Two eight five. Have I gone amiss from a comment, made much earlier, to this effect: I want the fragment form of these exercises to speak in a voice that's neither poetry nor (academic) philosophy, a maturing voice? "Better count on evolution. / Better way to start a revolution." (Chan Marchand / Cat Power) The fragment form's so powerful -Nietzsche, Kierkegaard, Schlegal ... Adorno, Wittgenstein. It's easy, to me, to get sucked into their didacticism. A good didactic fragment's like a jungle gym -you climb around it and pivot your head upside down, hair hanging down, legs locked around a cold and sturdy bar. But the thing's also alienating -the relating pushed off, ironic (necessarily so, Kierkegaard, Schlegel, Adorno would say), the defensives high. The defensives high. Like sea-rise barriers. And I'm thinking there's gentleness in humor, in letting be, that allows a relating-attempt to be non-fantasy, out into the anonymous world, in search of indirect eddies, community. I'm wondering whether that form's the fragment's evolution. I feel like we need what it's about now, need the earnest humbleness of self-organizing community working on a major set of challenges. I'm thinking internal ecology, human ecology, the thing to internalize broken ecologies of the planet.