Talking to mathematicians about poetry

A fictive dramatisation of Vladimir Mayakovsky's tax return to pure scientists and guardians -

Dear Taxonomy agent:

Because I speak as an outsider, having never been awarded a medal or a mantle to pin it on, I cannot capture your definition and intent of what you do and how you see, obviously!, respected as it is. But is this an act of betrayal?

Claiming sole definition lives but complaining about malabduction or mismatched engagement as an economic injury? This is preciousness - beyond value and metaphysics - belies a theology of language, which is the author, Auteur, slighted political Pontiffs.   If respected definition must set up boundaries of ownership it becomes strategic, and semipermeability makes it all wobbly-woo.

Cover to Mayakovsky's book "Talking to the Taxman about Poetry"
photography by A. Rodchenko

Rarification of language can be ascertained with application and breakthroughs - allusions and allegories are the treehouses of scoundrels who articulate at distances, with their particular nuance and touch. Allusions and allegories are distant volleys. Traipsing botanists have a habit of shaking trees to get fruit, seeds, animals, and if indeed there is a tree house czars, czarinas, and Rasputins above, volleying distant allusions and allegories ...the fumbling botanist spoils the exploration, if the guarded Faberge eggs - cerulean blue, fall and crack. Let us hope that hatchlings emerge in the clumsiness of traipsing big footed botanists.

Pure science, pure reason, pure critique, pure identities? - fantasies

Why do some old stick-in-the-muds mathematics professors begin proofs as "Let A=A"? It is to remind that, amidst the student giggles, that the foundation, non-reflective algebra, is still symbolic and potentially can become something else. In an Alice in Wonderland way - this trajectory should suggest that A could equal X, that is why the stickler starts with establishing the frame of self-identity and solidity of mathematical value. If not, then, all that is solid melts into air... and can we have that?

 To overstep further to the precipice of mathematical ignorance, that the solidity of mathematics and algebra, of its self-identical and non-self-reflective nature that if we do not let A=A and A can equal something else, or it equates to a multiplicity of values within one algebraic symbol at this first axiomatic level of solidity and self-identity...

I wonder, and only fumble, that at this axiomatic foundations of algebraic, or even integer solidity (1 must equal 1, mustn't it?), that mutliplicities or complexities of value are unfolded in proofs and equations.

treeshaker without due research, but his
career depended on it - see climate change debate
between Monbiot and Bellamy. Bellamy slain.
10th May 2005 Channel 4 UK

That language - with its everyday misunderstandings already needs no unfolding proof of this, that language's multiplicity and ambiguities, zeugmas, puns, intended or unintended, are immanent.

Mathematics is hard work, for the complex state of multiplicity of value within one logical symbol. Here is a scatological example.

The word "shit" means many things - drugs, bad value, good value, agreement, a scream of sudden pain and the list can continue - that is economical in its many uses in four letters

the mathematics of this - s+h-it ... requires constant operators in the proof and to get an equation "=" is axiomatic. To be silly but serious that s+h-it= this blog posting ... well it is a lot of work, the mathematical operators in the proof working in a hydraulic manner - whereas shit (in words) is digital in comparison and really says it all. I hope at least I made someone laugh at my blackheaded pimply logic and maths in space.

Mathematics as language requires mechanisms, operators, no matter how clumsy or fine, swift and elegant. It has constructive filters and elements of functionality. "Science, It works, bitches" - is a pontification of the theology of function and analytical reason. "Working" is the grounding of science but working as the final refuge of czars, czarinas and Rasputins of Science? This attests to a certain attitudinal laziness or inflexibility of the sciences, also known as - that bitch has the best botox. Science has no idea to do with its indolence, its free time when money is not involved. This does not mean that individual scientists cannot wow me with scientific oddities, wonders or anachronisms. I think that is grand! I like how some scientists just hold back on the money.

Language is a math that has turned into air - solidity turns into hot air -the pontiffs tell you that you are dismissed.. Language, as a mathematic, does not require operators, or multipliers or dividers, squarers and rooters, - one word has several meanings, within written context, language hallucinates, hallucinates the reader. Language is already a multiplicity, of either blossoming solidities or semipermeable weavings.

One cannot hypnotise with the obvious power of math but with this - words, you can. Compliance to oblivion, you want, don't you.... hallucinate, hallucinate, hallucinate...

I have no science or philosophy career to lose. Sanity? Well, I don't take these writings seriously - it doesn't matter much to me.

Mayakovsky suicided at 37 years of age - prodigious and very ambitious. Grandiosity is to be danced with, with appropriate care and caution. Love to the reader, you have suffered enough! Now eat your pineapple xx

https://sites.google.com/site/poetryandtranslations/vladimir-mayakovsky