23 february 2018

23 february 2018

John Bjarne Grover

When the estate agent showed me the house and site in Szolnok in 2015, there was a small frog in the lower part of the garden. She wore small shoes and the soil was quite wet and 'dissolving' but there were stones to step on.

When the younger official sister Tone Gröver and I found a frog in the forest in the early 1970's, we brought it home and called it 'Burke' after the swedish word 'burk' for 'box'.

On 'Burg' there seems to be a play presented in january which was not mentioned in the 2017-2018 catalogue. It seems to relate to a swedish author which I myself used in a small fragment I wrote on my home computer on 28 october 2017.

My life as author is quite miserable and I now and then feel that it is only 'secret intelligence' and things like that which read my things - could be even via secret surveillance, which would be illegal. The good optimism and wellbeing of an author is related to the authority to the text which is the authority to decide when a text is to be read by somebody else. If that authority is partly under others' control, such as happens when the surveillance is illegal or secret, it resembles reduced authority, which of course is very unfortunate for the work as author. (The integrity of the authority of the author could resemble the political issue of 'HYMEN'). The copyright law automatically grants the copyright to the author - and that is the authority to decide when a text is to be read by others. A poet progresses if own authority can release the text to interested readers - whose 'platonic' response can be the basis for further development - but of course not if the text is raped out behind by secret surveillance who is full of bad conscience and 'the art of suspicion' - and soon the author starts thinking in their ways and in the worst case this can lead to a poet who produces thousands and thousands of pages on the internet about political intrigues, assassinations, coup d'etats and things like that.

In my case it is critically important that the poetic work can be published and thereby made available to potentially interested readers. It is possible that 'the whole thing' was couped by way of the Kennedy assassination (why do I think in such ways?) in 1963 - and therefore it can be even more important than for a normal poet.

Attention via secret surveillance is of course 'unwanted attention', and particularly critical it would be if unpublished material leaks out to other authors who abuse it. Do my home computer files land in the 'intelligence services' on computers that can be accessed from anywhere else? If so, then it could be all and only for the purpose of being in control of that authority - which also was the theme of 1963?

Secret surveillance thinks perhaps in terms of power and therefore could be reluctant to return the authority to the author by way of normal publication. "It is not safe", they say perhaps. But then they should be reported to the police. Is it the author's authority which is not a 'safe'? Clearly political power could find it unwise to find a publisher, since it could destabilize the east-west power balance and things like that, but of course it is the only sensible solution.

For a raped author, the only thing of value for being able to continue the work is the chance to keep other people out. That does not include the plumber if a water pipe is leaking, because the alternative is not interesting.