A note on "stream of consciousness"

"Why, this stream of consciousness is not writing" is a favored plaint of that sort of writing teacher who has to think before compounding a sentence and sets his face against what he considers disorganization...which is indeed disorganization in some cases, and in others, an organization he hasn't seen.

As a teacher, I welcome "stream of consciousness". This is because "stream of consciousness" is preferable to passing out in the back of the class, or on drugs in an alley.

"Stream of consciousness" is a beginning, and it is also the whole ball game if I understand Kant: for "stream of consciousness" is probably nothing more than that manifold which for Kant precedes the ability to think.

The corporate media would replace "stream of consciousness" by a digitized succession of images such as are encountered when one has been "overserved" (i.e., is drunk).

A fully qualified "stream of consciousness" is in fact something which many Americans don't seem to have.

For example, although I inhaled, I remember the 1960s. But if I read Joan Didion (POLITICAL FICTIONS) alright, much of the insanity of the Bush administration is explained by a seismic break of consciousness in the 1960s and 1970s, in which the Puritan high caste sorts encountered the "evilduuer" in themselves, and have been, to their partial credit, trying to deal ever since.

A truly unending stream of consciousness is I think to be preferred to a partial consciousness, blocked as it were by great whacking Hoover dams of guilt and fear.

Any way, that is my stream of consciousness.