No Rust on These Hinges: Heller Levinson & Hinge Theory
Bug: In ten words or less, can you describe Hinge? How is Hinge different from other methods of poetry-fashioning?
James: Cool, let’s rip … Well, part of the beauty of Hinge Theory is that I always say it is non-reducible, — i.e. non-shelvable, commodifiable, label-able. So my ten word or less answer for what is Hinge is the following: It’s not what it Is, but how it Behaves. There, nine words, whew! When people used to ask me what Hinge was, I’d beg my publisher, Michael Annis (Howling Dog Press) to hurry up and produce the book, Smelling Mary, because then I could answer them with “here (giving them to book), here is Hinge.” That would be the one word answer — “Here.”
But by answering “How is Hinge different from other methods of poetry-fashioning,” I’ll be able at the same time to dialogue Hinge, with the caveat that everything I say is incomplete and intended to work as “indicators,” (indication) only. Seeing as Hinge is a new and young discipline, I am still learning as I go, learning more all the time. But right off the bat we can assert that Hinge departs from all other poetic fashionings in declaring itself an ongoing ever-fulfilling linguistic enterprise. Every poem or story that has an ending, a finish, every poem or story that says “this is it,” “this is what I am,” “digest this,” is Dead! Finito! Yesterday! A relic, Pre-Hinge … each and every Hinge Application is fervently fulfilling itself in additional applications. Notice, I no longer associate my creations with the term “poetry,” instead we (the “we” refers to all Hinge Practitioners) employ the term “applications.” Also, Mobile Probe Collectives, also MUPAE’s — Mutational Update Panel Animation Extenders. We are constantly in motion, constantly refining, additioning, architecting. So, for the neophyte, if a person goes to the Jivin’ Ladybug site and encounters the cycle of Mermaids, for example, they will see that the subject of Mermaids is being treated in a variety of “set-ups,” we call these “set-ups,” (mechanisms) Hinge Modules, on the Ladybug site, the Cycle of Mermaids exfoliates the subject/word (Hinge vocabulary terms this element the Particle) in differing ethers, swivels it into alterior and complementary mobilizations. Perhaps similar to acculturating cells in various Petri Dishes. To date, over a dozen Mermaid Applications have been rendered. Each application both creates its own Mermaid Personality (ether) and interacts/impacts with the other applications. The Particle, then, is always in transition, on the road to developmental road (further development). Slapping your wrists a bit, the “ten words or less,” reflex, the nitwitpedia, the googling informationMania, what is described as our now living in an ADD culture, which in reality is now an ADC culture, since attention deficit is the common denominator, or the accepted Condition, it is no longer a disorder, but the norm, one begins to see the underpinnings of Hinge as a uniquely Counter Cultural movement … the non-reducible, that which resists fold-in and manifestoes unfolding as creed, that which does not define Trauma-in-America as when our computer is down, or we are out of Cell Phone reach, that which adheres to a neurological integrity, the dizzying zone of vortical centrality. Which brings us to the concept of prolongation.
Bug: What do you see as the benefits of Hinge’s process of prolongation? Why is the notion of an ending so anti-Hinge?
James: Prolongation benefits the practitioner by permitting a deeper and richer experience. Again, it is counter cultural and thoroughly opposed to the Jiffy this and the Jiffy that, the quick access, the quick broadband, the quick fix. Prolongation insures a sinkening, a marinating, a Delve/Immerse-Into that heightens both the practioner and the subject addressed, we can compare this to the prolongation of love-making, the maintaining of arousal – (I like that: Hinge and Arousal Maintenance) – the binding of the experiential unit into an ever mounting sensous blend of cavorting ecstatic eurekas.
This sense of things could knock the Viagra industry on their ass. I mean, why are so many persons paying good money to get their dingles up? From my point of view, one of the benefits of aging is that the damn thing begins to stay down. Wouldn’t it be beautiful to see workshops spring up offering instruction on Building The Month Long Erection, The Artisanal Erection, The Twelve Step Program to a Slow Sperm. Craftsmanship, Caretaking, Slowing Down, bringing the old reliable values back.
Hinge purports to flesh out, to impregnate, asserts that there is no ending because there are infinite opportunities to mobilize the particle. In similarity with Deleuze and Guattari’s “desiring-machine”, we can have pauses, interruptions, breaks even, but the flow continues. And in the case of Hinge Theory, what is integral is that complementation accompanies that flow. Let’s Hinge, right now, we are discussing prolongation, what is prolongation, what does it mean, what does it get us, how does it ‘perform,’ so:
prolongation, … maneuver
irritability, — complaint
purloin quiddity loin launch mastication therapies altitudinous gain no gainsay quibble
grit grainy to robust go
archaelology the dig uncovering
To provide a ‘quick’ (succumbing to cultural pressure) take on the above application: to prolong is against the grain in our culture therefore one must ‘maneuver’ become ‘irritable’ with the blockages and of course rag (complain) about them … I then employ a ZAP, a Zinging Activation Procedure, (a long large mouth/lung full of a legato one breath fractally collusional line intended to de-stabilize & to evoke (not to claim) alterior reassemblies) which campaigns to nutritionally gain altitude and steer toward the ‘robust, the realm of loin and therapy, and what we are working with in this Hinge Application is an archaeology, digging into the logos, the word uncovering perhaps perturbing material yet ‘pertinent,’ (‘pertination’ = neologism) and then to present the results of our dig which is the application.
Now to show why “end” is anathema, and how Hinge Enlarges, imagine the other modules we can submit “prolong,” “prolongation,” to:
the road to prolong road
in the prolonging of orgasm
with prolongation this pertinence
from prolongation this archaelology
prolong like conspicuous tribe
To break it down, the seven modules cited above are: 1. the road to ____ road 2. with __ 3. smelling ___ 4. in the ____ of _____ 5. with ____ this ____ 6. from ___ this ____ 7. 2 syllables plus “like” plus three of four syllables plus one syllable.
The “with” module to date has over 200 applications. All the others cited have a minimum of twelve. Once each of the “prolong” modules above has been fulfilled/executed, we should be treated to some very enlightening views of “prolong/prolongation,” some “novel” views if I may say so, and here we again see Hinge at work for “novelty” has already been treated with “with novelty,” “the road to novelty road,” “smelling novelty,” etc. — there you have it, our language, our exchanges, become ignited by flesh-outs, stomach kicking impregnations, the wor(l)d becomes more fascinating, it is both what we are saying/exchanging and the trip-over events that trigger further explosive illuminatories. We are enmired in the Dervish-Fabulous.
Obviously this needs to become a group practice. One person can only go so far in creating a linguistic cosmology. And as we speak this conjoinment is taking place, Michael Annis will be the featured poet in the upcoming Cartier Street Review and will be featuring three of his own modules, one of which I have hinged to. So as more modules are being born, what I would call zero foundation creation, we have existing modules attracting Modular Reaction. All quite exciting. I hope you agree.
Bug: The complementation and prolongation sides to Hinge seem to indicate that it could very well move beyond writing. It seems to be a method of interacting. Is there a Hinge beyond writing?
James: Absolutely. Absolutely. Good catch, Jared. Let’s call it an activity of interactivity, connectivity, and complementarity? Basically, the behavior is as follows: Each Hinge Application (what formerly was called the “poem”) is intended to work independently. To qualify as a Hinge Application (a MUPAE), it must in some manner enlarge the “particle,” (the subject). Each application, in turn, is connected to additional applications that are also working on enlarging (complementation) the particle – causing an unremitting cogency combustion. At the same time, each application, by virtue of creation, breeds new particles as it dehisces. And while new particles are being created, so are new modules (modules being the device that shuttle the particle, such as “the road to ____ road). An upsweeping spiral of contagious generative creation is thus efflorescing.
So in answer to your question, Hinge invites, indeed requires, non-linguistic disciplines to co-create. For example, I worked with the hugely talented guitarist/poet/artist, Joe Giglio on fulfilling (this, in Hinge Language would be the third element of the three P’s – the first is pivot (with), the second would be the particle (in this case, arson), and the third would be the postulate, which would be our duet-ing to “with arson.” (Any interested readers should really consult the Hinge Theory Diagnostic in Smelling Mary). With Joe playing the guitar, and myself playing English, we set forth on playing “arson.” What sets this collaboration apart from the plethora of artistic collaborations is that we are focused on fleshing out and treating subject matter (i.e. arson), whereby “arson” becomes more MindFu(i)ll(ed). We are not intermixing but inter-breeding. In the volume Smelling Mary, Michael Annis executed the first Hinge Visual Event, the artwork collaborating with and extending the linguistic information. Art, architecture, drama, sulpture dance, all creative endeavors are potential Hinge Operatives.
My focus has necessarily been on creating a productive Hinge Linguistic Universe to serve as a prototype. It is also my hunch/belief, along with that of my publisher, Michael Annis, that there are laws at work in these Hinge Formulations that should interest the scientist and the mathematician.
Hinge is thus all-inclusive, it is a way of being-in-the-world. Hinge would necessitate a change in the pedagogic system, we would no longer have isolated subjects with isolated teachers and textbooks – History textbooks/History teacher, Math textbook/Math teacher – we need to reengineer the very foundations of our Education programs (to provide flow-throughs) as well as well as our society, not performing what the current administration seems intent upon doing – societal restoration, but rather, and very profoundly, societal Re-Creation. I even envision Hinge providing the spark that could serve to de-barrier the Palestinian/Isreali conflict. But I fear I’m getting away from our current purview now.
The short answer is an emphatic YES! writing is but a Hinge Aspect.
Bug: What lead you to Hinge, to viewing language in the particular ways that you are?
James: Similar to a scientific breakthrough in a laboratory, I would have to say it was accident. I was driving with the movement therapist Victoria Ganim from Santa Monica, Ca to NYC with a stopover in Fort Collins to visit with my publisher, Michael Annis, and to appear on radio. At that point I had begun a poem beginning with “with.” After that I placed “with” before a word and that was it, that was the spark, the catalyst, the cat was out of the bag, an alchemy, an activity transpired once I preceded a word with the “with,” what we now term the “pivot,” and like a gourmet discovering a perfect wine to twin with a certain cheese, I could hardly await the next encounter, I was off, transported, a “with” among a universe of words, of words waiting to be launched by this magical property, this empowering elixir. By the time we reached Michael’s house, I had executed about seven “with” applications and was ecstatic about the thaumaturgic properties inherent in this formulation. Michael had just finished publishing my book ToxiCity, and we had become as close as brothers while we were putting the book together, true compadres. He had seen photos of me, but I had no visual image of him, and when he opened the door, there he was, a Christ figure, lean and taut, the face chiseled, prophetic, … fierce. He opened the door and before it even closed behind us I was regaling him with “withs,” opening my notebook and reading him the applications, I didn’t notice the surroundings, barely acknowledged his wife, I knew there was something important, something blazing upon us, and, — he took it all in, endorsed the alchemy, the mad furnacings agglomerating. We talked for two days and nights, I did a radio appearance, we ate food, but all I remember is our excitement, and this third factor that coagulated around us, that we couldn’t name or identify, but that was searing our insides with entreaty. Then I began doing applications pivoting off of the formulation (called “modules”) “the road to ____ road,” and then off of the pivot, “smelling,” then, again accident, I tried putting the same word in the “road” formulation that was in “with” and “smelling,” and I found that each module was capable of delivering different and additional news. I was too caught up in this tumult to want to do anything other than deliver it, create it, and, one evening, having dinner with the Emily Dickinson and Literary Critic/poet, Mary Newell, I asked her what she thought about all this lingual behavior and she said “it’s like a Hinge,” so Mary Newell is the person who actually coined the term that we all use today. So the progress/process, has been very incremental, step by step, with new developments occuring all the time. The precise answer to “what led me to viewing language in the particular ways that I do,” is that language led me there.
Bug: How do you decide what to turn into a pivot?
James: That is such a great question! I’d like to see more attention and study being given to the phenomenology of the Question. The question is such a propellant, such a mobilizer. Now that I think about it, the question is what the pivot sets up. See, Jared, we’re actually making advances in Hinge Theory now. We could say, could we not, that the Question is the domain of the possible, it is the alchemical zone which initiates construction and assemblage, i.e. creativity. At the most basic survival level, “I am hungry,” results in the question, “How do I satisfy this hunger.” The module, “with mermaid” leads us to ask, what? with mermaid, what? to what? “smelling mermaid,” what … what’s it smell like? “the road to mermaid road,” – what happens on that road? what direction does it take us? Without the pivot the word lies static, lexiconic; the area we need to spring into for transformation, for galvanization, is the Domain of Query. (I will be developing this, the Query, and how it relates to Hinge Theory, down the road.)
How do I “decide what to turn into a pivot” is really a two part answer. The first part of the answer is the belief that Everything should be pivotized, thrown into question, tossed up, explored, made more interesting, doused with fascination. (After all, we live in a Democracy). This is why Hinge is evolving into a discipline/a practice, since it can never reach fulfillment as a one person enterprise. Every word in the dictionary needs to be launched by a “with” (not to mention other modules), every image, every appearance, gesture, manifestation, concept, sound, color, etc., is ripe for Hinge Fulfillment. So the decision is already made, everything requires pivot, it’s just a matter of getting around to it all. As we mentioned in SM: “There is virtually no component of Hinge that does not yearn for intercourse, … throughout the ongoing invention of Hinge, we learned to our continual astonishment that we are dealing with a very erotic universe.”
The second part of the answer — how I decide to pivot what I pivot – is that it’s largely accidental. I’m beginning to feel quite strange answering so many of your questions with “accidental.” I thought the idea behind the “interview” was, in some measure, to feature the interviewee, and here I am repeating how inconsequential I am, self-annihilating, so to speak. By the end of the interview I may simply vanish.
But I think my role is to recognize a particle deserving addressment; someone might say in a conversation, “it’s intuition,” and I will say to myself, hmmm, that’s interesting, intuition, now what does that really mean, what do we really know about intuition, and, most importantly, what can we learn about intuition, and then I’ll just chamber it in the module (or multiple modules) “with intuition,” and off we go. This got to be something of a joke as I’d go out to dinner with a friend, I’d have two or three modules I’d be working with during the day, and we’d be talking and something curious would arise and my friend would say, “with preposition,” and I’d say no, no, leave me alone, … it’s like I was being bombarded with insemination requests.
Then there’s the role of serendipity/synchronicity/divine intervention which I think the artist is particularly alert to. One becomes a conduit for the miraculous, the necessaries, the materials required to flesh out a vision/a mission simply appear magically. At first, when I was younger, this was quite spooky, I’d be working on a crow poem, for example, and at that time there hadn’t been many books written about crows, and I’d happen into a bookstore, and within moments while I was there for another book, a book on the Raven would appear, and that Raven book would end up containing very crucial material for the poem’s formation. But now I relax about these “givens,” these divine interventions, in fact, I’ve come to expect them, to depend upon them. Once a subject (particle) has been chosen to be featured (perhaps like in an interview?), it is also clear that they are ripe to be pivoted through differing modules, so that is another decision to be made: ultimately, each particle requires submission to each extant module. Since there is limited time, the decision to let’s say submit Mermaid (prior to “oligarchy”) to every module available is made because I have an ongoing absorption in the Mermaid and require as much information/enlightenment as I can obtain on her, thus I need to know how she will appear as she fleshes through the various tosses. She emerges as a pressure.
Now that becomes curious, the dynamic of “pressure” in the psychic topography. I want to flag this as an area deserving further investigation. To initiate, we will pivot “pressure” through three differing modules: “with pressure,” “the road to pressure road,” and “smelling pressure.” So this both answers and illustrates how I decide what to pivot: they arise. They occur.
We are also illustrating Hinge Behavior during this interview as already we are breeding subject matter (particles) that are just begging for it – The Domain of Query, Pressure, the road to developmental road, Hinge & Arousal Maintenance, Prolongation, etc. A wealth of material is being created during only a few pages of this interview process. This qualifies this interview as a Hinge Event.
Bug: How has the reception for Hinge been so far?
James: Well, I don’t feel I’m in the rating business, and I’m hesitant to comment on the reception to my own invention. There are only two ways it could go: what a pompous, arrogant asshole, or, it smacks of false humility. That being said, I’m quite pleased by the reception, as Hinge has affected some lives very deeply, musicians and artists as well as poets and writers. Adam Roufberg of the radio show, Radio Active Lunch (broadcasting and streaming live from Vassar College, WVKR), recently dedicated a show to Heller Levinson, and with a group of talented musicians proceeded to Hinge musically. Kurt DeVrese of the sensational Belgian literary ezine, alligatorzine,(www.alligatorzine.be), enthusiastically embraced Smelling Mary and featured a selection on his site. Examples abound, but I fear leaving someone out, so I’ll stop here. Additionally, it’s important to note, that the applications (the “poems”) were achieving widespread acceptance by fine literary journals, both print and online, without any understanding that these applications were connected to a larger picture. That is how they were designed. Each application is intended to stand on it’s own as a successful utterance. Your magazine, The Jivin’ Ladybug, for instance, featured Hinge applications prior to Hinge Theory being unveiled.
That being said, I will lament that book sales have been pitiful. I feel particuarly poor about that as the publisher, Michael Annis, has poured so much of himself into this project that it disturbs me to see him remunerated so slightly. This is a reflection, I fear, on there being a disinclination to explore deeply. A person can google me, read a few poems of mine online, and feel – as someone who was soliciting me for a book review actually said, without ever having read a book of mine, that she “knew all about me” – they are in touch with my work. This book-deprivation phenomenon has been much discussed by others, so I’ll let it go at that.
It also must be mentioned that there has been no publicity, and little effort to secure readings. My focus continues to be more about doing the work than worrying about how it’s being received. Which has more to do with the fact that there is so much work to be done, then it does with egolessness. We are not looking for “reception”, we are looking to Overhaul.
Bug: Since this interview has been somewhat concerned with beginnings, I’m curious as to what made you start writing poetry and why poetry over other art forms?
I did particpate in other art forms – drums from a very young age, and visual expressions – , but it seems that poetry seduced me more comprehensively, or, perhaps another point of view, would be — I was simply better at it.
With my background from the navy seals and military cognizance training, I developed into one of the leading Intelligence agents in the far East. My specialty was Laos and Thailand. When not gathering intelligence and disciplining subordinates, I spent a lot of time in brothels and bars, soaking up tongues, bitters, & babble, a collage of seediness, grime, … skank. It wasn’t long before my off-duty behavior took its toll. My intelligence was less reliable, the wrong people were getting killed, the wrong trucks requisitioned. I was becoming more and more dissolute, slithering through vertiginous opiate miasmas, perfumed pubic petals, inviting forests of nymphys & hallucination. My grip on my responsibilities waned. My assessments became more & more skewered. This did not go unnoticed. I was talked to. Consulted with. I was advised. I received warnings. My career was in jeopardy. I feared life outside the “company,” I knew it to be perilous, flimsy, … I couldn’t afford risking all. Mi Jeong, one of my favorites girls, had a copy of The Poetry of Robert Frost on her night table, I read the poem “The Road Not Taken” and it changed my life. I was saved. You could say that it was the trinity of Mi Jeong, the Pillow, and Robert Frost, that rescued me from perdition. I was soon Zooming down the poetry highway. Gathering Highly Classifieds like a motherfucker.*
* From “with my background …” down, is devisement and suggests HL’s aversion toward the strictly personal.
Bug: We’ve talked about how Hinge can branch beyond the realm of writing & you’ve mentioned the collaborations between you & Joe Giglio. I was wondering if you could talk about the role of performance in your writing. Does it influence the compositions? What is the best way to perform your applications?
James: Pretty much I turn up the rap music on my boombox, raise the volume of Trane’s “Love Supreme” on my iPod which blares out of 3 foot JBL subwoofers, max the volume on my computer spitting out Elvis singing “Heartbreak Hotel,” then I get Joe Giglio on the phone and ask him to play “Moon River” on “Butterscotch” his telecaster, & while this sound cyclonic is mushroomrooming I’m also watching Nureyev dance “The Corsair” on YouTube while my daughter is bitching in my other ear about my lack of parental skills. These enactments situate me in a proper environment for Hinge compositions and undoubtedly impress themselves upon my creations. I mean, when Elvis sings “just take a walk down lonely street, to Heartbreak Hotel,” with Elvin careening on the tom-toms, & Joe blistering through enharmonic scaling & Nuryeyev performing “tours en l’air,” you just know you’re in the country of “the road to lonely road,”* “in the heartbreak of lonely, “smelling Heartbreak,” “smelling lonely,” “lonely like libidinous flaw,” “from lonely this heartbreak,” – crashing breakers of outseeking source muse, sacred mash, celestial minglings.
Two days ago, a brilliant painter – Henry Avignon – contacted me and asked for guidance on employing Hinge in some of his artistic projects. We are now in the midst of a collaboration which is initialing with the Mermaid Particle. I’ll have material to actually show you down the road.
It’s difficult to apply determinations like “best” to our enterprises because, like I said, Hinge is very much still in its infancy and as more and more practitioners become involved, the playing field will expand and so will its behaviorisms. I’m hacking away at the thornies as I pilgrim through the linguistic brambles, … frenetically, doggedly, marveling in amazement as the nuggets I uncover are being scooped up and developed.
This is all very encouraging. There might be hope.
* the road to lonely road
sunkfull, ….. slinkery capsize
bloat cacophonous caulking
callow co-ordinates (going down)
the calumny that closes a hold a
perfidy a puncture
a skull manufactured
Bug: You’ve mentioned that with Hinge there is a break, that it seems to call into existence a new kind of reader. While many avant-garde movements have attempted to do the same, I get the sense that with Hinge, you’re going for something different. How can this interactive poetics avoid getting ghetto-ized as “avant-garde” or “experimental”? While these terms rarely do justice, I find they fit even less in Hinge, a poetics gauged to be “experiential” rather than simply “experimental”.
James: I like the distinctions you’ve drawn and I think they are right on the money. It was Michael Annis (HDP publisher) who said that “with Smelling Mary (the first true Hinge enactment), James, you’ve drawn a line in the sand.” And what he meant is that it established once and for all the differential between “dead poetry” (his words), and that which is truly alive, vitalistic, and galvanizing. Additionally, it suggests that if you’re not practicing Hinge, you’re archaic. Single-serving sized poems (Jared Demick term) may be skilled, admirable, moving even – quixotic curiosities –, but, as in the case of iambic pentameter, they are no longer pertinent. No longer offering a medicinal contribution. Most so called “poets” on the current scene are executing mere Vanity Exercises – like pumping iron in the mirror, look how great I am, applaud me. You’ll notice, to segregate myself and Hinge from this culture, I do not call our creations “poems,” but rather refer to them as “applications.”
Certainly, Hinge is “experiential” and not “experimental.” This is not another link in poetic movement to be annotated in the Norton Anthology; we’re not traveling from Dada to Surrealism to Beat to Concrete to the New York School to Deep Image to Confessional to Language school …. We are not an offshoot. Not some brand new mannerism looking to insert itself into the mainstream to attract fat University salaries. No. We are guerillas, saber-toothed, dangerous & dreamy; we come armed with insight & provisions. We are dedicated to affecting a Revolution in the Country of Mind.
Hinge Theory is not a philosophy; it is a guideline to enable entrance to the Hinge Universe which is a continuing construct of perpetually interconnecting, profusely propagating, contagiously enlivening multi-universes of multi-complementary extensions. We have identified language as alive generative reproductive. We replace the lexiconically static with the Impregnative-Fertile. Unlike Surrealism, which adapts a poetic practice to achieve an ideational goal – penetrating to the “real” with methodologies that are considered more “real” (Surreal) than rationalistic approaches –, Hinge is paradoxically about creation and discovery. I say paradoxically because we view creation/exploration/discovery as all coterminous. We are not claiming to present any thing that doesn’t already exist, but, rather to deliver what Does Indeed Exist. To reveal what has been dormant, undisclosed because, like rocketry which enabled the human race to get a handle on outer space, we now have an approach that can lead us to uncharted territory, to miraculous material. A book like Smelling Mary is essential reading to illustrate the above discussion because it walks its talk. One can see/experience how a lingual universe is being created, step by step, cautiously, reverently, circumspectly, gaining & gaining, galaxies being created. The only apt comparison would be to our universe which has already been created and is still undergoing creation, evolvement, … we can talk about it, but the universe is still the universe, existing independent of exegesis and scientific analysis. The physicist Adam Roufberg, is working on a paper entitled — “A Statistical Analysis of Combinatorics in the Phase Space of Hinge Theory, and Several Mappings In Complexity.” I don’t have a clue what he’s talking about, but I anxiously await the paper. And that’s what I mean, the creation continues unabated, independent of discussion and analysis. In fact, I recently sent Adam a new Hinge Alert (astonishing alerts arise as I do my field work which I attempt to pass along to fellow practitioners) and he said it totally altered his approach.
To answer the question: how can Hinge avoid ghettoization or reductivistic simplifications? It avoids it by being what it is – an alive, continuously expansionistic ever-volumizing production that is fueled by a gathering of “unknowns.” So any attempts to shrivellize Hinge Activity, to try to shelve it, commodify it, is merely an exercise in dumbness. It is inaccurate and doesn’t apply to Hinge. The horse is domesticated, but not the zebra. The zebra avoids domesticity by being a zebra and not a horse. You can’t tame the untamable.