[Newspoetry] assignment: exploiting virtual children

[Donald L Emerick]

Dear Editor:

I find inscrutable, as usual, most of what Emerick says.  I gather that he is trying to link the images of virtual reality to the religious topoi upon which he forever prattles, but did he not forget to talk about video game characters, who were supposed to be the principle subject of his backside-biting expose?  Yes, his claim may be true, that religion thinks that it is talking about the duties of children that are anterior to, and foundational of their rights.  Yes, he may be right that the Pope is like a video-game character, who keeps claiming that God lives a million (or many times) more lives than any one of us lives.  Yes, he might be right that anyone who talks about God is really claiming that God is present at every act of human procreation, that sex is not for entertainment, because it is the serious business of populating, and thus by copulating, to fill the world up with empty places in which God may come to dwell, to fill with his holy spirit, to endow with fragments of the overfull soul.  Humans are just a machine that make a place for God to be God!
At least, that seems to be the thrust of Emerick's observations, that God is the closest thing we have to a perpetual E-motion picture machine.  So, from such a God's point of view (and, perhaps, from Emerick's point of view) all of what we other people call Reality would be Virtual to him (or Him (or them (or Them (or THim (etc...))))), because it is generated ad nauseam from the ad infinitum, which never runs out of material upon which to reproduce itself, to impress its image as the representational picture of what is real.  One never runs out of descriptions, drawn from Virtuality, for Reality.

One would have to deny, then, if this is Emerick's ironic line of satirical reasoning, that Virtuality exists, in order to maintain the one true Reality, in which VideoGame Characters are just people who happen to have been produced by some other natural process than the ordinary mechanical sex that sometimes happens to make human beings.  However, doesn't this kind of Emerick argumentation go too far and, yet, not far enough?  I mean, he could have said that rights are always relative to the law of the land: and that nothing in philosophy, society or politics could properly oppose a Government that claims the right to say what the law is.  There is no alternative: one faces an absolute that is either Man-made (man-defined) or else it has to be God-made (God-defined).  At least, that is the stark kind of madness that Emerick seems to postulate constantly.

Fortunately, we do not have to sit on the sidelines and listen to Emerick's madness remaking the world for us, along the crooked lines of his latest cranking nightmare.  We could say that the world is all that there is, even if we do not have the slightest idea of how much of it is there, or how much of it we know, or how much of that is unknown, and may even be unknowable.  It's possible that, even in his delusions, Emerick has some intuition of this truth, for he mentions unnamed and nameless truth, as a possible way of configuring our relationship to the known and knowable.  However, it is possible that Emerick has not a single idea of what he is saying, but the pattern of words was pleasing in his ears, so he copied the sounds, as best he could, thinking that virtual music was almost as good real music, that virtual art is almost as good as real art, virtual poetry (or literature) as good as the real and right stuff.  Well, he might be wrong, but we would never be able to tell, from how he talks, what differences lies between virtual and real.  he just schmoozes all of these things together, into one big obscurity, showing how anything is everything, some of the time.

I, for one, think that we would all be better off if Emerick would stick to talking about something on which he could be better versed.  He should give up his pretentious vanity, which makes him drool over his video-games of writing, playing his clever word games, as he thinks to call his games.  He should stick with simple reality, for that is where he should stick, and not be so stuck upon himself, parasitically, canaballistically eating his own being.

Thanks, indeed, for listening,
Sincerely,
on behalf of the real Donald L Emerick,
and not that other quasi-mondiality,
that artificial, virtual, pseudonymous-reality
Donald L Emerick
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/archive/newspoetry/attachments/20020501/a7e076ae/attachment.html