/lit/ - Literature

No active critique thread. So how's my prose, /lit/?

>The notion of uselessness welled up, suddenly, corrosively, dissolving the productive thoughts into embarrassment. Arthur stood from his desk, forcing himself apart an extra step, staring over his past several hours’ work while permitting an overdrawn sigh. His room was decayed, cluttered, poorly-lit, not the room of a man who entertained guests but rather that of one who feared intruders. He had convinced himself that he was writing on the behalves of the countless other decayed, cluttered, and poorly-lit men of his generation. And, as had become necessary, he had convinced himself that these men, (himself detached, an observer), were somehow remarkable. Somehow, compared with generations of men past, these men represented some buried truth or revolutionary undercurrent, yet to be tapped and refined.

No active critique thread. So how's my prose, /lit/?

>The notion of uselessness welled up, suddenly, corrosively, dissolving the productive thoughts into embarrassment. Arthur stood from his desk, forcing himself apart an extra step, staring over his past several hours’ work while permitting an overdrawn sigh. His room was decayed, cluttered, poorly-lit, not the room of a man who entertained guests but rather that of one who feared intruders. He had convinced himself that he was writing on the behalves of the countless other decayed, cluttered, and poorly-lit men of his generation. And, as had become necessary, he had convinced himself that these men, (himself detached, an observer), were somehow remarkable. Somehow, compared with generations of men past, these men represented some buried truth or revolutionary undercurrent, yet to be tapped and refined.

A line, points “L” and “N” thereon, is determined by the relation of “L” and “N” on Cartesian plane “X”. “L” and “N” are points identical to “P”. This is the first dimension of consciousness, insofar as “L” and “N”, previously related to nothing but their closures toward “X”, are now determined by their one relation as a line. On “X”, it is important to say, “P” exists in an unlimited set of identical points, and observing one point changes none of its properties. The change occurs when a second point is observed and its relation to the first is defined as a line. The act of definition thereby lessens in simplicity.

Where defining “P” was simple as observing a point on “X”, defining a line through “L” and “N” is less so.

The act of defining a line through “L” and “N” better reveals a determiner than the act of defining “P”. This “determiner”, in effect, reveals himself further at each of the subsequent dimensions of consciousness, of which there is an unlimited number. Imagine a screen window, whereat one stands outside and is blinded to inside. One knows that inside there is a child and a dog, playing. When there is a knock against the screen, one may not know whether the child or the dog is responsible. However, when knocks come in a rhythm, one knows immediately the child is responsible.

A line defined by a determiner, through “L” and “N”, is determined by extratomic facts. Such a line never exists as part of “X” but is defined as existent by a determiner. Therefore, a line is prescient over atomic facts.

Such a line may represent the first dimension of consciousness, insofar as its observance is scalable on “X”, “scalable” meaning that for any magnification, the observation shows the same result. This is the case with linear equations. A line, points “L” and “N” thereon, shows the same result at each magnification of “X”, of which there is an unlimited number. This first dimension of consciousness is what entertains life. One relates to his world, and at each magnification of his world, the same result is shown.