Introduction: Nonsense as Pleasure
If Lewis Carroll’s nonsense is a logical laboratory, Edward Lear’s is a sonic and affective playground. Where Carroll tests the limits of local coherence against global impossibility, Lear celebrates the sensation of language itself. The words, rhythms, and sounds generate meaning through experience, expectation, and delight, rather than through propositional or referential content.
In relational-ontology terms, Lear exploits value-dense coordination systems while lightly engaging semiotic stability. The result is nonsense that feels complete, satisfying, and resonant, without relying on a stable world-model.
1. Phonetic Coherence and Affective Anchoring
Lear’s poetry is carefully structured:
-
Rhyme and meter create predictable patterns.
-
Phonetic repetition establishes anticipation and satisfaction.
-
Alliteration, assonance, and cadence act as affective signals, guiding emotional response.
Consider The Owl and the Pussycat: the joy arises not from what happens, but how it sounds and moves through the reader’s perception. The value system is strong — it engages rhythm, auditory expectation, and aesthetic pleasure — even if semantic anchoring is minimal or flexible.
In this sense, meaning is a byproduct of play within the constraints of sound and affect.
2. Minimal Semiotic Fixity
Where Carroll’s nonsense is dense with local logic, Lear’s is lightly tethered to reference. The words are often:
-
whimsical names (e.g., “Yorick” and “Turvey”),
-
nonspecific locations (e.g., “the land where the Bong tree grows”),
-
and exaggerated events (e.g., an owl and a pussycat marrying).
Yet these under-specified referents are sufficient to sustain local coherence. The mind can track action, rhythm, and relationality without demanding a totalising world. Here, meaning floats, anchored affectively rather than propositionally.
3. Semiotic Lightness as Play
Lear demonstrates a principle our ontology clarifies:
Semiotic systems can function under light actualisation, generating coherent experience without global specification.
This is different from Carroll’s over-determined local logics. Lear’s poems show that pleasure and coordination can dominate while meaning is partially withheld.
The “nonsense” is a feature, not a flaw. It allows the system to remain open, leaving space for imagination, affect, and emergent interpretation.
4. Rhythm as Relational Operator
Rhythm is not merely decorative in Lear. It operates semiotically:
-
It structures attention.
-
It signals patterns.
-
It constrains expectation while allowing novelty.
Just as the kaleidoscope rotates fragments to produce new patterns, Lear rotates relational cues of sound and rhythm to generate fresh, coherent experiences without changing the underlying semiotic fragments. Each poem is a local instance of pleasure and patterning, ontologically complete in itself, but not totalising.
5. Ethical and Experiential Implications
Lear’s nonsense teaches readers to inhabit pleasure without demanding closure. It trains the mind to:
-
tolerate under-specification,
-
enjoy local coherence without global authority,
-
recognise the generative power of constrained play.
This is, in essence, a pedagogy of openness: an affective exercise in inhabiting relationally structured systems without overreaching for finality.
6. Lear in the Context of the Series
Where Carroll foregrounds logical torsion and Gödelian openness, Lear foregrounds affective orchestration. Both demonstrate that:
-
Nonsense is disciplined, not anarchic.
-
Meaning is relational, not fixed.
-
Play is structured, generative, and non-collapsing.
Lear shows that semiotic lightness can generate experiential richness. Carroll shows that over-determined local logic can reveal system-level openness. Together, they map two poles of nonsense as ontological practice.
Conclusion: Floating Meaning and Relational Pleasure
Edward Lear reminds us that nonsense is not a failure of language, logic, or perception. It is a deliberate play of constraints and values, creating floating islands of experience that delight, instruct, and train the reader to inhabit openness.
In the next episode, we will explore Mervyn Peake, who combines Lear’s sensual richness with Carroll’s logical density, creating worlds that are overloaded with semiotic relations, kaleidoscopic and baroque, yet internally coherent in their local actualisations.
No comments:
Post a Comment