any excuse to give Henry Reed’s great poem an airing. As you may guess this was set in WWII Britain, a new recruit going through training. (Don’t fret, this may go somewhere.)
To-day we have naming of parts. Yesterday,
We had daily cleaning. And to-morrow morning,
We shall have what to do after firing. But to-day,
To-day we have naming of parts. Japonica
Glistens like coral in all of the neighboring gardens,
And to-day we have naming of parts.This is the lower sling swivel. And this
Is the upper sling swivel, whose use you will see,
When you are given your slings. And this is the piling swivel,
Which in your case you have not got. The branches
Hold in the gardens their silent, eloquent gestures,
Which in our case we have not got.This is the safety-catch, which is always released
With an easy flick of the thumb. And please do not let me
See anyone using his finger. You can do it quite easy
If you have any strength in your thumb. The blossoms
Are fragile and motionless, never letting anyone see
Any of them using their finger.And this you can see is the bolt. The purpose of this
Is to open the breech, as you see. We can slide it
Rapidly backwards and forwards: we call this
Easing the spring. And rapidly backwards and forwards
The early bees are assaulting and fumbling the flowers
They call it easing the Spring.They call it easing the Spring: it is perfectly easy
If you have any strength in your thumb: like the bolt,
And the breech, and the cocking-piece, and the point of balance,
Which in our case we have not got; and the almond-blossom
Silent in all of the gardens and the bees going backwards and forwards,
For to-day we have naming of parts.
I was reminded of Reed’s poem whilst reading Confuscious’ Analects.
The one thing needed first is the rectification of names.
Confuscious maintains that every name contains certain implications which constitute the essence of that class of things to which this name applies. Such things, therefore, should agree with this ideal essence. (Astute readers may hear echoes of Plato here, though Confucious predates him by 150 years or so.)
I was, earlier, tidying away some files on my PC, looking for appropriate places to store them. I had a note which I could have put in several different directories (classes of things), and which probably should have been in all of them in order to make them readily retrievable.
Like traditional bookmarks, directories are poor, outmoded, tools. I could just pile everything into one directory of “My stuff” and use google desktop to find them when required. Or tag them (assign one or more attributes to a file), though I’m not sure how that could currently be done, except on the net. Of course, I could store them anywhere, on the net, and add a tag of “Rustle” to them.
Yes, deli.cio.us tags are the way forward. I am a convert.
In a Perician sense we end up with multi-representamens (forms / signs), single objects (to which the signs refer), and an aggregated interpretant (sense made of the signs). The web does seem a nice example of Peirce’s “unlimited semiosis” (where the object is a sign in itself etc. etc.).
I think there is a more universal (not just applied to writing of texts) element of truth in Barthes’ saying that we should concentrate on the signifiers and let the signifieds take care of themselves.
