Upward mobility has been a perfect method for apprehension in the day of post-modern statements. So many of which the primitive societies have examined a superfluous change in no trace to call 'home'. Perhaps the thought of such origin, never really adapted a course throughout history that we find ourselves. So the weight of the world behind you, carries a forward movement as if gravity were meant to hold together the fragility of such pieces as if a puzzle. Though, in the world of self depreciation the value one holds dear to their heart is a will from which the emotion was never truly recorded as a moment, but instead, you must look over the shoulder - no matter which of the opposite left side or the right side.
The initiative seems simple enough to presume what intent were self described.
Perhaps within the imaginative world of a make-shift reason to chance, the ability to diversify the possibility of change were not left to mythological hypocritical immunity. However, the personal view of life were - if in fact - a divided narrative between ranks of authority solely for the purpose of intervention. In light of this, there is no simple choice between language or its more resolute form - desire.
Desire is a more or less of a indisposed sensation regarding the sense for previously anticipated phenomena. Therefore, perhaps that it is desire acts as a conflict to debunk everything that we avoid contact with in the universe.
It is a classic illustration of the ethical question which should dictate all morality, which is it of course, do 'ends' justify the 'means' from getting to a point which then causes post-ergo solution. I feel it is a mistrial of judgment, that so much of ones thought process weighs itself under, much as though a void unfulfilled in mystery, until, the radical incumbent seizes in mind a selective memory as for false retribution. I will call this timing in refrain as if posting a 9-1-1 call to some remote location on a deserted island. We can think of it as the minds way of achieving a well developed sense of welfare, as it continually counts the number of times they can dial 9-1-1 over and over again repetitiously, no you will not call the police, whatever for - you were here when it happened - no I was not, am i the one holding the smoking gun or is it you sir. For all intensive purposes the same can be said for those unwilling to confess, they simply claim they did nothing wrong, or acted in self defense - as though - as though self defense were a primary objective. However, one could say the act of a felon uses the cowardly act of reason without thinking creating the lie of 'self-defense' as their only defense mechanism of choice. You mean a choice to become a coward, but then what is a hero, or better asked what is emblematic of heroic meaning, a heroic meaning is quite a powerful form of concept - so are we dialing a 9-1-1. Though the thought is quite pragmatic, one could say the interviewing of thought from the idea of a selfless definition might spark another thought, and then another, before you could even realize that the truth is what lives within the parameters of all such reason.
That Shakespeare suffered Hamlet's demising nature, due through Rosencrantz and Guildenstern, was the choice of such characterization between Hamlet's jesters really all that common, instead, we might believe Shakespeare’s aim was merely subjective as if to speak on philosophical terms a commentary on the futility of the human mind. Was Shakespeare a man so far beyond his time, that the language was not communicated in ability to perform theatre, but that consequently Rosencrantz and Guildenstern were Shakespeare's dichotomy served for justice in the hands of Hamlet's madness. That we know of common knowledge due to Rosencrantz and Guildenstern’s tragic fate was a voyage of deceit, which only the human conscious knows is obsolete that it destroys any mans course of action, that in return Shakespeare's commentary helped refine Hamlet's self image in the story as it is told by Shakespeare.
Perhaps, then it is a self-imposed will, that as in Shakespeare, Hamlet's self imposed will was one at the height of self-importance. An anomaly between ones narcisstic (in this case of Hamlet) exploits of exhibitionist behavior, which not only causes an anomaly to emerge within the story, but a maverick. That even the greatest or least of our own resembling fears will equate, to one common variable in action (in this case Rosencrantz and Guildenstern did not share a bond formed on anything albeit common-knowledge that resulted in death, they thought was Hamlet's ended up being themselves). The pursuit for the truth is a conscious effort that Rosencrantz and Guildenstern had obeyed if they appealed to a common sense relationship between the two of them. Instead, they became procrastinators as if alpha-sluts to the demiurge Hamlet. Hamlet is to Shakespeare, a genius that controls the most interwoven fate of all, ones own immunity to death, both spiritually and enigmatically chosen before ones mind is self-aware. In other words, reason and logic dictated everything Hamlet did, as it did for Shakespeare.
The common variable we identify with most is of self-importance, characterized through the agency of self-awareness without it dehumanizing. This is not a self-righteous concept, but one based strictly, as simple as it sounds, on - emotion.
We all feel the desire to compete; in fact, in the face of logic where there are rules we celebrate it in professional sporting events. Then, there is that searching for false lust (prostitution) - or in the face of romance - love interest, greed (drug dealing) as opposed to greed - but not in contempt - for virtue, there are in fact different alternate perspectives to choose from. There is nothing more provocative than treasure, or less provocative as pirate.
In that sloppy context, importance colors restraint.
In my ovation of words, psycho babble. (Perhaps - only maybe.)
In silk, comfort and joy go unpronounced in dress.
But - you cannot out-guess the mock cause of one's desire over time.
Read as an experience rather than a logical argument, the piece moves like a mind that keeps trying to speak and keeps catching itself.
It opens with pressure. "Upward mobility" and "the weight of the world behind you" describe a climb that pulls you back down. The past is a hand on your shoulder, and you can only look at it sideways. The sentences stay in that heavy, circling motion, returning to "perhaps," "as though," and "if in fact," so the reader feels the hesitation before any idea arrives.
Desire enters as something you can't hold still. "Indisposed sensation" stumbles between two registers, and that stumble is part of the effect: desire is restless and hard to name. The line "you cannot out-guess the mock cause of one's desire" then turns desire into something that mocks the attempt to predict it.
The 9-1-1 passage is the emotional center. A call is made again and again, to a place no one can reach, and the repetition starts to feel like comfort. The reader hears the loop, the same question put to the same empty line: "am I the one holding the smoking gun or is it you, sir." The people who insist they did nothing wrong, or acted in self-defense, sound like someone repeating the same reassurance until it stops meaning anything.
The Hamlet section is the least held together. Its voice sounds more agitated, with "alpha-sluts" jarring against the more formal phrasing. Read for feeling, that jolt may be intentional, a sign of contempt for the courtiers. But the section also explains its images more than it lets them work, and that is where the emotional effect thins.
The close moves quickly through sport, romance, greed, treasure, and pirates, then pulls back to small, sharp fragments: "In silk, comfort and joy go unpronounced in dress." I read that line as the most successful one. Comfort is worn rather than spoken, and it doesn't need to be named.
My honest view: the images of pressure, the unanswered call, and the glance backward hold together well as a mood. The Hamlet passage and some of the fragments depend more on the reader sharing the author's associations. I may be wrong about how much those associations carry, and you're in the best position to judge that.
=================
