nyuuzyou/wikis huggingface dataset:
Lipton’s Journal/February 21, 1955/645

The Burglar with his half-insights, his Germanic Vummmmm! always yammers about the basic masochistic passivity—case closed, human being impossible! But passivity is masochistic only in the eyes of the . The man of the distant distant future will be a taker. The closer man approaches to the infinity of God the more he will live in passivity, thought, pleasure, and space. Indeed no human can enrich himself without returning and dipping into the lore of the mind-body. It is the source of all creativity available to us, outside of what we intuit from nature when we personify it. For indeed man is a part of nature and so can comprehend nature by understanding himself. As, for example, the way I now understand animals so much better than before. To be ashamed of one’s passivity is to cripple one’s capacity to give. Those nights in bed where I not only give but where I take, receive, lie passive before Adele are always the prelude to rich activity for me on the following day. Let me fight or seek to repress my sexual impulses and I am nervous and depressed in the morning.
But I have one basic difficulty in sex. I truly hate to accept the orgasm too early. So I delay it, and the result is that my orgasms suffer. Lately, I have found a compromise. When it is coming I relax, I let it take me like a wave, and so it is often better. But I suspect that until I am ready to enter the act of love ready to come so soon as the orgasm takes me, I will never have the full symphony of an orgasm. However, I accept this too for I would not like to lose the joys of loving for an hour or more.
Category:February 21, 1955
Lipton’s Journal/February 21, 1955/646

The phallic narcissist (who cannot take) says, “I shot in her.” The cock is a rifle. The gentler man says, “I came in her.” The “I,” the part of the person which is in the world, the skin, also was passive, also entered the woman.
The shitter is the one to beware. “I off my rocks.” ROCKS! Unless he sees it as rockings. I’ve never used the expression.
Category:February 21, 1955
Lipton’s Journal/February 21, 1955/651

Out of sight, out of mind. Absence makes the heart grow fonder. Both are true. One cannot understand separation without grasping that. For the heart makes unconsciously, and only guilt makes one think very often of those out of sight. When our loves are out of sight the works on them, steals up on the , softens it; the strength of the er is that it retains, it dwells, it elaborates. The sup generally has to use its energy on those people, things, stimuli which are before it.
Category:February 21, 1955
Lipton’s Journal/February 21, 1955/653

What occurs to me is that there may be a “death-instinct”—that the deep within it knows that there is the hereafter of entering infinity, and when it has been mutilated by the it shrugs its shoulders and says, “To hell with advancing this fragment of the infinite—I return to the infinite.” And it welcomes “death” which is eternal life. Although I suspect the Hindus may be right and just like the fucking army one comes back from a patrol merely to be put on K.P. Which introduces reason and the sup. 
To build society, to have men act in life, it is necessary that the sup penetrate the deepest reaches of the er and induce the counter-conviction, that there is no life after death and so one must do all one can now. To build a society one must believe in zero after death. Hence the sup while punishing man enables man to raise himself to the infinite. And that is why the sup (read the Super Ego) mysteriously relents at times. It knows that if it goes too far, the er will give up, it will begin to long for death. 
So the sup as well as the er is a preserver of life. And that is why a genius needs a sup to match his available er (for all people have vast er—what differs is the amount available). If the genius did not have such a sup he would become a Taker and not a Maker-Giver. (Is this the effect of the Roximyl? I’m so tolerant today. I see good in everything. Except for passing rage at the Lindner. But notice the mellowness of this note now that I gave vent to my irritation.)
Category:February 21, 1955
Lipton’s Journal/February 21, 1955/654

Over the weekend I took many notes, and had a host of word echoes. In the reading dingus on Omnibus I noticed something with interest. They showed pages to read and gave you various times. To my pleasure I noticed that I was now a slower-than-average reader, I who as recently as two years ago had the fastest reading rate Fig Gwaltney ever came across in the Nelson-Dinny test which I at the time called the Motherwell-Ginsberg test—how revealing. 
Anyway, they had a dried up old prune of a schmoo talking about how to increase one’s reading speed on Omnibus and he talked about all the blocks to quick reading. One stops too often on each word, one reads words backwards, at least children do (Dr. Pruneface said so). (God and dog—which the old bugger commented on) in short one does not “absorb” rapidly. Then he talked about modern reading methods. My suspicion of them is well-founded. To grasp the word as a whole is to lose the richness of a word. Modern reading methods make experts, they do not make artists. For the expert is capable of taking the mass and giving it a name, a one—he has sublime disinterest in understanding-taking, he is interested in nomenclature-one-giving. 
So my poetic insight about academicians seems to have confirmation. To become an academician, an expert, one must amass mountains of “knowledge” which means one must read quickly. But to read too quickly is to get the gist and not the orgasm—geist. (The artist has the ability to take the one and make it enormously various, the opposite of the expert, the critic, the academician. All those latter gentlemen seek answers. The artist seeks questions. This I learned from Malaquais, who once said in a passion, “There are no answers. There are only questions.”) So, the academician is drawn to the subject which intrigues him least—in other words, he can read it the fastest because he finds it the least disturbing and stimulating. He takes less as he reads so he can read efficiently. Which is why editors often get little out of a book—they read too quickly.
Category:February 21, 1955
Lipton’s Journal/February 21, 1955/655

An article in Scientific American on conferences, and conference-cooperation. They found the number of “positive” contributions were greater than the negative. Of course those psychological tester ladies told the conference gentlemen a one way glass-mirror. So, naturally the results have “scientific” value. Abegezint. How the conferees must have been eager to be positive and constructive. I wish I’d been in that conference. Man, I would have rang the gong on negative contributions—if I had had guts enough or enough at the moment. 
One interesting sidelight on the “contribution” to psychological testing is that the guy who got the idea used to take covert notes at Alcoholics Anonymous meetings, writing down gestures as well as words, until as he put it, he found it getting a “little sinister.” I’ll bet. What schmucks these experts are. And worse. So many of them are socialized cowardly sadists. No wonder they go in for social welfare and sociology.
One thing I did find valid was the give-and-take. A remark by one man would produce a negative reaction from another which as he continued to talk was converted into a positive construction embodying the first positive and his own first negative. This does contain the heart of the process of effective collaboration.
Category:February 21, 1955
Lipton’s Journal/February 22, 1955/657

Today, I’m completely down. The depression came on last night after rereading the journal for the day and being struck forcibly by the fact that it all seemed far less profound and much more “gushy” than I had thought. Particularly the enthusiasm about having my ass whipped. In bed last night that seemed really de trop. And today, I regret the note about Bob, although of course it served its purpose. I vented the spleen I felt, and today I like him as much as ever. But will he like me? The balance between obeying one’s swings and social consideration is of course the great difficulty.
Anyway, there is a difference. Because I expected the depression, because I did not try to fight it off, it was actually very mild, and this morning on six hours of sleep I feel calm and in a good mood. It’s a little sad perhaps to be back in the world with its slow wasteful pace, but on the other hand I recognize a peculiar thing about writing. It’s almost a law. The more depressed I am while I write, the better is the quality. The more enthusiastic while I write, the worse the quality. It is almost as if I have to express myself through intense sup resistance in order to give texture, and ergo absorb the sup beating. Which means that for good sustained writing I will have to stay off Lipton’s. Unless I try writing quick wild first drafts on L-1 and L-2, and then reworking them calmly. Well, there’s nothing new in all this.
Category:February 22, 1955
Lipton’s Journal/February 22, 1955/659

First comes “back and front.” More and more I have the feeling that concepts and abstractions come from bodily frames of reference. Thus, the idea of one’s back, or more accurately the sense of one’s back and the sense of one’s front have an enormous influence on such ideas as past and future, identification, introjections, etc. For example I do believe that our sense of the past in “time” is closely related to the idea of the back, the ass, the ass-hole. Which is why most conservatives are tight ass-holed people—they try to impede the flow of the present into the past, and their rigid faces are a muscular contraction to prevent the entrance of the future into the present. 
On the other hand there are probably people who relate their front to danger instead of their back which would be true for most people. These ideas are all still vague, but it occurs to me that the positions people take in fucking, their preferences are a continuation of baby-states where the universe was located first by front, and then by perhaps the first abstract concept to enter the infant-child’s mind, to wit that what is behind him or her also exists. One can see this bewilderment in a kitten chasing its tail.
Category:February 22, 1955
Lipton’s Journal/February 22, 1955/661

I have postulated consciousness as a function, and instead of the psychoanalytical topography of a super-ego on top, an ego in the middle, and the unconscious beneath, I see mind-and-body as being filled with an infinity of -sup matings, the vast majority so automatic, so controlled by the , that consciousness as such, sup-expression is unnecessary. 
But what I do believe is that there are dialectical layers of er-sup, each the progressive antithesis of the one above. Thus, our consciousness at any given period is a sup expression of an er-drive in one layer or another. Which would account for contradictory state of consciousness, conscious dilemmas, etc. Conscious ideas which come from the deep layers of the psyche-soma invariably come through with exceptionally low fidelity—they are either clichés or mechanical inventions—the deeper the layer of er, the more total is the sup, and hence the er-expression which is vaster and vaster the deeper one goes comes through in exceptionally crude form. 
Nonetheless, the descent into the er is in varying people capable of being digested into make-give sup active expressions, often with great elaboration. Freud and Marx for example. But it is done at the price of anxiety. As a general concept, anxiety is released by going from er-sup state of n to er-sup state of n plus 1. People in psychic motion (contraction inward) are always anxious—the expansion outward which is sup-dominated is always contented and joyous (all other things being equal) for the sup is now regaining domination. 
Which is why artists are unhappy takers. They know that for them to take is dangerous since they will make and give from what they take—hence most artists are close to phallic narcissists in that they dislike taking. Only the person who is pretty certain they are not going to make and give can enjoy taking. “You look like a cat that’s just licked its milk.”
I’ve expressed the above very poorly, but I can just about reach what I wish to say. I wonder if I’ll understand a word of it five years from now.
Category:February 22, 1955
Lipton’s Journal/February 22, 1955/663

The revolutionary and the mystic. Each are against society, but the mystic leaves society, the radical returns from his deep hell to leave a social portrait of the future which society in its retreat from advancing man will in time come to adopt as a defense. (Symbolically, the miner-radical lives in hell, the mountaineer-mystic in heaven.) Our resentment of mystics is not altogether unjust—they have left us; they have refused to add that particular perversion (into words) of their thought which might be a step-hole in the wall for men to come.
Category:February 22, 1955
Lipton’s Journal/February 22, 1955/664

Time. Our idea of it is very crude, for just as society has flattened the infinity of wealths through the unit of currency, so the clock chokes our appreciation of the varieties of times. The clock-present is a skin, no more, it is merely overt time, present time, an attempt to postulate a material time. Such items as the newspaper, the commodity, the mass media, TV especially, are the overt act, the social defense against the expressive . What we may say of overt time is that in the act of its birth, its presentness in relation to clock-time, it is in a deeper sense come to us from far in the past. The state of the total of emotions of all men is a far closer approximation of “present” time. Not their acts—which belong to the past, are merely fruitions of emotions and needs out of the past. Deeper in man’s unconscious sooner or later to come to consciousness in the future.
Actually there are wave phases to time, parallel expansions and contractions which bring us closer to the nature of it than the unilinear concept. As a practical example let me draw time for the writer. His present is unverbalized thought, his immediate future is the unexpressed but verbal idea. Further future is talk. Then the note. Then the article, or the finished product, and if that is ahead of the social limb of society for which it is intended, it fails to expand overtly until the “thought” of man (not the idea—that comes later with the critical evaluations) reaches it. If it is behind, if one’s thought to work progression succeeds for groups one does not wish to reach, groups who are behind the “center” of the artist’s aim, then one has created a false art-work, no more than a past product even as it was conceived as a future one.
In political economy one can see this better. Money is the unilinear adjunct of unilinear time, social time. Thus, the essential condition of individual existence which is that the relation to the “norm” on any given quality of experience we live in future time or past time—we are twenty-first century in our sex-expressions, say, and eighteenth century in our reasoning methods, or whatever, or whatever—this condition, this existentialism of living across a spectrum of time is muddied by unilinear money, for finally there is not a consumer body as such, there is rather a congery of consumer-coteries, and products which are conceived for one coterie (one consumer-position in relation to time) often reach a coterie more to the future or more to the past relatively. The only limitation is that commodities too advanced must fail, as must commodities too far behind the most retarded consumer-coteries. 
Category:February 22, 1955
Lipton’s Journal/February 22, 1955/665

Thus, the future exists materially in the thought-idea flow of man at actual past which we conceive inaccurately as clock-present. Put most crudely—what we think today is what in some form we do tomorrow.	
The past, the social concretion, vanishes slowly. The horror of the past as Marx saw is that it is the dead incubus on the body of the future which lives in the present. One returns to the past, one studies it best in order to interpret and increase one’s sensitivity to the future. It is worth approaching the past only if one wishes to draw from it a finer extrapolation into the quality and quantity of the future.
Category:February 22, 1955
Lipton’s Journal/February 22, 1955/666

The value of commodities is that they give us power. The only legitimate power. Passive power. To wit, power for ourselves, rather than the power which is domination of others. The aim of man is to increase his own power. In the domination of others we diminish our true power for we can be enriched only by taking, and the domination of others is giving which if it predominates too totally can only exhaust the man who has social power. History as opposed to the distant and perhaps unattainable Hissoul, is the story of the attempt of man against society to convert domination into power.
Category:February 22, 1955
Lipton’s Journal/February 22, 1955/667

Has anyone remarked that bebop is the first popular and tentative expression of Joycean language. “Gimmerhereson sonomove that avocado sauce with the reekie-fookies.” Which is why I prefer it to “cool” which while technically advanced is nonetheless a retreat from a more advanced state of perception to a more elaborated but retrogressive-in-time social production.
Category:February 22, 1955
Lipton’s Journal/February 22, 1955/668

Actor’s say of an emotional tantrum: What a production! They’re right. To bring Marx up to date one must add the total of non-commodity productions to have a sensitive “ear” for the new movements of history. And to this one must add multiple time. Which means that a “system” of thought which attempts to take into account “movements” all over the world is doomed to impotence because its extrapolation of the future is an extrapolation from the past without ever considering the clock-present which contains the unconscious future.
Category:February 22, 1955
Lipton’s Journal/February 22, 1955/670

Social forms: We say, I’m afraid we can’t make it this evening.” How true. What we are -saying is, “I am afraid. We can’t make it this evening.” Whatever people say, they mean. They mean it in its opposite at a given level of er- and at the next deeper level, they mean it literally except that the periods, commas, stresses, etc. are shifted. Speech rests on er and sup, on rhythmic contraction and expansion (beat) and emphasis (syncopation). Between the shifting two is the music of communication—human speech. One must always listen to exactly what people say. In the commonest banality for any social coterie is the statement of their collective fears. “I don’t dig you, man,” is the hipster’s admission of terror.
Category:February 22, 1955
Lipton’s Journal/February 22, 1955/673

They. Th ay Instantaneity of t carried into h (-) suspension and ay—maleness, action, giving. Which is why society is thought of as “they.” 
He and She. (eeeeee—the male and/or female active sound). Suspended in time by the h. She has s added. It is the socialization of the suspension of eeeee.
We. The world of eeeeee. The community.
Category:February 22, 1955
Lipton’s Journal/February 22, 1955/674

When I take Lipton’s I am free of guilt. Hence I understand. Guilt is the inverse function of understanding. The academic compulsive is the guilt-ridden man who never has the faintest understanding of the subject to which he has given his life. When an academician begins to understand his subject (as indeed often happens) he solves a thousand other mysteries at the same time. In a funny way, I was the academician of sex while I was writing The Deer Park. The Deer Park is authoritative (indeed, author—iative) on sex, but doesn’t understand it at all. And too the author is the authoritarian, the man who does not understand, which is why authors are invariably such horses asses.
Category:February 22, 1955
Lipton’s Journal/February 22, 1955/677

Shakespeare is the decadent genius of the Elizabethan period. All geniuses anticipate the decadence to come, and yet retain the vigor of the Make-Give era, the expansive era in which they live and work—they cast forward into the decadence which will follow much to Enter and much to Take. It is therefore so fitting, since the decadent genius always casts a multiple set of interpretations that Shakespeare’s name has so many spellings and his identity, his legitimacy, are in question.
Category:February 22, 1955
Lipton’s Journal/February 22, 1955/678

The relation of h to f. Head to body? Mind to flesh? Quite possibly.
He is head and flesh. She is society, head, and flesh.
Thus, I am going to try substituting h for f and r for l in words that come up.
One, immediately. Fellow becomes hero. For becomes hole, or haul. Part of the mystery of consonants is that they do have relations to one another. And the vowels are a universe.
Category:February 22, 1955
Lipton’s Journal/February 22, 1955/679

Chess. The dramatization of the “umbilical” conflict: Man vs. Society. White is man using his as -attack. Black is society using er as sup-defense. A way to check this chess thought is to study the style of chess champions. I would guess that a master player who does better playing black (relatively) than white has the capacity and the talent to construct his most beautiful attacks out of positions of defense. What characterizes him is a surface “wildness”—again relatively, and underneath a deep social sense. The er so to speak is the surface, the sup is concealed beneath. People like Gandy Brodie, myself, Chandler Brossard, Adele.
The “white” champion is comparatively calm but er-imaginative. His energy does into logical progressive attacks, but his “genius” is in sudden brilliant defenses. People like Rhoda, Dan, my sister, Bob Lindner, and many others.
Category:February 22, 1955
Lipton’s Journal/February 22, 1955/684

I glimpse a form for Antacid Analgesic. It could start as a play, dialogue and actions. An unplayable play for it would include a masturbation, a fuck, and an orgy, probably in the form of Two, Three, One. Then, next, it would be a novel. Then an expository essay—“The Psychology of the Orgy.” Then ???? the heart of the book, written in double and triple and n-parallel lines which come together and fall apart, as opposed to the punning condensations which Joyce used. Until finally, at the end, it must degenerate into handwriting, picture scrawls, non-objective scrawls, and mathematics. Yessir, we end on H2O.
Category:February 22, 1955
Lipton’s Journal/February 22, 1955/685

I suspect that the form of the play is always a variation of the One, the Two, and the Three, psychically that is. To wit; there have been play-structures corresponding slightly ahead in time to any given century, and if I knew enough about the drama I could explain Act One, Act Two, and Act Three as containing respectively.
One 	Two 	Three	Most plays.
One 	Three	Two 	The Little Foxes?
Two 	One 	Three	End as a Man?
Two 	Three	One 	All My Sons—Death of a Salesman.
Three	One 	Two 	The Gate of Hell.
Three	Two 	One 	The Cocktail Party.
Category:February 22, 1955
Lipton’s Journal/February 22, 1955/687

I can hardly complain about Adele’s alternate love and rage toward Susy, for Adele unconsciously was acting out upon Susy the way I act toward Adele. And Susy in turn would act toward me as Adele acted toward her. What characterizes that three-way daisy chain is that I call the tune for Adele, she called it for Susy, and Susy called it for me. The way I felt it at the time was that Adele was unreasonable in her swings toward Sue, and Sue gave me the time of day when Sue felt like it.
Category:February 22, 1955