by Corry Shores
[Search Blog Here. Index-tags are found on the bottom of the left column.]
[Central Entry Directory]
[Logic & Semantics, Entry Directory]
[Deleuze Entry Directory]
We previously looked at a contraband email heading, seemingly designed to be smuggled through email filters.
RE: Sei zeMar kdow nsOnCap su leAllThr ough outTheYear
I was impressed by how differentiations were incorporated so to heterogenerate a new formation of the text parts, which operated despite the incohering of the parts. I received this other one today which I found quite beautiful.
RE: Fan Your Sexual Crave seam brainpan
which was kindly sent to me by Samantha Adolphus.
Is this a code that I have been unable to crack? Am I supposed to get "Craving" from "Crave seam"? What does 'brainpan' have to do with anything? Was it selected for its phonetic beauty? Does one 'fan a craving'?
I suppose this was produced through chance operations. Is the idea that you need only have one suggestive word, and the rest can be gibberish? I honestly feel like I know what it means, but I cannot make it explicit without saying something that would seem inauthentic to the original.
I would like to ask if we could differentiate (1) a meaning being implicit (rather than explicit) and (2) a meaning being inexplicable. Implications can often be explicated. If I say it is raining, we might explicate one implication as being that the humidity is high. But I think we all might say we 'get' the meaning of 'Fan Your Sexual Crave seam brainpan', but is there a good way to explicate the meaning it implies? Do we interpret it as an instruction, as in, 'click this hyperlink to shop for a product with a certain use that might interest you'? And if so, is this instruction communicated by leaving much out of the message, so that we want to learn more?
Let's assume it is all as simple as that. It is a randomly generated sequence of words with one word explicitly suggesting what can be obtained by investigating further. What about its poetic beauty? Suppose that is by chance or just my personal taste. Still I wonder, what exactly is the property of language that allows random incoherent messages to communicate meanings or instructions in a way some might find beautiful? Does language operate on a level independent of interpretation or the pure sensation of the phonetics? Is there a sort of meaning that can be communicated with language without this involving the interpretation of its meaning or the sense-impressions it gives us?
I ask, because there are great lines with profound interpretable meanings and poetic presentations. We might think of one of the most famous, 'to be or not to be'. Can we really exhaust the line by giving all possible interpretations and analyzing every aspect of its poetic beauty? Is it not safe to assume in the first place all its meanings could never be exhausted, that it just keeps giving meaning and beauty no matter how much we explicate it? In other words, this thing I am looking for in the spam language is really something I find in a lot of instances of textual communication, but the advantage of the spam lines is that they might help us put-aside in our awareness the interpretive and sense-impressive parts of language to see if something else is being communicated.
[By the way, from time-to-time I try to place words together in a way not based on phonetics and associated meanings, at this blog here. I was surprised by how similar the formulations are to the spam message! Even the artificial pen names reminded me of the spam sender.]