[-empyre-] glitch device/divide
ajaco at xs4all.nl
Mon Dec 12 22:15:24 EST 2011
H Curt et al
11 Ways to escape the symbolic Field
Thank you Curt to not just accept the constraints (language) of post post structuralistic people. This was also - I think - the point of Merleau's controversy towards Sartre's existentialism
Apart from being pushed to a (pre?) romanticism it looks like as if when 'reality' leaks out from idiosyncratisms such as glitch/glitch-art/art it is met with a forcefull repulsion to stay in just that same realm of 'containment'. As if the 'contents' are for ever to be hidden by the 'package'
A glitch or a rupture should or can reveal the contents through the package, whether the package is an art/philosophical societal/political or an otherwise rigid authoritarian systemic world constructing machinic device
That makes me think - again - how wrong McLuhan was:
the meaning is not the message/massage, the meaning is the package and as such 'no-meaning / no-knowing' or the 'unknown unknows' are revealed through cracks in the semantic surface
Sent from my eXtended BodY
On 9 dec. 2011, at 21:52, Curt Cloninger <curt at lab404.com> wrote:
> Hi Eduardo (Andreas, and all),
> The apparant paradox of "The void is all there is" merely reveals the prejudice toward "presence" which is built into predicative language systems. It doesn't really prove anything other than language is unable to access The Artist Formerly Known As The Void (which seems to be Andreas' point).
> Just because a concensus of post-post-structuralist people have agreed to use language to reduce the entire world to language, that doesn't mean all contemporary people have to drink that same flavor of cool aid. There are other plateaus of immanence besides language (that "exists" in "realms" other than ascii-centric listservs). Yes, a romantic quest ideed (but hopefully rigorous); within and without language.
> Way Off and/or On Topic,
> At 10:11 PM -0500 12/8/11, Eduardo Navas wrote:
>> Dear Andreas,
>> I think others have moved past my comment on to more complex ground, but I should follow up to a couple of points you make.
>> On discourse: the very fact that we are communicating about the specificity of glitch as an art form is proof enough that we are dealing within a specialized field. This is all my statement means.
>> Regarding your statement on the "pre-discursive," it is safe to say that in our times, it is common knowledge, at least based on what is left to us after poststructuralism, that it is impossible to function outside the symbolic. There is no such thing as "pre-discursive." A search for such an element may closely appear to be romantic.
>> To this effect, your statement: "The void is *all* there *is*" exposes that through negation existence is confirmed.
>> Eduardo Navas
>> On 12/8/11 6:19 AM, "Andreas Maria Jacobs" <ajaco at xs4all.nl> wrote:
>> I wonder why discourse should have relevance at all, I think what matters is to uncover a field which is *inherently* pre-discursive and *existent but not known* and consequently *before* any possibility of interpretation.
>> Artists task is to observe - from their own subjectivities - a *probable* - because not yet commonly perceived - future understanding of the phenomenal appearances of perceived/sensual *reality*
>> Also I do think that just that makes it possible to (re)gain *truthful* insight in *reality*, wether technological, political, societal or personal and where aesthetics plays no role. (i.e. whether it is boring or not, does not matter, because that again is discursive and supposedly based on previous knowledgeability of the mental gestalts of being bored, surprised, touched etc etc )
>> The conservative - literary - *art worlds* collect, maintain and indeed conserve quasi-religious fetishized material forms, which are but indicators of what lies beyond them
>> Andreas Maria Jacobs
>> "The void is *all* there *is*"
> empyre forum
> empyre at lists.cofa.unsw.edu.au
More information about the empyre