Literal and metaphorical speech are not related as more and less ‘faithful’ representations of an object: both seek to secure the intelligible presence of what is perceived. But it is arguable that the metaphorical, or at least the non-slavishly literal, has in some circumstances a better chance of representing what is spoken of, in so far as it seeks to identify a form of action that is active within another phenomenal shape—so that the distinctive form appears (paradoxically) more plainly when ‘playing away from home,’ detached from its original specific embodiment and linked to another context; just as the distinctive feature of or moment in the life of the ‘host’ subject becomes more itself when phrased in a borrowed terminology.