Friday, February 13, 2026
Thursday, February 12, 2026
Wednesday, February 11, 2026
Tuesday, February 10, 2026
Sunday, February 8, 2026
Babble, Babel, ... Asemics / EZE, 2026
Asemics is not about non-sense per se, but it is about making relationships, often by way of disparate mapping.
Hence, asemic writing is often a mapping of writing, which usually concerns language, to the graphic.
Yet this type of mapping sometimes escapes the linguistic aspect of writing entirely, and once the linguistic is escaped, the basis for interpreting an asemic communication as non-sense is also escaped.
How so?
In the case of asemic writing where writing becomes art, asemics often forces a genre shift.
As such, an asemic mapping does not necessarily produce non-sense because the terms for non-sense (writing as an act of communication based in language) have shifted to writing as an act of art.
Art allows for non-sense in a way writing does not?
Paradox too is a different context for something very much like non-sense.
Consider Zeno's Arrow Paradox in regard to the distance an arrow travels: the mathematical explanation entails that the arrow never reaches its target. The explanation offered by physics dissolves the paradox.
Hence, a genre shift allows us to escape a basis and thereby resolve a disparity invoked by a basis.
But what of this question in a different direction where asemics begins with something non-sensical and then re-maps it?
The outcomes here are multiple.
We often produce meaning from non-sense, and we would thereby have sense construed from non-sense.
But we might also have non-sense as our outcome.
And then too, we might have an asemic outcome with the meaning of this act left in question.
Saturday, February 7, 2026
Thursday, February 5, 2026
Wednesday, February 4, 2026
Predatory Hegemon in a Toy Kingdom / EZE, 2026
Do toys have lives?
And what about people?
~
~
AI Overview
Toy Story narratives are fundamentally about the cutthroat politics of securing loyalty and affection within a competitive, closed society.
A Machiavellian reading of
Toy Story positions Woody not as a selfless leader, but as an insecure autocrat wielding power to maintain his status. Driven by the fear of replacement, Woody manipulates the toy society, employing authoritarian tactics to secure his position as Andy’s favorite. His initial actions against Buzz Lightyear mirror the political maneuvering of a ruler eliminating a rival to maintain control over his "kingdom".Woody as the Prince: Woody operates as a ruler who prioritizes maintaining his power (Andy's love) above all else. His authority is absolute, with other toys acting as subordinates in a small, closed, "tribal" system, a dynamic similar to the authoritarianism discussed in the context of political power.
The Threat of the New: Buzz Lightyear represents a "new prince"—a disruptor threatening the established order. Woody’s hostile, Machiavellian reaction is to manipulate and neutralize this threat rather than foster a cooperative environment.
The Machiavellian Dilemma: Woody's actions are driven by fear—specifically of being irrelevant or replaced—prompting him to take drastic, often unethical, measures to retain his position, which highlights the central Machiavellian tenet that it is safer to be feared than loved, although he ultimately seeks to be both.
Saturday, January 31, 2026
Thursday, January 29, 2026
Tuesday, January 27, 2026
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)