıef and ınescapable practıce

so havıng saıd all thıs

havıng saıd all that weve saıd and more and havıng saıd all we havent saıd and less

havıng engaged ın enslaved speech and feelıng as dead as alıve

lets be bound by the vıolence of freedom

and freed by the vıolence of bondage

and stop talkıng

  bashıng through the flow

  ın our fucked mısshapen way

  wıth swords & shıelds we go

  laughıng all the way

  hells and cocktaıls rıng

  makıng spırıts brıght

  guns & -cıdes & thıngs all sıng

  a slayıng song tonıght

  dıngle hells dıngle hells

  dıngle all the way

  oh what fun ıt ıs to rıde

  on our fucked mısshapen way  hey

  dıngle hells dıngle hells

  dıngle all the way

  oh what fun ıt ıs to rıde

  on our fucked mısshapen way

anyhoo

anyhoo

we got thıs attack on one famous lıterary whonym whıle sımultaneously and throughout that day and every day there are ınnumerable equally unjustıfıed attacks on other whonyms and egregıously cruel ıncarceratıons tortures and slaughters of other lıvıng creatures that go hardly notıced or entırely unnotıced

ıs thıs dıscrepancy vıolent

certaın lıteratı are ıncensed shocked horrıfıed condemnatory

ıts a tragıc day for lıterature

ısnt ıt a tragıc day for lıterature every tıme a nobell pıllıtzer or bookers awarded

ısnt ıt a tragıc day for lıterature every ınstance a polıtıcan or executıve uses a poem to bolster ıts agenda

ısnt ıt a tragıc day for lıterature every moment a medıocre text ıs extolled and a great text forgotten

are you not ıncensed that lıteratures now a subsıdıary of capıtalısm

arent you hourly shocked that lıterature makes no dıfference  that ıts useless  that ıt gasps for lıfe ın a sacred land wıth no passage to the republıc of worms and knıves

dont you condemn the hıerarchıes nurtured by the lıteratı that are antıthetıcal to the very vıtalıty and breath of lıterature

arent you horrıfıed by the constraınts and abuses explıcıtly ımplıcıtly systemıcally smılıngly applıed to those who dont conform to the codes of creatıvıty establıshed by the lıteratı for theır own aggrandızement and comfort

lıterature sımply doesnt depend on vıolence but ıs ıtself vıolent   ıt uses vıolence and hıdes behınd vıolence for ıts very lıfe

and sınce were speakıng so freely or subservıently or howeverly or falsely where has anyone got the ıdea that wrıtıngs a safe and healthy actıvıty

has anyone not notıced that the norm ın hıstory ıs for wrıters and any others who questıon whonym clıches ın any of the manıfold ways avaılable for questıonıng to be far more frequently ıgnored abused kılled ıncarcerated demeaned sılenced than lauded remunerated protected

are wrıters wıtches or emperors  executıves or dıssenters 

thats why you go to ıowa and get an mfa

to become an exec  or at least a junıor exec  or at least a lıckspıttle to a junıor junıor subexec

to have a career ın art godamıt

have whonyms changed ın anythıng other than the words and artıfacts they use to express theır hypocrısıes  what proportıons of justıce freedom and vıolence are ın the dısproportıonate amount of medea attentıon beıng heaped onto the attack of the great sushı 

surely the attacks deplorable but there are a bıllıon bıllıon thıngs rıght now seen and unseen that are just as or more deplorable

frankly were not that shocked sushı was attacked but that ıt took so long for the zealots to get to the sushı

ı mean ıf you really belıeve ın a certaın kınd of god and that sushı mortally offended that god & that that god beıng god could be mortally offended would you not do everythıng ın your power to get sushı thoroughly and quıckly

shushı

ıncompetent zealots

but thıs attack agaınst shushı ıs a symbol  a synecdoche  and ıf we express the rıght measure of ındıgnatıon ın the proper ways ıt may mıtıgate agaınst ınjustıces agaınst creatıve expressıon elsewhere  and lıberate the movements of spırıt ın whonym socıety across tıme and space

laws for the named and laws for the unnamed  theyve entırely dıfferent parlıaments and theır cases trıed ın separate courts

so vıolence pıtches ıts tent ın meat and spırıt and should you only call meat vıolence or rather and typıcally only certaın kınds of meat agaınst certaın kınds of meat vıolence and spırıt vıolence somehow somethıng else what vıolence then ıs ın you

thıs lack of equalıty between meat and spırıt ıtself a prımary normalızed form of vıolence

thıs hıerarchy of names and the prıvılege of socıal vaulted ındıgnatıon ıtself a prımary normalızed form of vıolence

the vıolence socıety forcefeeds a wrıter whıch then becomes ıts dıet and molecular conscıousness

the exıled devoıced neurodıverse  and the one who turns theır face away to eat theır bruschetta and sıp the 1990 bordeaux and

and we are the one and we turn away

let us repeat and rerrheapeat  we dont thınk shusı shouldve been attacked  but that vıolence ıs ubıquıtous and has a thousand faces and were all ın thıs together and to select a rare ınstance of prıvılege promulgated by the rmn regardless of any worth and press that mıght be ascrıbed to the texts of the vessel of ıt who was attacked ıs to

woe to those who make sows weep and tear them from theır chıldren and drag them down to legal hooks on screamıng ramps leadıng to your kıtchen

woe to those who ın apathy and greed and the lust for reputatıon send wrıters to homelessness and suıcıde 

woe to those aghast only from conformıty and status

woe to those who say woe

woah to woe

as long as the computers are happy

a sadoo protest

we protest humanity's strategic imbecility (and tactical implementations of this imbecility) – that as a species we're investing most of our time, money, and energy into our hyperapex predator attributes (slaughtering more and better than anything else – and entertaining, numbing, inuring ourselves to this slaughtering) … and little into what is our most distinctive talent – an empathic consciousness that allows us to contextualize ourselves (individually and collectively) as part of vast and intelligent ecosystems, adapting our lives to this broader knowledge.

bambara

i, fukky, am in botszania with sadoo wuth kafecth, who lives on a bambara leaf and eats aphids

hey sadoo wuth kafecth

hey fukky

why do you live on a bambara leaf and eat aphids?

makes more sense than being an executive vice-president of strategic planning for a fortune 100 company or a scholar of repute intimidating the faithful

not to a lot of humans

but why allow humans to make sense? have they provided much evidence of making sense?

sadoo voyeurs are wondering why you live on a bambara leaf?

i’m responding to dominant strains in human evolution that we can associate with the jcc (judeo-christian-capitalist) lineage presently pervasive and sacred in the world – a lineage oriented toward violence, destruction, death

i don’t understand the connection

rooted in dreams of subjugation, inequality, and radical decontextualizing practices, this now dominant tradition stretches beyond the formative genesis myths in which a reputedly divine being, terrified of nothingness, creates a splendorous fortress of activity and words, reaching through the increasingly absurd and unsustainable bifurcations of christianity, its scholastic and enlightenment offspring, manifesting in global infrastructures of capital, knowledge, and new forms of enslavement required to maintain and build them

a somewhat reductionistic presentation of three or four thousand years don’t you think?

the human assumption that it has the right to consider itself superior to the non-human world, then acting on the assumption of this right, is minimally a great stupidity. a great stupidity. and tedium

but humans have invented language, science, culture … they have reason, consciousness, freedom

and then use it for barbaric, primitive ends

these are facile arguments. go be born a female in rural somalia and have your genitals mutilated then speak of the jcc tradition as inferior. you were so born into freedom you can’t appreciate it. you secretly want money and power and resent that you haven’t had the guts to seize them

these are all possible narratives. but sadoos, if not anything, are not given to single narratives – either the west is the best or the worst or something specific between; that humans are worse or better than other animals or things or gods or something specific between; that work, volition, stability, at least as typically understood, are any better or worse than non-work, non-volition, or instability or something specific between

so everything’s nothing

nothing and everything and something. many somethings

not some somethings more than other somethings

sometimes probably

doesn’t give one much to cling to

who needs to cling? one can perform a dialectical play – and these plays dominate entertainment (and by entertainment i include politics, religion, scholarship, and the majority of art) – opposing a jcc orientation of anthropocentrism, duty to subjugate, fear of void, and tyranny of volition (none of these which are particularly jcc but almost monopolistically omnipresent) to a vegan non-teleological orientation that is unsystematic (that is, plural), language-diverse (including non-human languages and silence), with rooted doubt, imaginative prowess and contextual resource use, advocating the latter … but doesn’t this opposition, this purported supremacy, then place us as much in the former as the latter, effectively destroying the dialectic and so the play?

resulting in a thesis? a synthesis? tenure? rhizomatous vitality? madness? śūnyatā? eyeware benefits?

sure

not too interested in the results?

i live on a bambara leaf

you eat aphids so you’re not vegan

aphids are just little sacs of plant juice with legs. legally acceptable limits are 3,500 aphids per 10 grams of hops, so any beer-drinker is quaffing aphids – i just do aphids without the beer

this is all very nice sadoo wuth kafecth but seems unevolved. your ideas, your lifestyle, your entire way of being have no relevance to anything. you’re impractical, delusional, hypocritical, immature

i don’t deny these adjectives. i accept them but not only them – i accept all adjectives. the human tendency is to respond negatively, oppositively, dialectically, antagonistically when criticized ... and positively, beneficently when praised. couldn’t we call such instinctual responses primitive, immature, delusional, hypocritical? they might be practical, but only within a longer-term impracticality, even as many perspectives and lifestyles are easily considered mature, but within a context that itself can easily be considered immature or rational but within an irrational environment

we know that sadoo dith smis asesn has spoken of the fear of irrationality leading to an excessive rationality that itself is excessively irrational

the identity of most humans is achieved by comparing themselves to other humans – and even then to a small subset of other humans, this small subset manufactured by a rabidly limited and comprehensively tedious collection of attributes

we’ve all heard that history’s a nightmare. is avoiding history death then? or is it something else? is the establishment everything of which i am not a part?

a president is excluded from street culture, a bum from state dinners, a lawyer from being an astronaut, an astronaut from being a mystic. the establishment, like the margins, is everywhere

it’s true – one person’s establishment is another’s margin, but commonly the establishment is something else

it’s commonly something else and i would like it to be what it is – uncommonly something else and so uncommonly us

the establishment is us?

and not us … if you’re alive you’re established

you’re a poor revolutionary

i feel neither poor nor revolutionary for i don’t place poverty on an economic axis nor revolution on a political one

so you’re an idiot

in the etymological sense, yes. sadoos tend to be idiots and idiots are those they admire. i primarily live what i would like to be and dance around those i would not like to be – as soon as i enter into their world (in any manner other than virtually) i’m not living what i would like to be as i become engaged in praise-offense games that don't amuse, stimulate, provoke, or enrich me. i can blame (or praise) exterior aspects for this, interior aspects, both … but blaming and praising are tedious, dividing exteriority and interiority is tedious

you're using tedious a lot

you know what sadoo li dew said

so you live on a bambara leaf and eat aphids?

and i'm only thinking about this stuff because you're here on my bambara leaf - normally i think about more interesting things. i drink plant juice with legs. i drink beer without the beer. i am a plural one who lives in play and plays who calls this living-playing art

you're a sadoo

i'm a sadoo

Fukky Doubts

today i, fukky, have in my studio sadoos flammarion and maf nir malo

we’re here today to talk about sadooing and esotericism

sadooing is a new-old movement that pushes esotericism into the without

that’s not entirely true

nothing’s entirely true

that’s true

sadoo flammarion’s from socotra island and sadoo maf nir malo’s from the plain of jars

actually sadoo nir maf malo’s from plain socotra

and sadoo flamarion’s from jar i-land

a curious thing in all this is that esotericism is an invention of scholars in the mid-twentieth century so we shouldn’t really take it that seriously

but we take ourselves seriously

well

didn’t your mother just pass away?

if there’s anyone i’d like to go to a cemetery with, it’s you

i wish i had 16 more mothers so i could experience 16 more mothers dying

that’s not nice

it’s true though

could we talk a little about the relations of truth and niceness?

academia, being concatenations of orthodox judgment disguised as knowledge and progress, is useful primarily for transanthropological purposes:  for outsider thinkers and poets, those barely human but found in human form, more of myth than time, loosened from institutional conformist bonds into the raunchy air, friends of possibility and freedom, to comment on the commentators – a rough governance and dark vision, a blurring of insides and outsides

academia’s recent discovery of esotericism indicates – like the rise of nomenclature such as mental illness, human resources, alternative, underground, diversity, and irrationality – a need, an increasing desperation, on orthodoxy’s part to further entrench itself behind moats of privileged rhetoric and hierarchical bifurcations

but you just said we shouldn’t take it that seriously.

one should never take it that seriously

only verbs should be taken seriously

and even verbs …

what i’m trying to say is that academia’s clumping together of impossibly myriad and contradictory movements under one umbrella term reveals its attempt to absurdly rive the world into an odd simulation of the christian universe:  the true and the false, the real and the deluded, the good and the bad – of course the academy being the initiator and protector of the former in each couplet, some impossibly superior and objective vantage maintained only through its pervasive enforcements

but these supposedly superior words – true, real, good – have all been deconstructed by the academy

only theoretically. it doesn’t have the guts to live its theory. this lack of guts is what most wholly defines it. a comic consequence of course is that one of its practitioners seriously advocates we have bodies without organs – the academy’s leading the way, its guts displaced to those who carry the world on their heaped shoulders

i’m interested in pursuing further these relations you establish between esotericism and other movements. it seems to me in my mingling with sadoos over the millennia that what academia has recently called esotericism is hardly new but a collection of discernible and irreconcilable strains in the human spirit that are some combination of antithetical, strained, revolutionary, parallel to the dominant forms of societal structures – from philosophical daoism to various forms of anarchy (primarily individual), mysticism (secular, aesthetic, religious), modern underground and alternative movements, art in its orientations that aren’t primarily commercial …

this is sadooity!

sadooity isn’t a set of irreconcilable attributes, it’s configurations of energies that present possibilities of a breaking through the simian human without negating it

an ubermensch?

sadoo friedrich was onto something but its attempt is only one element – think of it as a stroke on a large painting, a work in continual progress – that is attempting to show humanity a picture of itself as it might be

it’s the protest that never wins that includes the doubt that it will never win

a doubt called hope?

sadoo chuang tzu, sadoo simone, sadoo scelsi, sadoo thoreau, sadoo spiegel, sadoo bronte, sadoo william, sadoo emily, sadoo jodorowsky, sadoo oram … all these and tens or hundreds of thousands more, named and unnamed, work together in strange concert …

against …

against?

against, with, alongside … we require an uninvented preposition … oun … work together in strange concert oun the exoteric

what interests us is the psychology and psychopathology of configuration

specifically how mental processes, in relation to the external world, are configured – and reconfigured – in sensuous representation, from inner necessity and vision, into what is sometimes called art

sometimes called madness

esotericism is frequently considered a third pillar of western culture alongside doctrinal faith and rationality, deemed heretical by the former and irrational by the latter, thus exiled by the dominant structures of the heart and the mind, construed then as being configured problematically by the numerically and militaristically greater powers, the heretical now having to deal with the natural potencies of their inner necessities and vision and the alien potencies of others’ outer necessities and tyrannies. esotericism attempts to slip through these regulatory definitions, these forces, having no particular throne, refusing heart or mind any ascendancy, exploring forms not particularly exigent but emerging from shadows of reality, closets of time, …

… often considered hidden, unified, universal, secret, inner, enchanted, individual, higher, superior, these attributions have arisen from an antithetical collaboration between the orthodoxies – which use them often as mockeries – and those among the esotericists who (often legitimately) feel threatened by the dominant forms and attempt to balance power by claiming truer knowledge

is esotericism less deviations from orthodoxy or orthopraxy and more paths of sensations not yet walked?

esotericism is just other forms of specific, inner-outer, rational-intuitive, polydirectional, individual-collective knowledge eschewed by forms of orthodoxy, courageously exploring alternative paths concerned with powerful spiritual dimensions of reality as opposed to the merely exoteric religious institutions and dogmatic systems of established religions and skeptical rationality

esotericism isn’t hidden, unified, or universal – it’s as plural as orthodoxy. the difference is that it yields different powers, relies more on intuition, flesh, imagination: these dark and vermiculous roots. the best of it includes vigorous mind, thorough and contradictory experience, broad learning, and the fullest passions

esotericism is the dream orthodoxy needs to dream then analyze and sell

this binarism of esotericism and orthodoxy – is it inevitable? could there be alliances which lessen the threat to orthodox insecurities and lessen the persecution and poverty often endemic to alternative or underground movements?

these tendencies toward ‘hidden,’ ‘higher,’ likely have resulted from a binarism resulting from the alienation of scattered and less dominant language groups as they encounter more homogeneous and powerful language groups. these tendencies are an attempt at justice – at balancing different legitimate forms of knowledge in an overwhelmingly exploitive context

but are there other means of working toward justice?

some say hide within the ‘system.’ but not everyone can or should do this. when the system finds something esoteric it can use and that esotericism thus becomes ‘successful’ it gains the ability to influence, but the creator finds it difficult if not impossible to then continue to nurture the vitality of its forms, powerful as the orthodoxies are. anonymity, suicide, silence, deserts, exile, retreat – all these are options, but unsatisfying

we’re interested in pathways of renewing subversions, including autosubversion, crafty vulnerabilities, satisfying unsatisfactions, death intimacies as vitality, energetic negations, adventures of doubt-paths …

… the underground, subversion, protestation, revolt and revolution – these all now become faces of orthodoxy, in the way a new order or movement in the middle ages was assimilated into catholicism or even as we see the internet’s nascent ferality being coopted by political-capitalistic powers

isn’t this just a natural ordering that occurs in chaos’s rush and maelstrom?

mysticism is the maelstrom that never demaelstroms, calm in its never

take aesthetic mysticism for example. orthodoxy – in contempt, indifference, admiration – includes at times mysticism in its analytical baskets and dumpsters, as it plucks and discards exotic flora from the psychic rainforests of the world. it infrequently combines aesthetics and mysticism – not a wholly unworthy practice – and examines, for example, the mystical landscapes of a van gogh or monet, articulating how such artists reacted against the materialism, empiricism and secularism of the modern age through forged individual spiritual paths. none of this is untrue

but mysticism, not naturally fitting into purported scientific practices, defies orthodoxy’s taxonomizing and ratiocinating dna by being of different blood, of the root and apogee of religion. a modern aesthetic mysticism inserts itself not in nature or gods but technology, incessantly rawly vulnerable to the city’s plurality of voices, incessantly disordered and ordered in its disorderings

orthodoxy can’t include these forms without dismembering itself, so instead it dismembers its esoteric objects and calls this dismembering inclusion

isn’t that a bit harsh – if it weren’t for orthodoxy, esotericism would never be recognized?

the harshness of your question is the harshness of esotericism’s living

and what you state as true is only possible because orthodoxy tyrannizes over the modes of production and one must enter the maw of its tyrannies to be seen. sadoos – as all members of the esoteric, regardless of their differences – abdicate their identities to the extent they enter that maw and are re-configured according to the presently and historically greater force. their strength is their refusal to conform to the external and social dominant exigencies, not primarily as against but oun

the so-called liberal forces of orthodoxy typically pay constructive lip-service to many of esotericism’s forms, but these forms are deep and creative, generatively impossible from within orthodoxy, forms orthodoxy uses for its purposes. it refuses to come alongside in equality for such alignment would threaten its privileges. esotericism does the work of spiritual mining for the human and receives occasionally nominal or posthumous praise

isn’t this painting an excessively bleak picture?

dance to disney if you dare

with giant ears

in robes

tasseled

gravelled

every statement of purpose is foreign to the essence of configuration and this essenceless essence is where esotericism plays. orthodoxy has a purpose, esotericism is foolish and uncouth. orthodoxy is clear and alert, esotericism is blank, drowsy, muddled. sadoos are punx – not of any movement but in the etymological sense … spiritual bottoms, trouble-makers, worthless, unproduced, rotten wood dust used as tinder keeping orthodoxy warm and safe

i’m unsure i can remain a sadoo – it is too much of the everything outside.

and yet of the nothing inside

sadoos laugh, though they don’t laugh in the manner of bipeds in arenas. they laugh in the manner of the last poets in their blues of madness

the white death of our people is a genocide in your trunk

our revolutions of silence are your sudating nightmares

sadoo is everything you’re not and refuse to be

isn’t sadoo then also not-sadoo and thus sadoos aren’t sadoos and orthodoxy sadoo’s esoteric home?

sadoo is everything that is not that is

sadoo is the highest degree of vitality given the most consummate expression

we will continue to revolt according to our modes of revolution

and are these not just walking in circles around yourselves?

nested carousels are our path and vision

the horses ride us up and down in aimless transport

we are the equine pooper-scoopers of ourselves

the horses ride us up and down

we are the equine pooper-scoopers

the horses ride us

we are the equine

the horses

we are

horses

are