2003.03.11
ideas
Rubbing My Duchampiana Oeuvre
2003.03.13 13:53
reenactment a day keeps future away
I forget where I put my book on mnemonics!
What does the rough edge of a tongue have to with Uranus in Pisces anyway? it was "the fruits of Uranus in Pisces."
Were your parents really married on the solstice?
I accidently took some liquid haldol and cogentin mixed in juice once. nothing happened. [Or so he thought.]
Tangled web goes this way and alzheimer goes that way
I just won $8000 in the lottery. What should I buy now?
No doubt the artist suffered from rubbing his Duchampiana oeuvre way too much.
2003.03.14 09:47
Re: www.cremaster.net
Nice sculpture! Makes me wish I had 3D CAD models of them all, a virtual/other sculpture collection. Plus, 3D CAD models of the sculpture would have greatly enhanced the offerings of the website, but maybe 3D CAD sculpture is actually another artist's domain.
Now compare the Cremaster characters' genealogy with the genealogy of the Neo-Flavians [gauge/limits: Constantius I to Julian the Apostate], and keep track of how many blood relatives and in-laws Constantine had killed, and then how many blood relatives and in-laws his sons had killed—easily labeled The Imperial Metabolic Cycle. No doubt Minervina remains the most obscure. Nice paradigm shifting architecture!
If I make the trip to see The Cremaster Cycle exhibition, think I might get to see Continental Divide again as well?
2003.03.17 12:16
Re: Has anyone seen whatever that thread was called??
Another one bites the dust.
From kidnapping to bulldozing.
What limits will we see next?
Probably time to just walk away from the murder mystery.
Finished reading Shamrock Tea late last night.
In the future everyone will remember for fifteen minutes [and forget they ever heard of Rosemarie Trockel].
Just when I was beginning to like anagram makers.
Ivana B. A. Memory Chip
2003.03.19 12:20
finally filling in the blanks
All I got is this lousy manifest limitation.
It had something to do with memory, but I forgot what that was.
20 March 2003 is the first official Calendrical Coincidence Day.
[20 March 1778 Benjamin Franklin and Louis XVI meet at Versailles for the first time. Wonder what was on the menu then? A decisive diplomatic moment in the (USA) war of independence.]
[Marcel Duchamp said someting about "Where do we go from here" in Philadelphia 20 March 1961.]
[etc.]
I find Uranus in Pisces inspiring.
2003.03.19 17:14
Re: Taboo
Survivor Iraq reality TV
[too taboo or too ironic or too much art?]
"Bring me your torch."
"The tribe has spoken."
[remember it's all a game to see who wins $1,000,000.]
2003.03.23 16:17
Euphrates [copy] Cat
20 March is Oil Nationalization Day in Iran.
Maybe 20 March (2003) is now Oil Liberation Day in Iraq?
| |
Étant Donnés' back door shares a niche with two Mondrians at the Philadelphia Museum of Art.
Composition with Blue (1926) hangs on the wall next to Étant Donnés' back door,
and Composition with White and Red (1936) hangs on the wall across from Étant Donnés' back door,
and it takes "2 KEY" to open Étant Donnés' back door.
cracks in a niche with restricted entrance
2003.03.24 11:22
| |
2003.03.31 11:29
finding fraud, damning the mediocre
"I'm for Duchamp." I find him a pretty good job, a man who was frustrated by the utter fraud of art in general, and decided to try to damn the mediocre. He did paintings too, alas.
2003.03.31 12:35
Re: stuff that really is life changing
At the Yale Center for British Art in the large window of the top floor gallery facing closest to the New Haven Green there, in the general lower right corner of the large window, are the scant remains of what looks to be a mosquito embedded in the glass. I call it Teeny.
Definitely among of the stuff that changed my life.
2003.04.01 09:05
Re: Has anyone seen Rosalind Krauss?
Krauss was in Paris 24 June 1999, standing between Peter Eisenman and Hubert Damisch. She is short, but didn't look all that old. Had big dark sunglasses on her head.
2003.04.01 18:37
been there, done that [taboo]
Guess it's time for me to work on the Piranesi print now. And to think I was going start that two weeks ago. Guess I needed some more inspiration.
2003.04.02 10:27
Re: The Last Taboo?
...it is a sign of the metabolic imagination more than anything else. (It also demonstrates an inversion of the 'trash into art' phenomenon.) While metabolism incorporates a creative/destructive duality, it also manifests a resultant energy. This is what really happens, (whether you (were taught to) appreciate it or not).
The only effect of affluence here is the greater potential of (acceptable, ha ha) recognition that comes with it.
2003.04.02 10:53
Re: changing stuff that really is life
My life is my hobby. Everything else is incidental.
...soon to be The Curatorium, which is next to The Living in the Dining Room.
2003.04.03 14:32
Re: The Last Taboo?
2003.04.03 14:32
...the Taliban destroyed Buddhist monuments, but they did not create anything in the process. In this case, the Taliban are not utilizing a metabolic imagination.
| |
2003.04.04 11:01
Re: The Last Taboo?
What the Taliban did was assimilation in the extreme, i.e., purge. Just like when our bodies assimilate in the extreme, i.e., purge.
Assimilation and metabolism are two distinct corporal physiologies. Assimilation is basically absorption of nutrients and the purge of that which is left after full absorption. Metabolism is a creative/destructive process (catabolism and anabolism) which releases energy. Metabolism is a basic tenant of life itself. Thus creative /destructive duality is a basic tenant of life itself.
In 1981, the Sammlung Architektonischer Entwurfe (a collection of 176 prints delineating architectural designs) by Karl Friedrich Schinkel was republished by Exedra Books to commemorate the 200th anniversary of Schinkel's birth. The box set of prints (edition of 1000) cost $500.00, and I bought number 476 (I think) October 1981. By 1984 Exedra Books went bankrupt and Baluster Books bought them out, which included a large quantity of sets of Schinkel prints that were never boxed or sold. Baluster, I luckily found out from a friend that collects architecture books, was selling the unboxed print sets for $100.00, so I bought a second set of prints. This was lucky for me because I could now replace the several prints from #476 that I had already mutilated—this was right around the time when I saw CAD (computer aided design) acting as iconoclast toward manual dexterity; I mutilated some Schinkel prints to 'illustrate' that computers were iconoclastically changing /revolutionizing manual dexterity. By the early 1990s I began to incorporate selected prints from the second set of Schinkel prints into the CAD process by ink plotting cad files onto them and then watercoloring the plotted portions of the prints—not at all different than what the Chapmans did with the Goya prints.
Here's what I thought then and now:
1. Yes, I knew what I was doing would be 'shocking', but I was also doing something that exhibited my own inner courage, which is what was most valuable to me.
2. Yes, the prints were 'valuable', and for me the prints were now really good/expensive art materials, like the very best oil paint and the very best canvas/linen or something, etc. etc.
3. I was then acting/arting out an iconoclasm that I saw came with the advent of computers within creative activities.
4. In the late 1990s I came to realize that metabolism is a creative/destructive duality, and that there is indeed a metabolic human imagination, and artistic activity can utilize the metabolic imagination.
5. In 2002, during an email discussion at design-l, I came to realize that I was sometimes doing art that was by nature appositional, i.e., creating art by adding another layer to existing art. [Remember I apposed Borofsky in 1984?]
Big Question:
Is anyone else opining within this thread actually speaking from first hand experience? I feel first hand experience is more valuable than any other type of experience. Maybe because no one else can then destroy a first hand experience already had.
|