2004.08.12 10:38
Re: common history should be rewritten as our-story
Patrick, when you write:
Once established such a list, let's say of people born the some day of the year , any historian or researcher could extract from their names, race, nationalities, work, or any other data or comparisons of their personal files, or lives, the conclusions he wants, the results he needs to show, from his interpretation to establish his point. to write his story
I hope you do not think that the above describes the process by which I initially composed the group of characters for The Odds of Ottopia, because a whole other (inverted) set of operations is actually at play in my work.
When was Eutropia born? When did Eutropia die?
These are two questions that describe a subliminal motive of TOOO.
Also, deathdays take precedence over birthdays within TOOO. [So much for the fragility of life.]
One mystery has already been solved, i.e., when Fausta committed suicide.
So where exactly in Greece did the spiral columns come from?
Athens? Olympia? Is Leni "Triumph of the Will" Riefenstahl the one who finds out?
If you do the research, you'll find that over the last five years I have written a very uncommon history of St. Helena, and, in so doing, a very uncommon history of early Christian architecture has also been written.
If you do the research, you'll also find that over the last six years I have written a very uncommon history of Piranesi and his Ichnographia Campus Martius, and, in so doing, a heretofore unknown printing of the Ichnographia has been discovered.
I am much more interested in uncommon history than in common history.
History aside, The Odds of Ottopia is my exercise in blurring the virtual and real to somewhat of an extreme.
|