ajumbleoffk

[ajumbleoffk]

I want to do drugs again. This is working.

[ajumbleoffk]

Subtext Through Sentence Structure in Writing

Ever noticed how a character’s true feelings can be hinted at without them saying a word? That’s the magic of sentence structure—a subtle tool to convey emotions, tension, and subtext in a way that feels natural. It’s all about how you arrange your words. Here’s how you can use it to give your writing extra depth:

1. Anaphora (Repetition for Emphasis)

Anaphora is the repetition of the same word or phrase at the beginning of successive clauses. It can create a rhythm, emphasize a point, or show a character’s emotional state. It's like a mantra or a sense of growing obsession in thought.

Example: "I can’t do this anymore. I can’t keep pretending. I can’t keep lying to myself."

Here, the repetition of “I can’t” highlights the character’s frustration, their internal conflict, and emotional breakdown. The more it repeats, the more you feel their emotional weight.

2. Asyndeton (Omitting Conjunctions for Speed or Chaos)

Asyndeton is when you deliberately leave out conjunctions (like and, or, but) to create a fast-paced, almost frantic effect. This can be great for moments of tension, confusion, or a character’s overwhelmed state.

Example: "She ran through the streets—pushing past crowds, dodging vendors, barely noticing the rain."

By skipping “and” and breaking up the flow, the reader feels the character’s urgency, the rush of the moment. It mimics the quickness of their thoughts and actions.

3. Choppy, Fractured Sentences for Internal Chaos

When a character is dealing with inner turmoil, sometimes their thoughts don’t flow smoothly. Fractured sentences—choppy, disjointed—can show their disarray or emotional breakdown.

Example: "Why did I do that? What was I thinking? No. No, I—I can’t—I can’t fix this."

This kind of sentence structure mimics the chaotic, fragmented thoughts of someone who’s in distress. The disconnection reflects their internal turmoil.

4. Polysyndeton (Overuse of Conjunctions for Overwhelming Effect)

Polysyndeton is when you overuse conjunctions like “and” or “but,” giving a sentence a heavier, more drawn-out feeling. It can show a character’s exhaustion, hesitation, or even their growing tension as they try to process a situation.

Example: "He wanted to scream, and cry, and punch something, and tear everything apart until it made sense."

The repeated use of “and” here conveys the overwhelming nature of the character’s feelings, as if everything is piling on top of each other, adding to the emotional overload.

5. Ellipsis for Unspoken Thoughts or Tension

Ellipses (the ...) can be used to indicate something unsaid—unfinished thoughts, unspoken tension, or the sense that something is being withheld. This subtle tool adds layers to your writing, letting the reader feel the weight of what’s not said.

Example: "She looked at him... but said nothing."

The silence here speaks volumes. It’s not just that she’s not speaking—it’s the unspoken tension between them that gives this line its emotional weight.

TL;DR:

Anaphora = Repeating for emphasis, building emotional weight.

Asyndeton = Omitting conjunctions to show speed, urgency, or chaos.

Choppy sentences = Fractured thoughts or emotional breakdowns.

Polysyndeton = Overwhelming feelings through too many conjunctions.

Ellipses = Showing subtext through what’s unsaid or withheld.

[ajumbleoffk]

I started a Facebook account. I realized quickly that I had no real desire to friend anyone that I knew. Most of them were acquaintances at best. I don't want to talk to anyone anymore. I have developed a distrust and distaste for most people of any persuasion. However, isolation breeds madness and is not good for the brain. I decided that I would just focus on friending relatives. The feed on Facebook has not been showing me posts from them at all.

A lot of the people I used to hang with were just people to smoke weed with. Now, that I spend a lot more time sober, and also educating myself to some extent reading Marxist, socialist, and anarchist works (also videos online), I find a lot of the people that I used to know just about intolerable. What was I thinking?

I used to feel like an asshole to some extent for feeling like that, but I don't feel like that really anymore. I mean, we are talking about olds heads that believe the Earth is flat, Ancient Alien theories, etc. It seems that everyone within the local area is either into that kind of crunchy granola stuff or a white nationalist Christian type of person. This is absolutely willful ignorance and a determination to be reactionary to the max. It is a real bummer.

They just say the inanest stupid shit like it is the funniest thing in the world. That level of ignorance is shocking to me now. But it is to be expected. That's just how it is here. No need to get all worked up over it.

I fucking hate Donald Trump. If you say that though they think you must loooooove Joe Biden and the Democratic party. Maybe I shouldn't care. I just hate the way that some leftists and liberals write off people from rural areas and within the interior of the country. Of course, maybe that is for good reason. Look at what I've mentioned formerly here.

What am I saying? I'm saying that I am conflicted. I know people that have meant something to my life in the past, and now I can't stand them. That hurts. The things they do to me hurt. I guess that's life, isn't it? I also see how huge swaths of the country are regarded as hopeless.

Why do people choose to perpetuate stupid and ignorant beliefs that make no sense? What fantasies are being reified and how do they help people cope? After all, religion was long the opiate of the people. It still is the opiate. False beliefs about the world seem to help us somehow. We live in a harsh world. Apprehending it in its complete and horrible splendor would be overwhelming to say the least.

Why do people like to inflict pain and suffering on others? It is not just out of some sense of justice why we do it and desire it. It serves some psychological itch. We want to watch others suffer and morality and justice give us a fine excuse to engage.

[ajumbleoffk]

From "The Infernal Desire Machines of Doctor Hoffman" by Angela Carter

My name is Desiderio.

I lived in the city when our adversary, the diabolical Dr Hoffman, filled it with mirages in order to drive us all mad. Nothing in the city was what it seemed – nothing at all! Because Dr Hoffman, you see, was waging a massive campaign against human reason itself. Nothing less than that. Oh, the stakes of the war were very high – higher than ever I realized, for I was young and sardonic and did not much like the notion of humanity, anyway, though they told me later, when I became a hero, how I had saved mankind.

[ajumbleoffk]

[ajumbleoffk]

Addicted to looking at these

[ajumbleoffk]

[ajumbleoffk]

Police Raid in Britain at the KCC

call for solidarity!

Dawn police raid on UK Kurdish centre, arrest prominent members of community

[ajumbleoffk]

– Justin Sweet

Death Mark

[ajumbleoffk]

A Comment on Bukharin's 'Anarchy and Scientific Communism' from a Critical Perspective

I'm reading Bukharin's "Anarchy and Scientific Communism". I would like to quote: "As with capital, the state is not a 'thing', but a relationship between individuals - between classes to be more precise. It is a relationship of class, domination and oppression - that's the essence of the state."

What does Bukharin mean "the state is not a 'thing'"? Is not a relationship a thing? This word "thing" designates all sorts of phenomenon that can all be classed under "NOUN". A noun can be any person, place, thing, or idea. Is the state a person? Are relations between persons the persons themselves. What is a relation when you think about it? Is it something over and above the people that make the relation? Are relations ideas?

Well, if the state is not a thing it, or reducible to just people, it could be a place, but it seems more logical to say that there are places within states more than that the state is a collection of places, and can there not be relations between places?

The state must be an idea, right? If it is not a thing. Ideas have no material being. They are like dreams: only existing in the mind. However, ideas have a funny way of leaking into the real world.

The state is not just an idea obviously. If it was it would be harmless, but it is not. There are jails, batons, body armor, handcuffs, legal documents, etc. All paraphernalia of the state.

Then there is the problem of production. Bukharin criticizes the anarchists on decentralized production in communes. I think he misrepresents the anarchist thoughts, if anarchists can agree on anything it is that there are many anarchisms, on production. I don't think many anarchists, with the exception of anarcho-primitivists, want to do away with centralized production, per se. They want a production that is more responsive to the demands and needs of those that work within those sites of production and the people that they produce for. It is the centralized planning of production that was railed against because it appeared to them that a centralized bureaucracy deciding everything from on high was not going to be able to truly imbibe "From each according to ability, to each according to need."

How can a centralized bureaucracy truly know what the people need? People would have to send information to the central offices that ultimately decide on all production. What if things change by the time the central office gets around to processing work orders? Bureaucracies are notorious for their slowness in response and miles of red tape that accumulate over time. Perhaps somewhere in between is the answer to that problem?

[ajumbleoffk]

[ajumbleoffk]

[ajumbleoffk]

Yo mama is so dumb she failed a blood test.

[ajumbleoffk]

Otto Mäkilä (Finnish, 1904-1955), Poetry, 1938

[ajumbleoffk]

[ajumbleoffk]

Halloween by Daniele Ingrassia

[ajumbleoffk]