To intellectualise  – This is the Writer’s statement of intent.

My language is only that of feelings with no implication. My intention is that the ownership of the meaning is yours alone.

It is without question that I believe that words are only a minuscule extension of our messaging dexterity. However, I have to accept that the ability to choose to form endless chains of prearranged and significant sounds are one of the things that set us apart from other species. This prerogative allows me to indulge myself in my obsession with the true underlying narrative. Therefore, as the gun is an extension for killing skills and the car to mobility, language has been invented by women and men as an expansion of their communication proficiency.

Words could mean the demise of our natural communication skills. Nonetheless, words were originally pictures on walls or in the sand, and are still intended to invoke images for our interpretation, be they understood or misunderstood. Just imagine for a moment how impossible it is to understand someone, who has written to you in a language that you do not grasp. It is not a great deal easier when someone does this on the telephone, but doing this face to face is a great deal easier: Even without those vital words one is able to interpret the music in it and watch the dance of it, by way of the observation of body language, and paying attention to the vocal tone and intonation.

My mission is to use the English language to reverse the decease of communication, and to rebirth those lost skills still to be found in our mind’s eye. By using non-linear poetic free style writing, it is my intention to implanted triggers that fire thoughts from the profound interiors of an individual into a multiplicity of outward directions. It is their choice which route they should take.

The process of writing like this, with triggers, involves a continual editing or readjustment of material, words, punctuation and tenses during the construction of a piece.

Language itself is in constant growth and change – open ended – open ended. As I believe thought is also ever changing, it is my intention that a piece should be retained forever in a state of evolution; always available for rewriting and reediting. This may seem a little scary to a journalist; for those who expect a result. However, life is so, every moment is the result of the last, as one thing turns into the next and appears to be complete then and there. Death is only one staging post for the continuity for the coach and horses of the living. My attitude is of the ephemeral, like a theatrical performance, there will be a different occurrence each time, freely open-ended, ready for changes and growth – no dead ends.

Returning to the issue of tangential triggers, ‘The ricochet effect’ redirects the imagination into more than one pathway of thought. Each pathway in turn leads to yet another ricochet of pathways, and so on. This is analogous to that of a tree of roots, branches, twigs, leaves, and flowers in unremitting chaotic growth. This means that during writing, the editing process is protracted by continual precise, and thus, the shift of punctuation, tenses, and genders: A single alteration to a word or tense can throw a whole piece out, off kilter and askew, ready again for reediting.

The prompts are also meant to encourage the reader, performer, or audience to return to the work; to take an alternative expedition, learn more, and enjoy different aspects of their own being. However, the road can be rocky as this requires a great deal of routeing around in the rucksacks labelled ‘The past’. Again, this ‘The ricochet effect’ with tangential thoughts requires both myself as the writer, and the exponent or reader to journey back and forth through time, gender and psyche while the material is constantly amended accordingly on paper and in the mind.

Should the exponent ‘understand’ the work? What is there to understand? The reader is intended to be the inventor, and the inventor is the one who understands their invention. Unfamiliarity is not understood immediately, but can become real later. If you were asked to explain a piece of music, could you say that one ‘understood’ it? Each listener will have an interpretation, which is entirely personal, so why not this with a combination of words?

For you – My language is only that of feelings with no implication. My intention is that the ownership of the meaning is yours alone.  Therefore, you will be unable to misinterpret my words.

As my thoughts tend to come out in chains of  bursting imagery, I enjoy a good set of semi-colons.

Finally, or rather not finally, as this is ‘open-end’, I shall later revisit this explanation of my work, to edit and re-punctuate.

“I see a view of the soul.”

Copyright © Jevon Antoni-Jay. All rights reserved. 2013.