Entry 184 — More Nothingnesses

Poverty = |  |; wealth = |                                 |.

I don’t consider this a poem, I think of it as an aphorism and thus, informrature.

6 Responses to “Entry 184 — More Nothingnesses”

  1. Bob,

    I think you’ve got in this “informrature” (it looks like a “mathemaku” to me) the “zero-point” equation for the type of “post-human” engagement with the world that Slavoj Žižek recently talks about in his books. The poverty of physical reality can be reconfigured as, say, virtual world “techno-digital” wealth (particularly for those who control digital means of production). Consider the example of global warming in particular: the poverty of melting Arctic ice cap can be redistributed into so many capitalist opportunites for year-round shipping, urban development, etc. It is an expansion of current globalized rationales that produce “more nothingnesses”.

    It is informative in the sense of serving as armature for critical radical thought.

  2. Bob Grumman says:

    I’m pretty sure I agree, Conrad–but I was thinking more in simpler terms, that of the rich man’s nothingnesses versus, uh, mine. Glad for other ways it can be used. Thanks for saying hello.

    all best, Bob

  3. Kaz Maslanka says:

    I like it Bob – it is one of the better things you have done.

    And according to your good buddy Jesse Glass who claims to be an expert on real Japanese Haiku, the Haiku poem is really a type of aphorism.

    I think what you have done is quite poetic as well. But of course I focus on metaphor as the prime ingredient and you focus on your idea of beauty.
    Cheers,
    K

  4. Bob Grumman says:

    Thanks, Kaz. I pretty much agree with you about the difference between you and me as mathematical poets except that I’d phrase it slightly differently: I think we’re both interested in the metaphor, but you prefer metaphors about ideas, I about sensual images.

    As for Jesse’s comments, haiku are aphorisms the same way sonnets are essays. If you want to taxonomize, as I do, you have to decide which a thing most is, not just clump everything together. I feel my mathematical text here is much more a statement of opinion than an attempt to express beauty. If we take it as art, what can’t we take as art?

    all best, Bob

  5. Kaz Maslanka says:

    I don’t take mathematics as art – I personally draw the line at culture. Math is culture-less.

  6. Bob Grumman says:

    I was referring to the work of mine mixing math and words that I call an aphorism and others might argue is a poem. For me, it is not art. I agree that mathematics by itself is never art. Mixed with words, it can be.

    Is math culture-less? Well, it depends on what you mean by “culture.” I define culture (loosely) as pretty much everything human beings do beyond surviving and reproducing. Science, art, sports, games, philosophy, religion . . .

Leave a Reply