Ken wrote-

> I was surprised when Bruce responded with clarity... and quite
> pleased. I like it when people cut through the crap and find the concrete
(so
> to speak). Bruce thought I may be pulling his leg, again, but the truth
is I
> had no idea who or what a Lyotard may be. Now that I know I'm not so sure
it
> pays well to be enlightened.

Funny, people are always surprised when I respond to anything with clarity.

So the question remains, was the joke on me, but aimed by the gods of
dis-course. Was the whole thing a cosmic setup? It certainly led into
itself, within the context of what I was responding to I what I thought
that you had written.

Or is the joke that, for some of us either/neither les philosophes or G & E
are opaque. Was I arguing with a phantom, corporeal to me, but only
available to you, Ken, as an archetype of a form of impenetrable discourse.

Once upon a time I was a poet. I was lucky enough to have a book published
with a very flattering introduction by a very eminent statesman of the
craft.
In that introduction he referred to my alterego- the "voice" I had invented
to get something out- as "a latter-day J. Alfred Prufrock". I didn't know
what the hell he was talking about. What was he reading? Or, drinking?
There was a lesson in there somewhere, and I'm still trying to figure it
out.

Bruce