vacuity: n; when someone expresses a longing for the simplicity of childhood you can be certain that intellectually speaking this person has already attained a radical, perhaps terminal, simplicity.

Valéry: n; “there is no theory that is not a fragment, carefully prepared, of some autobiography”.

value: n; 1. “what is of value to us alone has no value”- Valéry. 2. subjugation is a process of being persuaded that what one possesses is of no value. in this way what has no value can be appropriated for no cost and often with the blessing of the one who is relinquishing it. when an artist is led to believe that its profession / life is of no value the way is clear for the appropriation of that artist's effort and life by forces which it is the artist's responsibility to resist. 3. to paraphrase Socrates, an art not subject to criticism is an art not worth having. 4. the true value of living can only be grasped once living has been raised to the power of no.

vancouver: n; 1. it seems here that buildings cry every day. 2. here a loaf of bread costs two loaves of bread. 3. my pleasure originates in its negation. 4. i have been slow dancing with a skeleton and now the music has stopped.

variation: n; variation: stone; eye; thistle — footprints, deep impressions, evidence of something laboring across a snow-covered field. difference is the theater of the living (of life).

velocity: n; one of the few things more rapid than falling in love is falling out of love.

veneration: n; those who are venerated are done so not because they have been the bearers of truth. veneration is simply the memorial of those who have been useful. veneration is analogous to habit (repeated use).

veracity: n; “put a question mark after your favorite words and your favorite theories (and occasionally after yourselves).” – Nietzsche.

verbalizations: n; your poems and your stories are secret doors. the world is blind. when you speak your stories or your poems you reveal to the world some of these secret doors. the world can therefore follow you or investigate some of the places you have been. the world despises silence. the world is powerless in silence.

violence: n; 1. for a community that has seemingly nothing to lose the ultimate violence that can be done to it is mediatization (for instance, filming a television series in Vancouver's downtown eastside, a series about real life, using real actors and real consultations from a real coroner etc.). this re-creation of lives and situations is a form of control not of the lives and situations depicted but of the reactions and beliefs of those watching the re-creations. as well, it becomes evident that those with seemingly nothing left to lose in fact have something left to lose. and this truth is revealed as what they have to lose, namely, themselves and their ability to represent themselves, is taken from them. and it is being taken from them in an extremely public way. people are sitting in their homes watching these re-creations and are unaware that anything at all has been appropriated. that is, the audience is entertained. contained. in such a situation the reality of those who now truly have nothing left to lose is diminished to nothing. coincidentally, whether they realize it or not, the reality of everyone else is also diminished. 2. violence is the destination of every life that has been exiled from relevance, from consequence.

virtual reality: n; a redundancy. it is the active imagination of Ibn Arabi without the paradoxical relationship and identity between I and thou which is required for true creativity and freedom. it is a servitude, a denial of transcendence. it is a drunk's request to a prostitute as compared to the song of a troubadour to his beloved.

virtuosity: n; virtuosity is a form of perversion which indicates an inherent hostility towards its object.

vision: n; 1. the creative process is culminated by a vision. this vision is an overwhelming sense of wonder which becomes perceived as an understanding or a realization. it is perceived in my case visually and then with words i attempt to recreate my vision. where there is no vision there is no creation. therefore, i prepare myself to be able to receive visions and only when i receive them do i create. any other attempt, when passed off as anything more than an exercise is worthless. 2. where there is no light there can be no eyes. if light should appear and strike those without eyes it will be a darkness to them. and if they turn away, if they run from it, they will remain eyeless. in order for this darkness (light) to be able to work on them, in order for it to unmask their eyes they must linger in its presence, they must build their homes and their cities on it, and with it. 3. a face without eyes is functionally an anus. 4. there are three possible affirmative responses to a vision (or imagination), three possible responses which acknowledge the existence/reality of a vision:

i) one can destroy the vision. such destruction or un-building is a skill which can be harmful or beneficial depending on the circumstance of its use. it is often the step required to find a clearing where a new vision is present.

ii) one can appropriate the vision. by appropriating one is acknowledging that the vision is not one's own, that it is something which appears, which presents itself. appropriation can be necessary (even imperative) or it can be stifling (in the same way that one can pick a flower from your garden or one can pick a flower every time a blossom appears thereby rendering the garden sterile).

iii) the third possibility is the letting-be of the vision. here one lets the vision speak for itself. however, sometimes a vision may have nothing to say, in which case one may feel the need to appropriate it and force it to speak for some specific purpose; or perhaps one might feel inclined to destroy the vision. often, such mute visions do have inclinations if one just lets them be. such visions often lead the way to other visions, some of which may indeed speak if they are allowed. 5. the tear forces the eye to open... vision is inevitable.

visit: n; you must prepare a space for poetry. it will arrive whether it is invited or not. and when it arrives it will demand a certain level of preparedness. there are some things poetry can just not accept. should your residence be wanting poetry will let you know and will not let you rest until you take steps to improve the situation. you could evict poetry but it will always return. it has a key to all your doors. it is possible (and common) to attempt to deny entry to poetry. you can board up the windows and nail the doors shut but poetry is relentless and will hammer against the walls and bang the windows and doors until all your neighbours will come to know the reality of your discourteous nature. eventually poetry will find a way to seep or burrow or insinuate its way into your home. poetry that has had to undergo such an ordeal just to encounter you is no longer a poetry that one would like to meet. such a poetry will annihilate those who laboured to deny it. specifically, what will be annihilated will be their humanity as well as their ability to recognize its manifestations in others.

voice: n; 1. death never stops speaking. i have always been in love with its voice, i have always listened to it across the shrinking distance of my age. 2. i wish my voice to be something behind you, its source unseen, a wave cresting and breaking behind you, washing over you after you have been thrown upon the rocks. 3. the voice that i hear, my creative voice, is not the one that says what have you done, what are you doing? etc. such a voice stands in my way and points a condemning finger at me. confronted with a voice like this there is nothing to do but retreat. my voice is rather that one that is beside me, talking animatedly with me the way one would speak with a friend concerning something of great interest. and like such a conversation, i/we end up walking without noticing and by the time we discover where we are we find we have travelled a great distance.

Voltaire: n; “the true philosophy tills the uncultivated fields, increases the number of ploughs”.

voyeur: n; the scientist always asks the question (at least implicitly) how will this knowledge affect how i/we see the world? the question that is rarely asked is how will this knowledge affect how i live in the world?