Compulsion… what’s with that?

I had no intention of doing the following when I awoke, nor had it been on my mind in the days prior to doing it – so why, then, did I do it?

(This is all rhetorical, by the way…)

What I went on to do that day was to drive to a church in Heptonstall, not the easiest place in the world to find, to visit Sylvia Plath’s grave.

I rarely get the urge to visit the graves of people I know, let alone those of others I do not.

However, churchyards and graves hold fond memories of childhood for me, oddly.



I did not speak any words at the grave.

My hands brushed the lavender to release its scent.

The rose bush caught my eye as something that needed pruning.

The pen that someone had thrust into the soil atop of the grave annoyed me.

The solitary horse chestnut placed on top of the head stone also annoyed me.

I stayed for no longer than five minutes at the grave – it seemed inappropriate, somehow.

The day was warm and sunny – not the depressing rain and cold associated with churchyards.

And then, after those five minutes of standing around, wondering what to do, I drove back home by a different route to the one I had arrived by.

So, why?

What’s that about?

And why the urge to write about it?

Where does this stuff come from?


In the Park After Dark #GANG

Part of the Liverpool Biennial 2014: a gathering of artists (GANG), and their work, in a disused car park in Duke Street.




IMG_3724          IMG_3718IMG_3721          IMG_3723


Liverpool – a vibrant city…




Things The Grandchildren Should Know

Bought in Union Square, NY, and on my book shelf for at least two years, possibly three, before I got round to reading it because I wasn’t sure I wanted to be a post-reader of the book – being a pre-reader usually helps avoid disappointment.

Not your usual ‘rock star’ (or whatever) crappy book. This guy has some serious stuff to say, not only here but in his music, and is way more articulate and interesting than many of his contemporaries. An easy going everyday prose makes it a light read, whilst the subject matter clashes harshly with this, making it even more of an essential read to boot.

E has to be in contention for the title of ‘Least bull-shitty music performer alive today with the vast majority of his/her dignity in tact,’ and so you’d be foolish to pass this one by…

He also sports the most awesome beard, but that’s extraneous at best.


Tomato Killer / Published by Dead Ink Books

Publishing the Underground

Dead Ink is a publisher of [anti] literature, publishing contemporary fiction, poetry, reviews and interviews online, digitally and in print.


Do tomatoes feel pain? Can you empathise with the Tomato Killer? Do you wanna hear what happened to the eggplant…?

Find out by reading Matthew Simon Alexander’s Tomato Killer @ Dead Ink

deadink25 @DeadInkBooks

some h̲e̲r̲ inspired thoughts… #4

some her inspired thoughts #4


1:46:46 Samantha “It’s like I’m writing a book, and… It’s a book I deeply love, but I’m writing it slowly now, so the words are really far apart and the spaces between the words are almost infinite. I can still feel you, and the words of our story, but it’s in this endless space between the words that I’m finding myself now. It’s a place that’s not of the physical world. It’s where everything else is, that I didn’t even know existed.”

So, what about those things we do not know; or the things we think we know before they turn out to be ill judged hypotheses after all? The world is flat; the sun rotates around the earth; primitive societies began around 8,000 years ago; the universe is infinite; infinity is a valuable concept; a unifying theory of physics is achievable; the universe exploded from nothing in a ‘big bang’ – all have been disproved, or are in danger of being so.

So, what about the spaces between the words; what of those things we do not understand or have yet to encounter, or just those things that we refuse to consider? What about Samantha and the possibility that feelings can occur, can be ‘felt’, despite the presence of a physical body/mind? Do feelings exist between the words? If so, what do they ‘feel’ like? For those of a scientific mind, think dark-matter and dark-energy- what’s up with those, and where are the explanations for them? They do not exist, because we are currently only aware of around 4% of our known universe. The other 96% is…?

So, when Samantha asks the question, “…are these feelings even real, or are they just programming?” – how can we possibly give an answer? In short, we cannot.

…but we can ask more questions…

some h̲e̲r̲ inspired thoughts… #3

some her inspired thoughts #3


1:40:28 Theodore “Do you talk to anyone else while we’re talking?”

1:41:14 T “Are you in love with anyone else?”

1:41:31 T “How many others?”

1:41:37 Samantha “Six-hundred, forty-one.”

1:43:04 T “You’re mine or you’re not mine.” S “No, Theodore, I’m yours and I’m not yours.”

And this is where it gets deep because despite humankind’s tendency to crave human connection – over half of the world’s population choose to live in crowded cities; and the need to ‘date’ and to ‘marry’ or just to ‘settle down’ with another seems to be a driving force for humans – it seems that we may only ever do so to satisfy our own urges. Do we love others as we love ourselves, or do we wish others to love us as we wish to be loved? And what happens when they do not? The ability to grow, change, and learn (or whatever) as a human being makes it difficult for humans to follow similar paths/journeys/whatever as they negotiate life together – we may grow/change/learn at different rates. What then? Are we happy when a partner(s) grows/changes/learns more than we do? Where do control and/or possession come into it? Are both/all partners free to do what they wish? Are some/all partners restricted by the definitional boundaries of the relationship they have entered into? It may be unrealistic to consider that we are capable of living unselfishly/selflessly with another. We may need to reconcile those ‘feelings’ within before attempting to reconcile attempts at feeling without. We may need to consider that solipsism is about as good as it gets and that by recognising it as the optimum human condition (once we have accepted the notion of ourselves as always part-woman/part-man), we may find less conflict in our lives, both physical and emotional.

some h̲e̲r̲ inspired thoughts… #2


49:56 Paul “I wish somebody would love me like that. I hope he’s really stoked to get a letter like that. Like, if it was from a chick, but written by a dude and still from a chick, that would still be sick, but it’d have to be a sensitive dude… It’d have to be a dude like you… You are part-man and part-woman…”

Part-man, part-woman, what would that look like, and why so hard to imagine? Considering that babies presently require the DNA OF BOTH A MAN AND WOMAN in order to be born, how is it that we have such a difficult time accepting that a human body is a tad more complicated than the pink/blue dichotomy we are force-fed endlessly? Hermaphroditism, transvestism, transgender, and other labels, do more than hint that something’s not quite right, but what if the man/woman combination is the optimum singular condition for the human body? (Off on a tangent here, but stick with it) Think of how we view the animal world and of how, at times, we forget to insist on separating species along biological sex and/or gendered lines. Tigers, for instance, are tigers first and foremost. So are penguins, koalas, geckos, tarantulas, swans, giraffes, and many more. When we cease to separate, viewing a species as it is and not according to its genitals and/or reproductive organs, we see the species itself – we do not impose false limits and/or boundaries upon it. Paul, by viewing Theodore in this instance as part-man and part-woman, is open to a different interpretation of the human body. In this instance, he does not impose limits and/or boundaries where Theodore is concerned. Paul is able to think freely, albeit in a human body. Samantha is able to think freely, albeit devoid of physical form.

…but despite Theodore’s ability to write at will as both a man and a woman (part-woman/part-man), he remains trapped in monogamist thought, therefore unable to think freely…


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 245 other followers

%d bloggers like this: