||[Dec. 20th, 2003|03:43 pm]
The Hammock School of Literary Criticism
As I was reading this post in my hammock, I was awed by the exercise of self-actualization. Let us observe.|
This pronoun denotes an individuality. But with the "too", a there is a plea to become two. He no longer is merely concerned with being the sum of one, but he wants to join with another consciousness. He wants to assent to an agreement -- a furthering of consciousness, if you will. sorbonne hopes to enter into a paradox.
This simile makes me smile. The comparison of an abstraction to a concrete object is ironic. Can an "it" like anything? It is the readers job to adress the question of personification.
This is a contration of "I am" -- a statement of being. Is sorbonne trying to suggest that existence is a contraction? Or is he implying that we are less than the divine "I AM"? Perhaps he is suggensting that, by living in a temporal reality, we are a less-than-existence.
in the love desert
In the love desert, we are without dessert. But, more specifically, by being in the love desert, we are not in the love rainforest. What is safer? In the love rainforest, we may catch love malaria by the love mosquitoes. Worse yet, we may be poisioned by some of the love plants. In the love desert, the problem is that we may die of love thirst.
sorbonne is trying to suggest that our times are outside the brackets.