|
|
Well, I'll try owt once...
Consider this:
Deep with the first dead lies London's daughter,
Robed in the long friends,
The grains beyond age, the dark veins of her mother
Now, "robed in the long friends" is aphasic. The poor stuttering senile fuck has clearly got the word wrong. You can't be robed in friends. You can't be robed in grains or veins, either. Stupid piece of shit.
Except, hold on....it kind of works. 'cause, you know, you've got the dead, who are kind of friends, and maybe the death-robes are sort of friends, and they are probably long and then the veins aren't, like, real veins, and her mother isn't her biological mother. Maybe you were wrong. Maybe you misjudged this guy. Maybe you want to be his best friend.
So, there is a kind of series of connections going on here, but in every case the logical sequence of explanations and comparisons is not a part of the text, so the reader has to create a connection based on the metaphorical and contextual associations of the word they read, as opposed to the word they expect - a metonymic bridge, where the part describes the whole.
Will that do? |
|
|