PN Review Print and Online Poetry Magazine
News and Notes
Digital Access to PN Review
Access the latest issues, plus back issues of PN Review with Exact Editions For PN Review subscribers: to access the PN Review digital archive via the Exact Editions app Exactly or the Exact Editions website, you will first need to know your PN Review ID number. read more
PN Review Prize winners announced
Carcanet Press and PN Review are delighted to announce the winners of the first ever PN Review Prize. read more
Most Read... Vahni CapildeoOn Judging Prizes, & Reading More than Six Really Good Books
(PN Review 237)
Drew MilneTom Raworth’s Writing
‘present past improved’: Tom Raworth’s Writing

(PN Review 236)
Alejandro Fernandez-OsorioPomace (trans. James Womack)
(PN Review 236)
Eavan BolandA Lyric Voice at Bay
(PN Review 121)
Kei MillerIn the Shadow of Derek Walcott
1930–2017

(PN Review 235)
Kate BinghamPuddle
(PN Review 236)
Poems Articles Interviews Reports Reviews Contributors
Gratis Ad 1
Gratis Ad 2
Next Issue Peter Scupham at 85: a celebration Contributions by Anne Stevenson, Robert Wells, Peter Davidson, Lawrence Sail

This report is taken from PN Review 220, Volume 41 Number 2, November - December 2014.

From a White Notebook (1)
(or: Notes Towards a Discussion of Everything)
Frank Kuppner
1. Hmm. Listing actual All-That-Ises in terms of their inherent probabilities surely ought not to be quite so time-consuming?


2. Yes, well – what else is the actual universe supposed to be like?


3. At the very least, surely the entire Universe must be the cause of any x?


4. Still: if nothing existed, it would no doubt be inaccurate to say that nothing existed. (And certainly that Nothing existed! (But this is indeed much ado about next to nothing.))


5. Anyway, why isn’t there something else, instead of either this or nothing?


6. Presumably that which just happened, could just have happened any way it liked? (Not that it really did like (or, indeed, was like) anything.)


7. Perhaps it all started (or most of it did, or nearly did) when two different sorts of Nothing clashed? (Well, why not? (Or combined?))


8. Nothing can teach us what God is.


9. Yes. Certain types of Nothing(ness) seem to be incommensurable too.


10. Still. 2) Nothing can teach us what God is.


11. Or perhaps the very concept of Nothing existing (and therefore of being something – anything) is itself already a contradiction-­in-terms? (Or is this pretty much nothing too?)


12. But let’s see. What is the difference between a non-existent cat and a non-­existent dog? (And what do they have ...


Searching, please wait... animated waiting image