[…] And I grow Laconic even beyond Laconiciſme; for ſometimes I return only Yes, or No, to queſtionary or petitionary Epiſtles of half a yard long.

But throughout the morning there are about three or four who wander in and out carrying glasses from the glassery to the dining-room and performing duties which are mentioned in the course of the play.

https://books.google.com/books?id=_hkBAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA118 page 118 It speaks well for the general healthiness of the English nation that we have no words corresponding to ‘Weltschmerz’ or ‘Ennui’. The ordinary Englishman experiences neither of these things. […] https://books.google.com/books?id=_hkBAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA119 page 119 Weltschmerz is a species of disease, a sort of spiritual measles—or to give a more technical diagnosis, it is the revolt of a young soul against the stone and iron of existence. […] ‘Ennui’ only attacks people either of hopeless incapacity or incurable laziness. Weltschmerz on the other hand is a positive, restless, state, a state of protest against the nature of things. Treated as a foreign word.]

Although he attributes the theory of paradessences to Chas, Shakar has described the concept as an invention of his own, one that he takes as true: [W]alking around supermarkets myself, watching commercials, paying attention to what had an effect on me, and then trying to figure out why it did...I came up with the idea of paradessence (Hogan). One gets the sense that Shakar believes in the power of the paradessence. that (along with postirony) it is not only one of the novel's central neologisms, but a principle of construction for the novel itself.