Sacrifice of Isaac

The Infinite Movement?

I've always liked this one, but since Kierkegaard how could I not bring him up.

I think I like the study more, though, where Abraham doesn't look about to get hit - I first mis-saw it as the angel covering Isaac's eyes, which seemed beautiful and is the reality I choose

Upon seeing the closer version, though, I was surprised at how heavy the angel's features are
He looks much like my English teacher....

But where is the ram?

The Infinite Movement

Faith Only?

The true movements of faith are ones of passion, not meditation.

-> So it is said, so it may be?

But these infinite movements do not need to be those of faith, just those without meditation

But serene

Kierkegaard perhaps admired the faithful and their 'absurd' to greatly to see what was before him, or within his own capacity

There is the capacity for 'infinity' tied to the finite in so many - the expression of so many movements of prayer, faith, spiritualism, idealism or creation, perhaps, are the same

There are those who let life take it's course without resigning themselves per se to a higher power

-> There are those that gaze into the 'third eye'

Or what is it, psychologically?

Is that our horror-fascination, too? 

It seems that the abyss that stares back into us is a lie, or that it was there

As a kind of peace

Or that the abyss, the God, the infinity and exit and whole ego is ourselves

The endlessness we reflect on is our own being, a brain that considers it's own existence

Nicola Samorì

Male, Italian

He can speak for himself.
http://www.nicolasamori.com/ 

Steffi Grant

Wife of Kenneth Grant - negatice space, black/white, prints(?)

So dreamy

Rilke.

Love Song

-Rainer Maria Rilke

Translated by A.Z. Foreman

How shall I hold my soul and yet not touch

It with your own? How shall I ever place

It clear of you on anything beyond?

Oh gladly I would stow it next to such

Things in the darkness as are never found

Down in an alien and silent space

That does not resonate when you resound.

But everything that touches me and you

Takes us together like a bow on two

Taut strings to stroke them to the voice of one.

What instrument have we been lain along?

Whose are the hands that play our unison?

Oh sweet song!

Stomach Trembling

Kierkegaard's Wild Ferment

"If there were no eternal consciousness in a man, if at the bottom of everything there were only a wild ferment, a power that twisting in dark passions produced everything... if an unfathomable, insatiable, emptiness lay hid beneath everything... What would life be but despair?"

In this I see God.
That may be a misunderstanding, but there it is.

The 'darkness' of Light is an interesting idea
But call me Gilgamesh
But also in this, I can't help but imagine the Ouroboros, coiling about a person's stomach, metaphorically, and creating creation.

That primordial soup is a pretty common conceit

It's funny how a paragraph can last a lifetime,

But persective (obviously) has such an influence - I see that terrifying, roiling mass beneath the surface as God. Chance and evolution seems to me cleaner, more beautiful in a certain way, but he seemed to be thinking of oblivion or eternity (which, when looked upon, seems terrifying because of itself). Much of this, doubtlessly, is to do with the change of thinking and scientific advancements
Though still, the concept of God is in some ways very unchanged. The horror of eternity is surely no different

That aside, the image is so striking, wonderous and beautiful, that it resonates in its way and must be depicted. Something of that feeling - whether fear, trembling, awe or breathlessness - must be universal

Kiekegaard, Søren, 1843, Fear and Trembling, Penguin, London
(drawings are my own)

Austin Osman Spare

 

Occultist/artist (30 December 1886 – 15 May 1956)

The difficulty with philosophy

More and more I realise (thought I knew not to take the word as gospel) that it would be very difficult for, say Kant to describe the sublime. He sounds almost pained. Scarry sounds entirely pleased.

A political philosopher maybe has more substance, but their experience is equally subjective

Psychology is a tricky art for these reasons (short of a physical abnormality being detected) and so things are classed, re analysed, carefully ordered and recorded

Because we cannot know each other?

Post Cel Crabeels

Reconsiderationing

Following a tutorial with Mr. Crabeels things maybe need re-setting-out

-> He had the thought that spiritualism etc. is too big and vague a topic to commit oneself to

The recommendation was 'drawing', and that things that were of interest would present themselves by and by anyway

It seems just as great and vague a topic to me - drawing- but I do see the sense. 

Perhaps somewhere in between? I shall consider it 'drawing' 

And 'personal'

And currently am exploring automatic drawing, writings, and the things that come alongside

I think this is similar to my initial aim that got a little lost somewhere along the way - poor perdú! 

But it helps to clarify my own thoughts/intentions

-> Because his other question was 'how could I hope to express something that I didn't know I wanted to express?'

Perhaps I will know?

Steven Baelen

Steven Baelen

-> So much detail and so much space?!

They don't look much like pencil, which is nice

Ozi recommended this tactic

The lines showing through are pleasing

Makes a drawing...

->It's an beautiful way to look at, and de-construct, drawing
Super clean and removed - Looks like it took it's time
Seems too much hard work for the audience (in a physical way) to me though.

4:05

From 4:05, That Inward Scream.

Where does that come from?
Almost like Glossolalia. It feels good to do that.

What is it to Be?

Notes on Kant, As I Go Along

"God, You are my creation, I created you to create."

Maybe 'shadows' of truth like a plaster Ganesha

-> A net curtain like ectoplasm
I can consider it a game of limits and falliability -  There may just be pleasure to be had in talking 
about the unknown and those strange things like ant-minds.

But what is it to Be? I will be until I am not.
Lightly.

Philosophy is Synthetic, ie. Additive or Productive

The Truth that is the foundation of, for example, Platonsim and Christianity, is regarded as  'presence', or God's presence, as experienced by contrast to His absence.
-> One can have light without shadows, but only having seen light can you appreciate the concept of dark
-> Darkness, in itself, is 'whole' and idescribable without lightness.

We are the light that created god - shrouded in darkness as He is - so that we had a standard to hold ourselves against, perhaps. It would be difficult to find flaws without a measure against which to hold them, it might be said.
The fantasy serves a purpose and fulfills a need.

 So the 'thereness' is, like presence, a duality. One cannot concieve it without it's opposite - that emotional flatness.

-> However, as Jung almost put it, and I would say, everything is real

-> God, whether real or not exists as a concept real enough

As with many things.  

Want, Christopher and Klimowski, Andrzej, 1996, Kant For Beginners, Icon Books Ltd. Cambridge

Analog and Archetype?

Drawing on the Right Side of the Brain

(1)

Is there a connection between the supposed ability of those untrained in art to interpret analog, or expressive, drawings and Jung's 'archetypes'?

-> If they can be said to exist

-> Probably variable by culture?

For that matter, do I really believe in the solid left/right brain thing? Probably not

But there probably are different modes of thinking that we employ (Edwards' R-mode)

But which ear you listen with apparently affects aptitude...

Being as global skills are comprised of many things it might not make sense to say 'reading left, drawing right' since surely some of the the base skills involved in each global one could be on either 'side'

There is certainly a similarity between her descriptions of the L-mode (language, left brain) and R-mode (right brain, visual) and Jung's 1 and 2, automatic drawing
-> One can assume she knew of this, but how much did she develop/adapt?
Edwards doesn't seem very spiritual, so there might be a great difference there...

The idea of the brain observing itself is almost mystic in expression, like a lone thing.
Makes me feel a shell. Complex, soft program for expressing the brain
I wonder why we're so long.
It does not seem to need 'us' greatly, given our triple thinking and subconscious decision making
-> That's not true  but it serves my purpose

Perception is about overcoming the brain's editing of out visions - seeing with one's eyes.

Edwards, Betty, 1999, The New Drawing on The Right Side of the Brain. Penguin Putnam

Maggie Hyde and Michael McGuinness 1992, JungFor Beginners, Icon Books Ltd., Cambridge

On Political

What is Right and Normal?

Brain Vomit.

Lately, having been exposed to a few art critics, theorists, activists and discussions. It seems that the hegemonic attitude within the A/art world is an anti-capitalist one. I've seen more of Marxism - a note here: I certainly don't  tar all left-leaning/socialists with the Marxist brush - lately than I thought I might on an art course, and thought a fair bit more about political theory.

The problem is: I would, reasonably, call myself a capitalist. A liberal one, yes, but financially 'right'.

And I like having stuff.

I never considered myself a particularly peer-pressurisable person, but I'm starting to feel the heat a little.

John Berger (since he recently came back to me) is a man I respect academically,

As is Chantal Mouffe -  even if I disagree with her

As are the people I study with

But I find myself unable to whole-heartedly commit to the anti-capitalist, "we're heading to a corporate wasteland" business. 

-> Corporatism is bad, but so is anything taken to an extreme

And that's it.

I presume that the suggested alternative is socialism since, to make a massively broad stroke, most other systems are fairly unpopular/unknown

But it seems to me that if (rhetorically) we're going to straw man capitalism as extreme, we might as well do the same for socialism, ie. consider it communism. Realistically, which system has the better track record? (And while I doubt anyone alive would support the mostrosity of, say the Soviet Union, North Korea, China and it's One Hundred Flowers, it is hard to take someone saying "I'm a Marxist" out of the context of communism)

 There is a problem with our world - Our System - but I don't think the answer is as simple as "Let's try a new one!"

Anything can be corrupted and abused - That is what we need to deal with

Apple are good for giving us iPods, terrible for what they do to people. That isn't about capitalism or socialism

How many protests have been organised over Facebook? With Smartphones?

We're too used to having Stuff, we forget how we got it

In short: Many people in my 'sphere' are anti-capitalist, I'm not. Boo hoo ):

An Evolving Post (Hopefully)

On On Beauty

1=1

On "On Beauty", Elaine Scarry, 1999

Began reading yesterday. A second reading will be necessary but for now-

Finished section 1 - Beauty, and Being Wrong

To summarise

-> Beauty is worthwhile (?) because it intrigues us, often we misinterpret something's 'beauty' value - in a very broad sense - through either under- or overattribution. When we realise our mistake we examine more closely to find the truth.

-> Also because of replication, in short, 'beauty inspires'

Beauty, and Being Fair
Scarry talks about a divide between beauty and the sublime (divided up by Kant), though it seems to me an arbitary divide - perhaps there is simply more to be understood?
Also, she claims that thre is a connection between beauty and aliveness
And beauty and vulnerability - for the beholder. That this wasn't the case was news to me...

Kant thought that experience of the sublime depended on the viewer rather than the object itself
-> "A virtuous person fears God without being afraid of Him"?
Is fear at the root of beauty? There may be a case for that, too

Want, Christopher and Klimowski, Andrzej, 1996, Kant For Beginners, Icon Books Ltd. Cambridge
Scarry, Elaine, 2000, On Beauty and Being Just, Gerald Duckworth & Co. Ltd., London

Yellowism?

Tailoring The Foot to Fit the Shoe?

So, "Yellowism"

First off, I don't know enough about this to be any kidn of authority. Probably playing to them.

Maybe admitting it mitigates that?

Maybe there was a part of me that thought I had to support these guys because they seem edgy and 'anti-establishment'

From what I can discern their principle can be distilled down to "____ doesn't have to be art, it can be Yellowism"

-> Yellowism = Art percieved in a new way, sans their concepts

-> Yellowism = Art objects (in this context)

(I know there's a strand about changing the way we percieve work based on it's context, but is that really anything new? It's more or less the basis of curating.)

Calling it now:

It's just a new kind of shock art - something creative is either art or anti-art

->Coming up with a random, 'quirky' idea then changing the world to make it seem philosophical

->Lets ruin some art for art's sake (and call it's non-art Yellowism)

I'm up for protesting against institutions, and sometimes that takes 'radical' measures, but that Rothko was defaced for a farce - either Yellowism is a joke, or it's a poor attempt at philosophy.

Smooth, guy.
He kind of contradicts himself on the "not art" bit, anyway.

Personality/Project/Research

Drawing¦There is No Line in Nature

Draw to delineate, express or depict? At most one can only draw a "picture of" the world, never truly this or that.

Drawing is the basis of all art, it is often stated, and I find myself in agreement.

-> Perhaps time for the inner nature, where lines do exsist?

Some looking may just be needed into the origin of our line-makings [is this alll drawing?]

and some line making may be necessary to understand what is not.

-> If there is some second nature to things - a phenomenological one - that cannot be photographed then we must draw it as we understand it but;

Are there lines in that Second Nature?

In relation, it may come out that by drawing a better understanding of oneself and ones true veiw of the world is reached. It might just serve as skill improvement, with nothing so grand as Art falling cleanly out of the movements of our ancients.

But we have always been drawing, so I will endeavour too - really draw, everything, like I haven't in a while.

Perhaps I shall happen to scribble on a wall and understand why I started. 

On Political?

frieze: Shouts and Murmurs

"How can change be manifested if it can’t first be imagined?"

"Who to make it for?" and "What's worth making?"

-> There is a nice antidote for that, I think. Some times radical expression can maybe be just expression?

 I don't want to make political art for the sake of being political, I don't want to make Art just to be Arty. 

-> Perhaps it's time to make a drawing. We can make sense of It by touching it. We can touch it with that Heart Hook? 

-> Put a line here or there, or draw this and that until

Thank you miss Higgie. But also thank you Ms. Mouffe, because when one reads and understands, one cannot forget.

-> The art/issues/politics never leaves us, I hope. But neither should beauty or writing or expression,

once we know how/a way to express  



 Mouffe, Chantal (2007) Artistic Activism and Agnostic Spaces, Art & Research: A Journal of Ideas, Contexts and Methods, Vol. 1, No. 2, Summer 2007 [online] Available at: http://www.artandresearch.org.uk/v1n2/mouffe.html

:24//01//12:

[The New York Trilogy begins]

:1//22//12:

http://www.lifeslittlemysteries.com/1269-slideshow-scientists-analyze-drawings-acid-trip-artist.html [will write about you later]