nyuuzyou/wikis huggingface dataset:
Lipton’s Journal/February 1, 1955/413

On how I can’t destroy love. The one total impotence I had in my life was with R.P. shortly after I met Adele. I was drawn to R, I found her totally attractive socially, I knew she was drawn to me. But I was afraid of what would happen if it clicked with her, and I was full of sexual beans at the time. I was afraid I would desert Adele. To turn upon someone who really loves me has always been deep in my unconscious the unforgivable crime. So I was impotent with R.P. the first time we tried, I had a panic to quit her. It was only when I came to realize how sexually frigid R.P. was that I could have sex with her, and even then it was the worst, anxious, semi-potent, and possible only on tons of liquor. What a time I gave her. 
Before I met Adele, I could never know in advance whether I would be any good with another woman. I think I could make full love to another woman only if I felt Adele no longer really loved me. In the old days before we were married, my heart used to sink every time I realized how much she loved me. It meant I could never be free. Today, I no longer wish to be free. So, I have been loving her. And, slowly, very tentatively, with deep suspicion, she is beginning to believe that yes, truly, I do love her.
Category:February 1, 1955
Lipton’s Journal/February 1, 1955/414

One thing bothers me. I had a few intimations under Lipton’s that there is some sort of identification between Adele and my sister. (Further proof of the mother-father embodiment—who but a sibling substitute could be better for a mother-father embodiment?) I don’t like it, and I steer away from approaching it, but I suspect that I have to face it and tear into it because my sexual scar may be exactly here.
Category:February 1, 1955
Lipton’s Journal/February 1, 1955/416

I have a hunch the next novel may be the worst of all to write because to do it I will probably have to quit Lipton’s and go back to depression. If I don’t it will all come too easily and be too surface. But to go with open arms back into depression! I don’t see how I can do it. In other words I don’t see how I can start a new book yet. At least, I will have the experience of tuning The Deer Park once again, and that may give hints and intimations of what to expect with and without Lipton’s. 
Category:February 1, 1955
Lipton’s Journal/February 1, 1955/417

My sexual scar. That is, a part of me has always seen sex as a pussy wound. Mmmmm. I meant to write pus—sy. So, chasing the dirty I felt excitement and then guilt. Now, with guilt eased, there is less excitement. (Perhaps…this is only for the last few weeks, at most the last few months as a tendency.) In other words, once the dirt is taken out of sex, I see it as brother-sister relations. Platonic. Which is why I get dirtier all the time to apparently less effect. I just feel tender. Even in the last ball, I felt tender toward the other girl as if she were my child. But, I mustn’t go too far with this. The few times we’ve made love in the last month without Lipton’s were pretty Goddamn hot—and without even a trace of guilt afterward. The effects of brother-sisterliness come out with Lipton’s. The only exception is the love we made Sunday night which was without Lipton’s and comparatively un-hot. I may be reading much too much into this. On the other hand, one of these days I am going to sit down, lie down, and free-associate on it. For example, why in hell am I thinking more and more of a secretary. Why do I put out feelers to Barbara. Why the note a couple of weeks ago about secretary and wife?
Category:February 1, 1955
Lipton’s Journal/February 1, 1955/419

Perhaps the sexual explanation is that I use up so much energy in this journal and doing my weight-lifting that there just isn’t a hell of a lot left over. I notice that I start high on this journal every day, or get high in the course of writing—auto-stimulation, and who was it that first called us authors?—and then wear out, feel the ideas become less sharp, the tone begins to wander, until finally in word echoes and consonant chasings I feel depression come on lightly.
Category:February 1, 1955
Lipton’s Journal/February 1, 1955/422

Decadence. I wonder if it isn’t generally misunderstood, especially because decadent periods are periods dangerous to society. A decadent time always follows a prosperous time, that is, the decadence appears first in ideas, art-works, fashions, etc. and is only then followed by economic crisis, or a political reaction, or by revolution. But decadence is the natural, even inevitable growth which follows prosperity, and I believe it comes into being because the abstract social contract is no longer pressing; relatively—to its time—the mood to quit it has come. 
So a concern with man as a-thing-in-himself, rather than the concern with man-in-and-of-society is the result. But society always underlines such attempts as perverted, and so they can only appear in degraded forms. The inquiry about man becomes expressed by homosexuality (always seen and understood by Everybody to be the real meaning of the word decadence) artistic experimentation which leads nowhere, or seems to lead nowhere, bisexual fashions in dress, distrust of power, anxiety of statesmen, feelings of general impotence, and increase in hatred and disrespect of the lower classes for the upper classes, a mood of doubt, a refinement of comedy, and perhaps most significant a cutting across categories, so that hybrid arts like opera, or today—bebop—are born. 
Until now it has been impossible for what I believe have been the genuine and indeed highest probing of the human spirit—occurring precisely in the period of decadence—to gain acceptance or energy. Society is threatened, the time is not yet to dissolve the social contract, and so all the forces are whipped up again. But the period of decadence we are in now is of the most profound sort. For what characterizes decadence is that it occurs more powerfully and for longer duration each time it appears, and each time the process of destroying it is less complete and more difficult. 
The real soul of man, I suspect, has always come closest to expression in decadent periods, but the expression was always degraded. There will come a time perhaps when a decadence less degraded will to everyone’s amazement produce the greatest flowering.
Category:February 1, 1955
Lipton’s Journal/February 1, 1955/424

Echoes and opposites. The child wishes to do something. It is forbidden. The child wished to express something. But, presto, as the words are on its tongue, it realizes that this too will be forbidden. So it requests a different object, less satisfactory but close to the original (an echo) or it requests the opposite. (The child wishes to strike its sister—it says instead, “I love my sister.”) 
But the child like the psychopath lives in the enormous present, and living in the present is like being in the center of a giant drum—every whisper returns its sound, and it is difficult to separate the whisper from the reply. So the reply in time comes to seem more real to the child than its own whisper, and the child identifies with the reply, the reply is itself, the child is the mother or the father or the mother-father, and its own Self is banished to be persecuted later when the Self produces its own child. So to the psyche (which I use for vs. ) every attitude has its refraction (its echo) or its mirror (its opposite), and the problem of what is the Self remains for most people exactly the Mystery.
Which is why everything must be turned on its head—at least for experiment—before one may be certain it is understood. Again I repeat—one comes closer to finding the truth-in-its-circuits by the desire to be ridiculous than the fear of being ridiculous. And the extraordinary person is extraordinary because the unbearable question of the child—Who and what am I?—has never been frozen into answers, but demands instead that one voyage for answers. (Echo: Answereers for engineers.)
Category:February 1, 1955
Lipton’s Journal/February 1, 1955/425

The spectrum of the saint-psychopath. The infant, initially, is all or virtually all H. The child is mainly H with great conversions into being formed daily, being vomited back, absorbed again, shifted, etc. The saint-psychopath retains this quality of the child, and probably if I knew enough, and if it were worthwhile one could draw the spectrum. The homicidal psycho at one end—the total saint at the other. And petty crooks, gamblers, adventurers, certain kinds of businessmen, entertainers, reporters, artists, evangelists, psychotics, alcoholics, beggars, old maids and saints would fit in some order of development and H vs. S flowings (I prefer to avoid the word: structures).
But what characterizes them and separates them from the other world of humans, the conformist-neurotic spectrum which inhabits the middle of society just as the saint-psych occupies the top and the bottom (this is even more true psychically than by classes or status) is that the saint-psychs are spontaneous, apparently contradictory—since reality shifts for them all the time, their reaction to apparently similar stimuli may be vastly different on different occasions—fluid and mobile, subject to crisis, subject to recovery, generally givers, active and inert, intuitive, manic-depressive, undependable in long-term love but incandescent for short love, the subject of gossip, the centers of attention, electric in quality, driven, shriven, and driven again, compassionate and selfish. They are creators.
The neurotic-conformist is the total opposite. They are dependable, stable, cautious, consistently honest, privately dishonest, expert at best, plodders at worst, socially affable, privately malicious, petty, envious, takers, subject to attrition, mildly steadily active, dull for short-term love but good providers for long-term, listeners, mechanical in air, intelligent and practical once the scope is defined, analytical, helpless before problems of synthesis. They are professionally compassionate (charity and community work) and professionally selfish. They are critics.
These, naturally, are poles. And the majority of people fit somewhere in between although of course they tend toward the neurotic-conformist. But the tendency of society is to make all of mankind neurotic-conformist—the tendency of man, as viz his modern heroes and celebrities, is to liberate the saint-psychopath present to some degree in everyone.
Generally speaking we have come to the point in history—in this country anyway—where the middle class and upper middle class is composed primarily of the neurotic-conformists, and the saint-psychos are found in some of the activities of the working class (as opposed to the working class itself), in the Negro people, in Bohemians, in the illiterates, among the reactionaries, a few of the radicals, some of the prison population, and of course in the mass communication media.
Category:February 1, 1955
Lipton’s Journal/February 1, 1955/427

Before I quit, I want to list a few of the word echoes which came up today.
:Again h. Hire and Ire.	Heaven and Hell.
:q quiet, quite, quit.
:sex—that most unsexy word. Society and the cross (corset)
:accept and septic—to accept is to take in germs.
:love, lore, explore.
:Jesus, Jeus, Deus. The G, the J, and the D.
:strike, stricture, structure.
::Enough for today.
Category:February 1, 1955
Lipton’s Journal/February 10, 1955/554

Today is L plus 1—some Lipton’s, one Seconal, and two bouts of love. But the lift is not tremendous today mainly I think because I took it too soon after the last time. Still, I’m not depressed either, and in reading over the last fifty pages of the journal I find many interesting, even fascinating things buried in the general incoherence.
Category:February 10, 1955
Lipton’s Journal/February 10, 1955/555

But what I want to try to get at now is the business of thought—what is thought? etc. Having gotten into the habit, particularly under Lipton’s of keeping a very sharp sense of my “mental state,” I have come to the conclusion that “thought” as such is without words. There is truly a razor’s edge in the mind between the “thought” and the words—even though unsaid—which come to give it shape and one-ness. I realized this in a peculiar way. 
I found myself having the old fantasy of an electric pad on my brain which would carry my unspoken words into a tape recorder. And at that instant I realized that I was truly thinking without words, for what came immediately after—and the thoughts had been beautiful and very clear—was that to think of capturing the thought immediately aroused “words” in me, and though the words were good, and still nominally “thought” since I did not speak them, I could sense immediately that the thought had been chased away, and I was left only with word scraps. 
So, I want to formulate it like this: the universe which is always within us delivers matter—that is, a part of what we have “taken” floats into consciousness; with words we seek to give it form, we are attempting to convert what we have taken—and so long as it is still “thought” we are still “taking” it—into an “Idea”—something we may give. So, form, idea, word, are -things; matter, thoughts, feeling are from the .
Category:February 10, 1955
Lipton’s Journal/February 10, 1955/556

This can help to explain the difficult condition of the novice writer. Over and over I’ve noticed that young writers, or old young writers, for that matter, cannot seem to understand why their work, which to the reader is banal, thin, and uninspired, is so magnificent and powerful to them. The answer is of course simple. Their work is highly un-social and private. What has happened is that they have mistaken the intensity and beauty of their thought for the drab expression in words. “He felt old and sad and alone,” seems to them to convey the state of old-age as it has never been conveyed before. The sophisticated reader who demands that thought be trapped as closely as possible, or he will not respond to it with his own thought, considers the work puerile. Part of becoming a writer is to develop a more and more intense conception of the particular inaccurate word which is least inaccurate—at least for oneself; one can hardly estimate the value of words for others.
Category:February 10, 1955
Lipton’s Journal/February 10, 1955/557

For the analyst and the analysand part of the same process occurs. The analysand is delivering thoughts—at the very best they are so concerned with the thought that the “idea” is completely crude—“I wanna fuck my mudder . . . er . . I’m sorry . . . didn’t mean it . . . What do I mean? . . . I feel dizzy . . . er . . . glass balls . . . er . . . Chevrolet for ’55 . . . what a fucking quack you are . . . I’m sorry . . . didn’t mean it . . . What do I mean? . . . I feel dizzy . . . er . . .” And so forth. As a literary production it is close to zero—yet the internal process has been intense. Yet the analyst would be super-human if he were able to remind himself constantly that these grunts and phrases far from revealing how stupid people are beneath the surface, actually show that we are all close to genius once we open ourselves to the .
Category:February 10, 1955
Lipton’s Journal/February 10, 1955/558

I have come to a conclusion about work. Which is that I must desert my old obsession with not getting overwhelmed and doing but one job at a time no matter how slow and painful it was, and instead I must take on a number of projects, novels, stories, articles, books-to-read, etc., and whenever I feel bored or worn out with one, I must leave it for the next. That way I think I could tap far greater productivity. 
The key of course is to be concerned with the act of working itself rather than its issue or product. One reason I have gone at such a great rate in this journal is that I have not been much concerned with publishing it. If I ever decide to publish it which means revising, rewriting, censoring, etc. it will become slow hard and anxious work.
Category:February 10, 1955
Lipton’s Journal/February 10, 1955/559

The fluoridation of water. I think the apparent irrationality of people on this can be explained only by the consonant theory. I am willing to bet that if an expression like Good-Water Plan had been used, there would have been far less resistance. It’s the word “fluoridation” itself which makes the difficulty. Using the crude equivalents I so far feel—the word psychically Anglo-Saxonized becomes: Fuck love o(cunt) rage I day (death of A which is X) shun.
Category:February 10, 1955
Lipton’s Journal/February 10, 1955/560

Investigating the consonants I’ve found some fascinating material. R and L are the only consonants which combine with any frequency with other consonants at the beginning of words until one gets to S. S has many combinations. Sh, Sk, Sl, Sm, Sn, Sp, Squ, Sc, Scr, St, Str, Sw. No doubt about it, R, L, and S are the key consonants in English.
Category:February 10, 1955
Lipton’s Journal/February 10, 1955/561

On the vowels, I’m beginning to feel other things. The hard vowels, I, ay, EEEE, Ohhh, (which is midway between hard and soft) and OOOOOOO seem to have more relation to giving, to society, to I as social actor. And the soft vowels are more from the . Of course this is enormously complex and I haven’t begun to feel it yet, but slowly I make progress.
Category:February 10, 1955
Lipton’s Journal/February 14, 1955/564

The kick-off was the weekend in Baltimore. One interesting result is that I have a mock-cold this morning. That is, my nose is running—like allergy—and yet I do not feel the depression of a cold. It has set me thinking about the nature of colds, and the Roxitchitl or whatever the hell it is that Bob gave. I took a capsule last night, felt no effect, and so added two seconals and went to sleep. But the note on the box literature said that “nasal congestion” was sometimes a side-effect. This morning I have nasal congestion. 
I wonder if colds are not an expression of an -victory necessary to relieve a too-intense conflict. The depression which accompanies my colds (except for today) is the sadness and anger of the at being defeated again. Yet the cold may well be one of the basic homeostases—when one is feeling too much “tnesion” (nesion as nerve tension) too much er, the S relieves the conflict by knocking the body out—what is essential to the cold is that the er cannot win at that given period, and so S in its victory declares a punitive peace treaty. The roxyl drug is probably an S stimulant, an vitiator—hence in people whose nervous systems react to S increments by a cold, “nasal congestion” is the result. Whenever I get a bad cold in the future, I am going to try Lipton’s and see if it is a cure.
Category:February 14, 1955
Lipton’s Journal/February 14, 1955/566

I’ve come up with something on “st.” It represents the total fixing of society. It is factness, society-thingness. For example, stop, stasis, stable, stink (what characterizes a stink is that it sticks) stare (the social permanence of air) sty (the freezing of the eye) stone. (The petrification of the one which is pronounced own. Note: won, one, own and just possibly “on”). Also: student, study, (which brings up the ud—the mating of the you (the externalization of oneself—we project onto a you what we feel)—so we have the u, the you with the d of death. Study opens expertization, socialization, etc. Star: the fixing of the ah and the ‘r’. R to me now means more than rage, it is the active element, the motility of feeling which gives shape, color, emotion, life, illuminated form to our passivity. 
Just note: life and rife. Rifeness is the state (st again) of life in its active form. Life is the state of life in its passive form. r is action, will to completion, l is passivity, contentment, euphoria. s and t give such tremendous stasis to a concept because s as society and t as thingness are both societal concepts—they are “ones.” After all, a thing implies an envelope rather than a continuity. As viz Bob with his quick confidence that he knew what “color” was, until I reminded him that color was an attribute of light which is not knowable, not yet.
Category:February 14, 1955
Lipton’s Journal/February 14, 1955/567

For days I’ve been working toward my first real insight on vowels, and now I believe I have it. The hard and the soft, the and the —a hard vowel is the socialization of a state of being. The soft vowel is the flowing continuous being. One little confirmation of this is that all the hard vowels may be expressed by one letter. ayyyyyy (hard a) is understood as A. Hard e is E pronounced as eeeeeeeeeee. Hard I is I (one’s social personality, one’s active giving, influencing aspect) : However, I is a peculiar vowel as a hard vowel for it conceals its very subtle almost or perhaps uncapturable echo. We say really IIIIIIIII-uh. Which is not true for the other hard vowels such as O which is simply O not Oh. 
What I’m trying to get at is that the hard vowel remains constant in its sound through all of its flow. The h pinching off, and the sometimes guttural or high-pitched beginning of the hard vowel are manifestations of the difficulty we feel essentially in life at expressing a single rather than a double sound. So what characterized each of the hard vowels is that they are preceded by a suppressed (getting up to speed) consonant, and are ended by a braking consonant. I list them below. 
::uh—AAAAAAAAAAAAAAA—yyy
::EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE-yih
::ah—IIIIIIIIIIIIII-yih
::uh—OOOOOOOOOOOOOOO-ih
::y—UUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUU-(wuh)
::and uh—OOOOOOOOOOOO—uh (the oo of pool)
The soft vowels which express the self (and I believe these remarks about hard and soft vowels must be true for all languages or else the theory does not hold) are expressed in a series of alternations. Like this: /\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\.
Hard vowels are more like this: /-----------------------\
Soft vowels also have accelerants and brakes. A more accurate picture is: /˄˄˄˄˄˄˄˄˄˄˄˄˄˄˄˄˄˄\
And the reason for accelerants and brakes is that speech as such is not natural, not as natural as sound which comes from animal and man alike.
So the soft vowels.
::Little e. eh space eh space eh space etc.
::   "   i. ih   "   ih   "
And so forth. The way we best notice this is in the slowing down of a record or in a singer sustaining a note. What happens is that the single sound becomes revealed as a double sound which is why a ringing occurs in the sustained note of the singer or a wow-wow beat in the slowing down of a hand-cranked phonograph. Which opens the laboratory possibility of cutting my own sound records and playing them slowed down on a special phonograph.
I think as a last note on all this one may say that consonants exhibit the ring or the wow (tweeter—woofer) more pronouncedly than even soft vowels. Just try to hum nnnnnnnnnnnnn or rrrrrrrrrrr or llllllllll. Only ssssssss acts like a hard vowel. ttttttttt is impossible. It is absolutely thing, one, instant in its sound. Only by adding h (th) can it be maintained and that by sliding into soft ih. (In a peculiar way, I believe it can be said that ‘s’ is a social vowel. But even the hard vowels have a suppressed woof or tweet to them.
So let me redraw the diagrams:
::Hard vowel: 
::Soft vowel: 
Both diagrams refer to the sustaining of the sound.
Category:February 14, 1955