conversation is the cleaver

all of conversation represents, 

at best, a sidedness.

for all of communication can not be limited

to just verbiage account.

mind is ever the work 

in the operative of the self.

emotion is ever the efforting 

of connectedness expressed.

for it is, 

either mental equivocation

or emotional alignment.

yet presence, as consciousness,

will always overwhelm perception.

for the dignity of being

is in the isness of the moment.

yet dignified, mindfully speaking,

is always begging for historical perspective

to account for the presentation of now.

this is where the examples of worth and valued

live very different lives.

where worth operates 

from a Machiavellian principle

and valued is searching for the intimacy 

of this moment holistically expressed.

while one prevocationally haunts,

the other one is background haunting.

one is hollowed, the hallowed.

one has liberty as a concession,

while the other one has freedom as a creation.

for language presents as linear,

yet living immerses as holographic.

say is a flashlight 

lit in a darken mind-room,

while be is a sensory invite 

in a spacial domain.

and so the unsaid question is,

who does perception essentially work for?

the mind, for the thoughts?

or the emotions, for the feel? . . .