I kept Kafka's comment in mind while I worked on this project. After all, Lyotard's contention that differends signal us by silent stinging echoes Kafka's insistence that we should "read only books that bite and sting us." Both authors presuppose that we will want to hack away at frigid internal seas. But how can a wisdom apparatus stimulate an awareness of those seas, and how can it convince an individual to begin to break the waters into fluency? If I imagine trying to develop a practical wisdom machinery for the electrate age, I feel skeptical that people will want to seek wisdom in the first place. And yet, if wisdom can be entertaining, people may come to it despite the sting it can sometimes deliver.

The differend I chose has been stinging me since I first encountered it four years ago, though I've never been able to articulate why. But as I worked with the images--improperly linking them, allowing the play of synchronicity--occasional pieces "snapped into place" just as if they were part of a puzzle. I enjoyed those sudden snaps of clarity. I can describe the process that produced them as a "logic of linking images"; it seems equally likely that my rather ingrained literate logic merely shifted pieces around until "it" discovered narrative connections. I don't think it much matters. The process of working from (apparently) unrelated pieces led me to discover rhizomatic connections in any case, and those accidental discoveries proved worthwhile.    

1. Make it fun.
2. And yet, perhaps you must also make it sting.
3. Include images and capitalize on rhizomic effects of montage.
4. I'm guessing that the more interactive, the better.
5. And yes, I'm going to mention that all-important "flashing white" space of Chinese wisdom. If stinging is the axe for frozen seas, flashing white can suggest ways to wield this tool.