Comments on: We have our mustache fill in Jason Kendall, thanks http://www.czwief.com/blog/?p=263 Wed, 15 Jul 2009 12:47:31 -0700 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.1 hourly 1 By: KrisBelucci http://www.czwief.com/blog/?p=263&cpage=1#comment-467 KrisBelucci Tue, 02 Jun 2009 00:58:55 +0000 http://www.czwief.com/blog/?p=263#comment-467 Hi, good post. I have been wondering about this issue,so thanks for posting. I’ll definitely be coming back to your site. Hi, good post. I have been wondering about this issue,so thanks for posting. I’ll definitely be coming back to your site.

]]> By: Cody_Z http://www.czwief.com/blog/?p=263&cpage=1#comment-410 Cody_Z Fri, 15 May 2009 08:14:55 +0000 http://www.czwief.com/blog/?p=263#comment-410 Virginia Woolf's To The Lighthouse is one of the best counterpoints to the limitations of film. Few novels have taken as great an advantage from their medium. Woolf is working against notions of the concrete in novels. In other books, we may be presented with dialogue, with descriptions of emotions and the reasonings behind them. The problem is that the world is not so neat. A person often does not think in complete thoughts. To even characterize real experience as thinking overstates the control actors have. Woolf is able to exploit this facet of existence primarily through her expert use of stream-of-consciousness. In penetrating the apparently concrete surface of thought and human interaction present in other works, her novel is able to plunge the reader into a world of half-formed impressions, glancing and unpredictable trains of thought. In this way she captures a truth about the essence of subjectivity often negleced, that it is untidy. Of course, Woolf's writing is not untidy. It's often breathtakingly intricate. Her method of writing conveys affective states through its syntax and style. A winding maze of subordinate clauses and parenthetical notes serve to mirror the tangental way in which human actors experience the outside world from within. One could write, “he woke up in the morning, got dressed and drove to work” and convey a coherent idea that is immediately intelligible and visible. But these events are really just artificial anchors in an otherwise chaotic experience. While he was waking up perhaps the first thing he noticed was an acrid taste in his mouth as he wondered wordlessly about a figment of a dream. While he was getting dressed perhaps he thought of his slightly sagging stomach, began to feel a cool breeze but was distracted by a spider crawling across the floor. Woolf's writing makes clear that, although these moments are transitory and forgetable, they provide the bulk of subjectivity. Woolf couples this with persistent qualification and modification of presented ideas. This has the effect of further undermining the concrete. In one of the best scenes, when James finally reaches the lighthouse, he is struck by the dual notions of the physical structure before him. It is both a highly powerful and strong symbol of his childhood, and an overwhelmingly ordinary piece of dreary architecture, cold to the touch. This is an important moment because it reflects on subjectivity generally, the insoluble problem that the lighthouse is not one thing or the other, it is both. tell that bitch to give me kiss // then I smack her on ass // throw a stack at her and laugh. // this shit to me ain't nothing. // how much money do you have? that's not up for discussion. Virginia Woolf’s To The Lighthouse is one of the best counterpoints to the limitations of film. Few novels have taken as great an advantage from their medium. Woolf is working against notions of the concrete in novels. In other books, we may be presented with dialogue, with descriptions of emotions and the reasonings behind them. The problem is that the world is not so neat. A person often does not think in complete thoughts. To even characterize real experience as thinking overstates the control actors have. Woolf is able to exploit this facet of existence primarily through her expert use of stream-of-consciousness. In penetrating the apparently concrete surface of thought and human interaction present in other works, her novel is able to plunge the reader into a world of half-formed impressions, glancing and unpredictable trains of thought. In this way she captures a truth about the essence of subjectivity often negleced, that it is untidy.
Of course, Woolf’s writing is not untidy. It’s often breathtakingly intricate. Her method of writing conveys affective states through its syntax and style. A winding maze of subordinate clauses and parenthetical notes serve to mirror the tangental way in which human actors experience the outside world from within. One could write, “he woke up in the morning, got dressed and drove to work” and convey a coherent idea that is immediately intelligible and visible. But these events are really just artificial anchors in an otherwise chaotic experience. While he was waking up perhaps the first thing he noticed was an acrid taste in his mouth as he wondered wordlessly about a figment of a dream. While he was getting dressed perhaps he thought of his slightly sagging stomach, began to feel a cool breeze but was distracted by a spider crawling across the floor. Woolf’s writing makes clear that, although these moments are transitory and forgetable, they provide the bulk of subjectivity.
Woolf couples this with persistent qualification and modification of presented ideas. This has the effect of further undermining the concrete. In one of the best scenes, when James finally reaches the lighthouse, he is struck by the dual notions of the physical structure before him. It is both a highly powerful and strong symbol of his childhood, and an overwhelmingly ordinary piece of dreary architecture, cold to the touch. This is an important moment because it reflects on subjectivity generally, the insoluble problem that the lighthouse is not one thing or the other, it is both.

tell that bitch to give me kiss // then I smack her on ass // throw a stack at her and laugh. // this shit to me ain’t nothing. // how much money do you have?

that’s not up for discussion.

]]>