I here am working on a system of play. As you know, if you must, I am interested in author and in system these things I think being closed until they are opened. Take, for example, occupational disease to which moron7 links. You see here I was making my own connections, or at the very least juxtaposing two things so that the juxtaposition can create connections as opposed to things themselves. No ideas but in things, nothing but the thing itself, [calls for] a modification of thing. For example and here is another, the program that I have been using to manipulate the images saves them for web export as gif files. By them I mean the juxtapositions the program [fireworks, and other midnights] calls slices. These are linked and connected as things are and would be if [.] opened. I write infinities because I never know who will read. Take my font.

Though I must start from the beginning though we are taught that no timeline exists, and there is the idea that I should work without it. This idea I do not quite understand I mean I can project results that operate without timeline but the very word project assumes past from which to create the future. Though it is interesting too that project is a verb and a noun these being different and collapsing a syntactic structure that one might call a timeline as I have done, now. All these now’s flicker into and out of each other if I am [.] to believe a poet who says to erase the footsteps, only the present existing. Look around you.

And anyway this is what I mean by the face page, which in the code is named lol_face. To use quotation marks is to assume an inaccurate naming which of course I wouldn’t you see I read [which quite conveniently collapses past and present, two, too] Pound’s Imagist principles in all of its paradoxical glory it is the I am in love with the origins. Often I would like to return, as you see from the web slices which are named return and home. At home there is an understanding and home for this project is lol_face that is the poem behind it by which I mean that generated it. Here is the play, in senses of the word including Shakespeare’s and Ashbery’s or at least what I ascribe to them though I couldn’t without them writing it, by which I mean thank you it is quite lovely to read you and you quite consciously are behind some of this. This is a plot and paradoxes and oxymorons are all over never_saw_a_wall and all the world’s a stage as wax5 which links to STAR because it is, I mean.

I do not hesitate to mean because in meaning there are infinities. I will sew you a world. Here I play (again) with fakeries which sounds like fuckeries see sin if you will, I have titled it scissor work across the page because of Susan she is near and dear to me, these rhyming and autobiographical as The Midnight. Ta-da.

I play because the poem would have me do and the poem too is born of play, as that internal rhyme. I am being as straightforward as I can be without the narrative getting in the way. I love you too much to give myself away. Or, I love things too much, even the primacy. You see this poem is generated from a generated poem from another generation and so forth. Go forth into that gentle, as it were. Rise my children and go forth. Gather round for the story of Paul Revere who is excellently named as Dreamweaver which I use to play. I see Inception too and I cry at the end. An eye-be-em poem is a device and I have made it sound. A sentence. To recreate the incidence of words which is important to the form – at least as important as I’ve made it – I insert the first image for lol that google gives me. When I need the second image for wax I take the second image from my search. Here is another funny thing: google orders these in terms of popularity. That is, I am giving you back to you, in the sense that I am rearranging you because I have run out of ideas which brings me back to Williams and Stevens as I make it new; I cannot resist [you]. Apologies. These things are funny I think and also sad in a desperate sort of way – I miss you and when I remember I destroy you as Ashbery says all those feet on the sofa are mine – but it also means that I can create, nothing new but only different, us all being collections of experiences, of old’s of you’s. I am of you & you are of me I cannot tell where you leave off & I begin // selving.

I want to say too that I have taken more liberties than I am used to [taking]. That is I do, as the phrase connotes and denotes, as it acts. This is how it is, among other ways [of being]: I have taken more liberties from you, that is I have acted more than you which is funny you see because I am you. As you

know I am used to device I spend a year [a class] doing it to implicate it, these being synonymous. But as you are saying I am also of device, device being both as you would term it cyborgian though I’ve always hated science fiction I am drawn more to Duncan’s meadows than I am your machines, this being my paradox because still at once I want to return by which I mean[,] believe. Here I make my own decisions, my being your and etcetera, my sweet old. At points you see [.] I want to make lol_face beautiful and so I do and I mess up the order that the search gives me. I create juxtapositions and often I connect to things of multiple narratives already for example. In this I mean midnights though you might mean some[ ]thing else. Which is quite all right and lovely. I want to make it lovely because the ugly is destroyed and used in the lovely. Originally I have a page named rape which I change to mean lovely. I add a tattoo to a movie and then it is mine. And anyway what would you know, by which I mean it might be real to you though there are parts that are fabricated that I can’t possibly know. I mean I know them when I create them but I’m not sure that’s what they which is always elusive I think means by knowing or knowledge these being of different syntactic value.

In other words everything is real as a collapsing of value is implicated. The world is leveled as a writer of science fiction might say this is post-apocalyptic, which brings me to never_saw_a_wall in a different narrative device, a segue [which I think is from the French which is beautiful in this, a melting pot, thoroughly American. Though I’m not attached to this relevance.]. never_saw_a_wall is generated by a villanelle generator overlaid on the dictionary meaning of never, cut up and spliced, linked to things like gasp1 which is why I’ve put it next to push1, both of which I have named first though there are no others. There are all these things which happened first. Much of the same, a fragment, or two as too. And anyway the page is connected to things as I want. In much the same way speaking of same girls has within it, of it, haiku generated by a generator that somebody else wrote for me, as I’ve used it. I like that picture of girls it says for me what I want it to thank you google. A poet, a courtesy. One person one vote. For you and you and you.

And so forth. Please enjoy it. There are different narratives and you may [you will] discover. I aim to discover you. There is a survival and a happiness this peace by which I mean piece [you see I first type peace even though I mean the other, this back to you dear Freud, cliché-lover, perpetuator, these things loved and leveled without care] means, as pieces do. By which I mean this, if you’d like:

to

you came today in the early afternoon
you said. let’s go tomorrow
where. i said
let’s just go.
where. i said
yes. you said. you see. your eyes are very large