Replacement of
lobster – note straight lines versus curvilinear original.
As I recall, the
Café Luca he mentions used to be a multi-level hairdresser to die for (I was
cut by Frank, the Iranian). Now we have popup hairshops with themed interiors;
one has a sign, “Enter a king, leave a legend”, presumably meaning they cut
your throat!
(secluded garden)
This is another
neighbourhood which has bits of leftover patches. What I’m getting at is a
development is the opposite of decadence which is pure spontaneity. There is a
sort of rustic feel evoked by tall grass and leaning shrubs. I was once on a
rundown chateau in France and we went about scything long-grass, butterflies
would fly about, psychically soothing. Reaping the harvest also has a certain
grimness to it; in a decadent situation there is the cycle of life and death.
So, a
development as such may have good coffee and art but has much less meaning.
Your compatriot has a picture of happy people – see the false dream C4. Quite
a lot of French file through and they seem to like it too. It’s the old problem
that an illusion can be very convincing – like Newton’s knives C5.
Here’s a picture
of stained walls from Bilal’s Gods in Chaos…
..where outer
Paris is a pigsty of urban resentment and actually fantastically picturesque.
Perhaps a festering sore is picturesque? The quote is apparently Baudelaire.
In the story –
part one of the Nikopol Trilogy – powerful divinities of Earthly
proportion – Horus, Bastet, Thoth, Anubis – are forced to apply to Paris’s
totalitarian governor for fuel for their hovering pyramid. I suppose that can
be taken as a comment that the divinities have lost their power over Earth and
instead need power to fuel their rocket.
If rockets
travel through perspective space (prev.) can one assume that is a parallel
reality? A parallel reality is usually taken to be something that runs on
rails, as CL Moore describes (Tales of Faith 12)
However, all our
technology tends to follow Newtonian principles (C5). Before Newton
scientists tended to proceed by way of deduction from the general. Scientists
observed the world then deduced, say, that the sun rises in the east.
Newton changed
that by initiating controlled experiments that were induced from the particular,
making observations on the experiments. So, he induced from observation of the
particular to general statements (principles).
This has been
taken to be scientific method till our own time. But what you can infer is
that, by inducing from observation of the particular (experiment), one can do
without proportion of the general. Meaning sun and moon.
So, did Newton
invent a parallel reality that does without a general sense of
proportion? Proportions are always deduced from the general, which one sees in
trees, animals, stars, sun and moon.
In olden days,
that would have been the universe; after Newton that is just what we see, but
it is not the universe. The universe is now disproportionate or, as I tend to
say, it exists in the head (the observer of the experiment.)
That was Newton’s
revolution, because a certain type of head is needed to perform experiments.
This was a danger foreseen in The New Atlantis (Idol of the Den Hyborian
Bridge 22). Experiments, which are linear and logical, then become general
statements of principles on our reality.
The inference is
we can do without proportion in the general, meaning trees, animals, moon and
sun. The ancent reality of death and revival. Man chases animals through forest
and over hills. Diana hunts with her hounds by the light of the moon.
Man kills and
the carcass is dismembered. Blood, ravens, the scavengers of the air,
harbingers of battles. Carrion nurtures carrion feeders; decay regenerates life
(see Elrig prev.)
This entire
cycle of dirt and cleanliness is denied by what you could call a parallel
reality of hygienic experiment. Anything to do with dirt and decadence is
proportionate of physicality (physique). It’s the physical world of strength
the modern world has left behind.
