Created: Friday, September 13th, 2003
Modified: Friday, February 14th, 2005

Art as isolation: A quick thought

Artists as necessarily being isolated and separate from the rest of society.

The amount of artists who truly spend their entire lives pursing the arts are like monks. They do not have anytime for anything but their religion, their art. They are in their own bubble. They can not connect with the common people. Because unlike John Smith, artists spend the majority of their life looking at the world, while others get some worker bee job spending all day doing menial tasks so they can go home and take two hours of their life to look at a pop art versions of what someone told them was meaningful.

Each artist, especially now, is alone in their practice. We are in a time of the individual. So each artist is detached from the next, perhaps even more than from the common man.

Created: Wednesday, September 16th, 2003
Modified: Friday, January 14th, 2005

Art as mysticism: giving attention to each other

I have noticed a lot of parallels between artists and religious fanatics as of late. Both believe that their work is righteous. They also both eagerly try to convince you of its value, as though they need to elaborate beyond its visual structure by explaining the ideas behind it. But how can another’s idea have personal value for me? Is art not only valued when considered for oneself? I suppose some must lead and some must follow and we all are willing to take varying roles at different times. But the most successful artists appear to somehow convince others of their art’s value via visual means alone. In fact talking about one’s art is itself a sign that the visuals have failed to be convincing. No words are necessary under ideal conditions. Paradoxically, under poor conditions words are also rarely spoken by the viewer.

The religious mystic is very alike. Most ignore their radical arguments and simply refuse to reply to them. However, those who are convinced often do nothing but observe with an unfathomable sense of awe. If one’s mind allows it, and one’s desires wish for it, the act of discovering a whole new world of meaning and religious experience is very possible through a belief in religious mysticism.

So why not worship each other and look at each other with the sense of focus and awe that the artist/mystic expects, even demands? I believe that if the majority of people actually thought someone would listen to them or watch them “do their thing” with a positive and unbiased attitude, people would actually take the time to think about what they had to say for themselves. But most are never asked the question, never hear the question asked, and worst of all never get any attention. I believe it is a reciprocal relationship.

Indeed, the mystic’s or even the Christian fundamentalist’s goal fails if he is never listened to. But when he is, when someone is converted to a faith which he exposes them to on a personal level; It becomes very fulfilling and affirming. The formation of the master/student relationship, the devotion towards a life-long desire for profound attention and focus. The tightest of bonds and respect between individuals. A force sorely lacking in modern society.

Created: Tuesday, March 15th, 2004
Modified: Friday, January 14th, 2005

Art as playing video games: specific to abstract

This past weekend I finished a video game. Upon the completion of the game and during my playing I came across the idea that my experience was one of artistic appreciation.

Firstly, I would like to reflect upon the artistic qualities of beating a computer game. During my childhood, the act of sitting down with a friend and beating a game from start to finish was one of the most common rituals of friendship. Several games are built so that they might be appreciated regardless of who is actually controlling the game. They rely more on strategy and concept that might be affected by one or many individuals. Other games are literally interactively cooperative. Others are directly competitive. All of these games allow one to bond and develop interaction skills with others thought the medium of a game. All of these experiences, although very tool specific, provide a positive experience for the users: human interaction and bonding. The type of game I wish to reflect upon more specifically for its artistic sensibilities is the role-playing game.

The game in question is Final Fantasy Six, part of a continuing legacy of famous Japanese role-playing games. They take at least forty hours to complete (perhaps up to eighty if one wants to discover all of the various secrets and sub plots) and are basically interactive, animated, illustrated, books. One has little to no control over the main plot elements. However, one must arrange one’s characters statistically so that they use various items, weapons, and strategies in order to survive puzzles and encounters while exploring a beautifully rendered fantasy world.

Upon finishing the game I felt relieved as though I had accomplished something great and demanding. I had been thoroughly absorbed into this little world for the past ten hours. I had worked myself through a small vacation of trials and tribulations and come out the other side, back into the real world, with another accomplishment behind me. In a way this gave me similar feelings to those of artistic realization. The kind of feelings one gets when one finishes making an artwork and can stand back and realize, see where one has been and how one has thought during the time spent making the art. Then a feeling of sadness comes that the work is completed, the book is over, the climax has fallen and the common baseline of everyday life has returned. One must play a new game, make a new piece of art.

This is not to say that art is a series of escapist pursuits. The works appear as a series of records. Physical skins of growth one sheds in a continuing line of practice. The joy and meaning comes from making these works and perhaps from moments of inspired reflection afterwards. The ending might bring one of these moments out from the subconscious. It might allow an abstracted universal thought to resonate though the work and into experience for an intense moment, but then it is gone. A perspective shrinks quickly back to where it started.

Final Fantasy Six was oldest of the series released in the West and one of the only ones I had never played. I had only ever seen an inspired friend of mine named Peter, play the game with an obsessed vigor for hours in our youth. Peter would not only play the game, he would quote the characters, act out their fighting movements, play the music on his keyboard, etc. It might have been his passion that inspired me to play the game. It might have been his vision that made me see just how deep of a world these games can provide. Maybe that is why I started playing them later, maybe that is why I found it necessary to go back and play that original game I never played myself and only ever saw played by Peter. Another aspect of the artistic experience is found here: inspired spectatorship.

Indeed, these games require more from the observer than most traditionally considered artistic media. Some games require skill, others imagination and strategy. Role playing games require little of these interactive elements. They might even been seen as easily accessible books for the imaginatively handicapped. They combine elements of screenplay with statistics, character design, etc. They are the art of creating entire worlds of fantasy and escapism. They leave little on the surface for the player or spectator. However, when embraced as one’s own, a truly inspired player such as my friend Peter, might make these worlds and characters deeper and more enveloping than commonly thought possible. The amount of people like Peter is not growing.

The internet is allowing more of these networked games to be created into whole worlds and societies of fantasy. One might think of this as a symptom of a sick society. But kids sitting in their rooms playing games with other kids sitting hundreds of miles away in their rooms is better than kids sitting in their rooms playing by themselves.

Otherwise, having beaten the game I felt cleansed of having to play more of these games. They come out every year or so, each one shiny and new. I resolved at some point in the past to stop playing them. To stop being a semi-active spectator, simply putting the pieces of somebody else’s work together was never enough. It gives the illusion of creating one’s own fantasy, one’s own imagination. But it is really a guided tour of many other people’s efforts and views.

In the same manner one might analyze or examine a piece of fine art in order to distill its ‘pure’ elements, its universals, its message; it is the nature of the final fantasy games to go from various fragments of characters and plots to one final abstract battle between good and evil. All of the characters one meets band up and go fight the ultimate bad guy. The final battles and endings often end up becoming very abstract with spells summoning comets that smash through solar systems and destroy galaxies in order to attack one’s opponents. Ultimately, a final message of magic, love, or friendship prevails. The group of friends beat the egotistical loner, who is also often insane and mad with power. One might distill political implications and continue to describe other readings, but I simply wish to reflect upon the way several detailed plots and characters become abstracted in the end.

The games give an example of ways that one might order one’s own attempts at creating a mental framework for the world. What abstract desires does one have that one wants to realize in this real world? What transportation? What friends? What enemies? What location? These games structure entire worlds upon which we model our own fantasies. Connections of aesthetics and music also combine. Everything is here, an entire world of design. However, the viewer, the player, is not called upon to design his or her own world. They are only given the role of the worker ant. They do the little tasks of organizing battles and solving simple puzzles in order to change the world.

In order to appreciate the games further one must look at how they are ordered and relate this passage from the specific to the abstract to one’s own artistic practice of creation and reflection. The presentation is often linear but the movement is generally from specific to abstract. This is the same process entailed by much formal art analysis.

Created: Thursday, February 17th, 2004
Modified: Friday, January 14th, 2005

Art as poetic ideal: living art

A Universal System

of

Organization

as applied to

The Particular Context

of

Contact Juggling

promoting

Community Values

of

Intimate Experience

as both

Mental

and

Physical

Focus.

Documented

by

All Previously Accepted Art Media

to reflect the

Inherent Inadequacy

of

Previous Individual Art Practices

and to exemplify

Their Differences and Similarities.

A death of documentation, a death of recording experiences.
A birth of life, a birth of living experiences.

Examples

Viktor Shlovsky: “Only the creation of new forms of art can restore man to the sensation of the world.”

Hans Haacke: “The context in which a work of art is exhibited for the first time is a material for me like canvas or paint.”

Created: Thursday, February 17th, 2004
Modified: Friday, January 14th, 2005

Art as system creation: language design

The essence of art is freestyle system creation. Making an order for oneself, a method of creation. The communication of this method allows others to share in the experience of artistic creation. The fact that it is indeed a system with laws and such allows for its values to be communicated and shared with a larger audience. Not simply displaying the result of one’s laws and values.

Ironically, it is by creating these orders, these sets of limitation, that we become free to create. The essence of all patterning and sequencing (progressive development) comes from sets of rules.

We need to define terms in order to communicate. We need to establish a language in order to share meaning in art. Value art. This common ground used to arrive via the shared experience of life and nature. Later, it came through the shared experience of using a particular medium. Now, when the mind rules all and abstraction is the order of the day, we begin to create our laws from scratch. Our art becomes our own language. The viewer becomes a student learning that language, trying to relate it to his/her own private dialect.

Created: Tuesday, September 16th, 2003
Modified: Friday, January 14th, 2005

Focus as refined movement

As I sat reading an article in my art history book about a man who sought to prove color as the doorway to the soul, (after first establishing an elaborate and pesudo-geometric model of the waxing/waning cycles of the spiritual in art and society) I gazed across the room and saw the afternoon sun shining onto the floor. Distorted diagonals from the window pane’s shadows, patchy light from the wires in the security glass.

I thought, “Why don’t I sit here and watch the sunlight move across the room as the sun goes down, it really can not take that long? Would it not be fun to actually see it happen? While I watch the sunlight I can juggle or spin balls in my hands.” As I stared at the light, I wondered where exactly I should watch and as my consciousness moved to the movements of my eyes and their focus, I became enlightened.

When one really focuses, visually, one is actually moving one’s eyes in a precisely ordered manner. One is not just looking blankly. One follows and moves, like a floating eyeball rolling around the form in question. I also find that when one really concentrates upon a very small and specific visual point, one tends to remain in slight motion, moving the eyes in circular or figure-eight patterns that seem to repeat in a symmetrical movement, however slight. In the same way, the only resolution to many of life’s simple questions are often found in circular, paradoxical, answers whose meaning is not constant, but shifts back and forth between two extremes.

I believe the movement of highly detailed, small-scale focus is also symmetrical to the grander motions of life. Those of the planets around the sun, those of electrons around atoms, those of our daily commutes, those of our blood cells though our body, etc.

Created: Wednesday, July 28th, 2004
Modified: Friday, January 14th, 2005

Inspiration as imbalance: insatiable perfectionism

It would appear that inspiration is a form of imbalance. It is a symptom of a disease. It is a problem that must be addressed. It demands one’s most impassioned attention until it has been satisfied. It consumes and motivates one’s reasons for living in much the same way that bad habits or addictions might.

When everything is balanced, adapted, adjusted, and at tune with its place in the world there is no inspiration. There is no need to wax poetic, to write the verbose essay, to paint the articulate picture. One is happy simply to experience that fleeting idyllic tranquility.

Only when we hold some internal flaw or the outside world reflects its flaws upon our own psyche do we feel inspired, compelled to respond. Only then do we need to write our own opinion. Only then does something need to be said by us, the artist, the citizen, the human existence.

Non-artists witness perfection or balance and they are not inspired, they are hypnotized, amazed. They are fully satisfied with the experience. The artist does not experience this same response. Instead, the artist is inspired. His response is not one of absolute satisfaction and tranquil universal balance, but one of insatiable perfectionism. The artist witnesses perfection and wants to make it better. The artist is inspired to create change. The artist is never satisfied.

Created: Thursday, October 31, 2002
Modified: Friday, January 14th, 2005

Mirror dancing

Have you ever looked into the mirror and wondered what was real and what was the reflection? Am I following the movements of the mirror or is the mirror following me? Who is the leader and who is the follower? Who is actually in control of this? Does my reflection think that I am its reflection? And so on...

People realized that true synchronicity comes through making the source of causation as ambiguous as possible. No leading and no following. Pure action and reaction, where the moving agent feels like some greater power realized through the symmetry itself. Through the sharing of the ideal, the ideal becomes reality.

A style developed. Fluid reflection. As individuals sought to find perfect symmetry, to realize their motions though others. Scouring the nightlife, the clubs, the bars the music scene. Dredging the darkest corners, hoping for that one lone figure in the dark who fits perfection. Who realizes the symmetrical dream.

He steps into the room. Looks up to see her looking up, straight back at him from the opposite end. Bumping into his arm a girl drops her purse and bends to pick it up. On the other side a man drops his wallet and reaches to pick it up in front of her. Their eyes are fixed. Hypnotized together. Like deer in headlights, walking slowly across the floor to each other. Their surroundings mirror each other perfectly as though there were a pain of glass in between them, now standing right in front of each other. Every motion, every thought met with constant reciprocation. No motion towards questioning the ability to break this mirror. They circle around each other and the room begins to spin, as do all of its occupants. The third dimension is born at the center of a whirlpool and the world revolves around them.

The world responds to their actions and they respond to the world’s action. Unity of will makes everything possible. Faith is born, the dream becomes true. The world becomes their own, accommodating their wishes because they believe. They have found faith. Have made their world real by actually finding a personal, real reflection of themselves in it. They touch hands, as if feeling for the first time. They actually feel. Realizing their own body. The outside becomes inside. The mirror becomes reality and reality becomes reflection. Things are clear, for the first time able to look with desire and not fear, and are surprised to see that things are what they want them to be. All accommodates to faith.

Created: Tuesday, November 5th, 2003
Modified: Friday, January 14th, 2005

On the power of contrast

The power of opposites. Switching from one polarity to the other. When the manic depressive laughs with heartfelt happiness, when the one month old baby dies, when the deaf boy hears, when that which is rarely seen, is witnessed.

There is power in the opposite. But after displaying the rare moments of life so frequently they themselves become common. Through television and fantasy worlds the ideal has become commonplace. The true nature of the world in all its particular and imperfect clarity is overlooked. People almost view the world as a cartoon. Perhaps now, showing the simple details of life will yield a powerful realization.

Created: Tuesday, September 14th, 2004
Modified: Thursday, January 13th, 2005

On drumming: the simple purpose

My theory of drumming greatly applies to the theory of my visual art. The idea of infinite regression as derived from the golden ratio, Zeno’s paradox, etc., involves the fact that between any two points there is an infinite number of other points. Thus, something might be divided into infinity, everything pragmatic divides the distance between things into a standardized measure. Drumming performs this operation in relation to time and space.

Space between two sounds, between two beats, between two points in time. One has two hands with which hit a drum, the left and the right. The timing between when one hits either the left or the right might be divided into quicker and quicker sub-divisions. For example, one can play eighth notes, all time divided into eight even divisions marked with a beat on the drum. To divide the beat further, one can play twice as fast over the same period of time creating twice as many evenly spaced hits. These would be called sixteenth notes. As defining the measurement markers of a ruler or the proportions of a figure, these new sixteenth notes might be divided again into thirty-second notes.

Theoretically, one might proceed into sixty-fourth and one hundred and twenty-eighth notes, if they were humanly possible to play. If one does this with a computer the sound approaches a constant humming, and gradually a tone forms depending upon the object being hit. This is where percussion meets tonality.

With regard to timing, the number of evenly spaced time increments one can play determines one’s percussive range. In much the same way, the number of octaves one can sing determines one tonal range. In percussion this number tends to be three while most vocalists work in two octaves. However, there are no actual end points and one is never exactly on time, just as one is never exactly in tune. If one were to recording a human drumming and examine the result on a computer, one would find that each beat is hit at a fractionally different time that is simply too close for the human brain and ears to differentiate between to notice a difference.

In relation to the left and right hands, one creates another dimension of division. Using varying patterns between left and right hits, one might play the same pattern in a number of different ways. One can also vary the type of note within the same measure. One does not simply have to play in thirty-second notes or eighth notes but can mix the two to form a diverse percussive melody.

One of the more interesting ways one can split up time is to do something called a “flam.” A flam involves hitting the drum with both hands at a fractionally different time. That means one hand hits ever so slightly before the other, just enough so that two hits are audible. However, they are meant to be so close together one can not really interpret two separate notes. They count as one note and take up one space in time, defining the beat by the fractional space left between the two hits. This paradox of sorts is ironic in the fact that one still has to be consistent in terms of the timing of the flam. The two sticks/hands must hit at a fractionally different time, but at a consistently different time. Indeed, this peculiar trait of the flam expands across all of percussion, allowing one to create one’s own style or “time” as a percussionist in that one can discover highly individual time separations. While not definable as simple thirty-second or eighth notes, they are performed consistently over time. If one performs twenty-seventh notes consistently before every eighth note, one is still in time. As long as one marks out a consistent time in eight (or whatever number one wishes) one is free to improvise around those cornerstones with infinite possibilities. One will sound on beat, one is still consistent. It does not matter that one is not aware of what time the note might actually be in as long as one can play it consistently, it will become in time. If it can be repeated, it is not an accident, it is a beat. In this manner each drummer can discover his/her own random, yet consistent personality traits as a drummer. They tend to form subconsciously as a habit would.

In the same way, one who consistently plays out of time can be considered in time. One might be dancing in a five beat time, while the music is in four. However, if one keeps going long enough, the two times will meet at twenty. If they continue and meet at twenty again, the dancer will appear to be in time, moving consistently. The more repetitions of the bizarre time, the more solid and easy to understand it becomes. The degree of effort one is putting into understanding the time or how a dancer’s actions relate to a time, also impacts the success of the dancing/drumming. If one is a drummer, one might be willing to listen and count quite high before disregarding something as having “no rhythm,” no repetition, no consistency. If one does not drum one is more inclined to say it is without rhythm quite quickly. This is quite different from much South Indian music that is largely based around elaborate time structures where the audience counts along up to numbers such as sixty four.

I believe the same is true in art. While we value learning straight and even time to some extent, it is more interesting to note the personal differences. Not the random accidents but the individual habits and stylistic qualities that differentiate one artist from the next. Our individual ‘times’ if you will, are the essence of our inspiration and give us each the desire to say something meaningful, yet different and alien to others. The medium is just the language used to communicate this individual beat. Just as time allows for a system to enable others to understand someone in terms of percussion, our chosen art media allows us to understand artistically.

One pitfall of this is that often art or music, or whatever language of communication is taught, is taught so stringently that one is not allowed to develop one’s own time. One comes out the other end of an education with no idea what one wants to make music about or paint pictures of. Or even worse, an individual time, an artistic style, but with nothing, or rather, no need to use the language to communicate.

I believe one ought to develop an art because one needs to say something whose meaning no other language will encompass. To develop language on a need to know basis. It seems much modern art decides to appreciate an aesthetic of language rather than meaning. People like the pretty colors but not what they mean. For example, computers are amazing, they can perform all sorts of amazing manipulations, but do we really have anything to express or communicate that requires their use? Did we really have some soul-felt urge to express that which only computers can say? I shall return to my percussion versus art analogy. Musically, I believe percussion is a simple and minimal language and that is why it is so universal, profound, open, and abstract.

Art on the other hand, appears to develop far beyond the pragmatic purpose of communication or self realization. It has entered an aesthetic of languages. But these languages say nothing other than the alphabet. This is ornamentation, typography, graffiti. It is admirable, but it amounts to comparing dick sizes in the end. Ego trips and competitions to see who can write “blah” in the most original form.

Why have we lost concern for the meaning of the art, the actual statement? Has art’s own aesthetic simply become an advertisement for itself? Does it just say, “look I am pretty, buy me to decorate your home.” Or even, “look I am pretty and I reflect a concern with politics, buy me to decorate your home.” Or even “Look I am pretty and I demonstrate an interest in bizarre sexual activity.” These simple ambiguous statements, even the bold assertive statements, or the dialogs, or the spans of entire artist's’ careers, have a disturbing limit when it comes to meaning and actual impact. There is simply not a concern for it, a need for it, a desire for it. We do not want to write an essay on a political view to appeal to the world. We want a striking visual image to make people pay attention. Propaganda. It is a sales pitch. If one’s art does not appeal to such larger universals as politics, one has to advertise and decorate oneself in order to get attention. If one can not play in eighth notes, nobody will be able to recognize your one thousand three hundred thirty fourth notes.

So what is there to say? Are their any meanings worthy of creating new fine arts to express? Yes. But we must first recognize the huge amount of ornamentation that surrounds these ideas. Profound thoughts tend to be extensively considered/thought out ideas, that are originally very simple, beginning and resulting from the contemplation of fine art or the reading/writing of textual art.

One simply needs to learn how to recognize meaning from ornamentation. Is something simply being referenced to say what has been said before? Are we seeking to find ourselves within an already existing language of associations? “My influences are Monet, Giger. I read Josh Middleton, Dave Sim...” Who I am is a combination of them, so if you know your art history, you can imagine my art without me having to create anything.

Bullshit. If the references are being made for reasons the issue becomes meaningful. However, if one looks at something or reads something and forgives the writer for irregular grammatical habits, or forgives the artist for technical errors such as a poorly made canvas. This is a sign that one is considering the art’s meaning and not its construction, that one is actually looking for something in the art, rather than judging it. The art is working. It is showing the reason it was made, the writing between the lines, the meaning of the symbol. It has become its own symbol. It has opened the viewer to a new idea provided by what it was for him, a first time experience of this new idea. A new direction of thought is now possible

It relieves doubt, it answers questions. It does not ask questions. How was it made? Are they technically good according to our previously established standards? Is there too much light on that form? Etc.

One becomes confused when trying to figure out how to create this experience with one’s own art. If one attempts to look at others and copy their methods one is simply decorating a piece of paper. If one looks to what inspired them, what it was that made them create the art, then one might be learning something more. However, this is all no replacement for the ability to channel the reason the individual has for making his/her own art. One has to find a way of getting past the surface differences to finding a naked truth underneath, The coverings are simply advertisements.

My art is advertising for philosophy.

Yes there may be some symbolic dialogs, some narratives, some purposeful combinations of symbols. But those symbols are still just designed to get attention. To be appealing. I appeal to my own sense of aesthetics in order to mimic that definition of appealing. For example, lets say I wanted to paint a picture of an angel smoking a cigarette to express the cynicism of the modern world (symbolized by the cigarette) to the discovery of ideals and happiness (symbolized by the angel). I have to create the visual image of an angel and the image of a cigarette. This is where the advertising lies. I have to sell my above mentioned idea by making my symbols as pleasing as possible. Rather, I have to make them express the idea as clearly as possible. This is where graphic art is born. There are abstract appeals to golden ratios and symmetrical mathematical construction, standardized forms of evaluation and judgment. However, if one becomes concerned with these when viewing the art, then they have already failed in their purpose. They did not express the meanings they were meant to represent because instead of working towards the overall point of conveying cynicism of the modern world, they have brought attention to themselves and the method of their construction. Was that line meant on purpose on that angel’s wing?

The aesthetics of the sixties seemed to cop out or give up on this concern for illusionistic meaning in a way. People begin to look at the construction of the art in the first place instead of bothering with the emotional impact or meaning. Artists therefore created an aesthetics of construction and personal creation, philosophical justification. One was meant to walk into a gallery and question why and how the artist made this art. But the question of what the artist was saying in the first place was lost.

I believe this is an aesthetic to avoid. It is staring into the abyss. It is nihilistic. It is fatalistic. It admits to an innate human lack of capacity to reach for the stars and to attempt to unify the self with one’s ideal. Plato’s forms are not even sought or described at all. Rather, because we can not ever perfectly replicate reality, we might as well not even try to get better at it.

Well I disagree. The point of magic is to amaze and mystify, not to make people question how it was done. Other than that, the audience might simply be suffering a desire or need to make their own art. However, even if one advocates a world where everyone is an artist/taught art to an equal level and there are no “masters,” as the language becomes universal, I still believe the purpose of art should be to mystify and amaze, to open the audience to a new and alien world. A foreign thought. Not simply, “here is how to paint a picture of this crazy looking alien. Follow steps 1-6...”

Think about it. When you walk down the street and for some reason it is filled with artists. Everyone is an artist. Do you want everyone to be drawing realist pictures of each other, scribbling away, looking at each other saying, “oh, you messed up the proportions on the arms by half a centimeter...?” Or, do you want to see people disappearing in thin air, running around in paint, one man walks by with six cameras tied to his head, another is in scuba gear, another runs by in a weird contraption made of suitcases on wheels. People who have invented their own languages, but not just for amusing aesthetics (as might be the case in the above examples), but because they are saying one thing each. And that one thing is that we are all different and we all have something different to say. There are common natures, sure, and sometimes we may only want to or be able to be understood by those who share our similar natures: the danger of specialization and spending too much time making art and not living life. For example, I like to play seventy second notes only other percussionists will understand.

Our common medium is this body in this lifetime. That is my picture frame. That is my medium. I do not want to confine my existence to a small square wooden frame. Our meaning exists in our life and not in how we communicate. Not in our art, but what our art does. The simple purpose.

Created: Saturday, November 27th, 2004
Modified: Friday, January 14th, 2005

On freedom: an attempt to wake up

Our world acclaims freedom. But not just freedom wandering about without purpose. No, we like freedom that proves itself by either breaking out of a system, surpassing a system; or freedom that willfully channels itself into a system. By system I am referring to a social order, language, or tool of communication.

For example, when a guitarist solos, when a juggler improvises. They are channeling all of their attention and spirit. All of their will to be present and completely fluid, just letting movements roll out, unconsciously making decisions of which ball to catch or which note to play, and somehow its all works out with perfect precision. The source of true improvisation. An order of randomness so complex it is unknown to the performer or artist experiencing it, channeling it, conducting it. This is an example of the ideal state of the artist, to lose oneself in the moment, to act without thinking, yet at the same time to be very mentally aware.

This is also where good drumming improvisation is born. The desire to create a sound that flows and stays in a predetermined time yet is always dynamic enough to keep the listener’s attention. Then again, not so random as to make the audience think the playing is simply wrong. There is no such thing as being out of time or off beat. It is just a matter of how forgiving the audience is, how much attention they are pouring into the event. This combined with their openness to the moment determines how far they might be willing to let the performance move away from what they are expecting.

But as a drummer, I believe more meaning comes from the simplest of decisions, choosing between two options: a bass hit or a slap hit. Using the most basic tools it is still possible to create an endless variety of patterns and improvisations that will always grow beyond what the listener expects to hear. One should never simply ‘expect’ the beat to stay the same. The time for melodic leads has passed

When the time stays still it turns the song into a metronome. However, if the time-keeping drummer begins to move more, the structure of the song is allowed to grow and develop. This makes for more melodic growth than before: the difference between a potted plant and one planted in a garden. Yes, if we simply let it go into the wild forest we might lose the plot completely but there is no need to stay with potted plants. Every gardener and drummer would undoubtedly kill themselves out of boredom. It comes down to a question of where one expects to find innovation and progression. Where do we as a society expect to see the most development? The most changing of definition and nature of that which already exists? Is this where the cutting edge of social attention should be? How can we change it? How can we grasp the helm of our own mental focus, our own ability to be free, our ability to align ourselves with social attention, action that we believe will lead humanity in a more righteous direction? I think we can all agree that the majority of us are sleeping too much. As it currently stands, society is not going in a healthy direction.

The decision might be ages old, but we are replacing our consciousness with tools that help us realize temporary happiness, with tools of communication so complex we need to spend half our lives learning languages, leaving meaning left unsaid. These are vain attempts to communicate past our bodies’ limitations. Why not simply realize what is already here, right now? How can humanity pull a 180 turn and look back for the first time in thousands of years? Our world is a purgatory. The moment we all realize how we have been hiding and avoiding the truth for centuries, is the moment this world disappears along with our bodies and minds. We can cease endlessly multiplying ourselves, cutting ourselves, dividing our attention into oblivion with children, television, habits, and drugs. We might wake up as a species of one, and truly feel ourselves as part of something greater, something whole and complete, and most importantly, honest and content. Not frantically running around helplessly avoiding the nature of things. Happy to find meaning in the simplicity of life, in the observance of life as a whole rather than the constant categorizing, boxing, and labeling into human versus nature, animal versus plant, etc. A movement away from the control and use of nature, the domestication of plants and animals, then refinement of the world’s resources on a global scale of abuse turning into a habit forming avoidance and eventually a complete neglect for reality. If the world outside of ourselves was treated as we might treat ourselves, things might be better. We are in a symbiotic relationship. There is no escaping that. That needs to be realized. Now.

Created: Thursday, September 18th, 2003
Modified: Friday, January 14th, 2005

On modern art media

In order to express an idea that one wishes to be considered “new” one has to present it in a “new” manner. Relating strongly to our materialistic world an oil painting, no matter what its meaning or form, will remain simply an oil painting. On the other hand, using a combination of media so obscure as to require the use of the term, “mixed,” elicits much more attraction. When a piece of art looks as though it were made from alien artifacts, of substances and machines unknown, it inspires attention and wonder. How exactly was this art made? What shall we call this new medium and what shall its meaning be?

Now although this might be a good way to get attention, what if the artist does not want to cater to such a controlled social climate of visual attention spans? He must somehow make a connection between his chosen media and the media of the current world, otherwise his oil paintings of still lives will be never gain meaning or attention.

Once that modern language is used to draw in the wide-eyed, open-minded, “I’m actually going to look at this art expecting so see something I have never seen or thought of before,” attitude, it is then possible to draw the viewer into more obscure and complex meanings. One might call this the necessary evil of marketing. I would say it is possible for good to come from knowing your enemy’s tools. Others say the masters tools will never dismantle the master’s house.

One of philosophy’s favorite techniques is to draw someone’s attention in only to show them that the object that drew in their attention was not worthy of their attention. Hoping that the viewer, although perturbed, might walk away thinking, “That is the last time I get sucked into looking at a naked girl unwittingly.”

Overall, in the long run, it would be nice to be able to influence the modern visual language into something more complex, by slowly developing one’s own theory into something more complex and hoping one had enough attention in the first place that others will still following. In the same manner our tastes get more complex as we grow older.

So I suppose this modern language is largely the language of style, fashion, and youth. But perhaps a better term to use would be change. And by learning the language one can help it progress to its next stage by adding one’s own language to it.

Right now, as our world’s society becomes more and more homogenized, capitalist, materialist, and without contrast. As race disintegrates and we all start to look the same, and act the same, our art and our art media becomes overly complex. So many tools to use. We become skilled at handling very many simple tasks rather than any single complicated task. We have become directors unaware of what an actual tool is made of or how it was made. We use computers and printers. We stand on the shoulders of giants. As we become aware of this lack of knowledge we find a desire to homogenize our art as well. To regain a spiritual focus, a developed and unified knowledge of our work within this world, instead of acting as a cross-eyed juggler.

In conclusion, I hope to help push art back towards the development of one focus, one medium, one vision. Instead of putting so many filters and layers of medium on to humanity’s view of nature, we ought to regain an intimate knowledge of our own art.

Created: Saturday, September 11th, 2004
Modified: Friday, January 14th, 2005

On noise and silence

He surrounded himself with so much noise, so much sound. He could not hear anything else. But soon this wall of noise became mute. A steady and straight calm. The meaning of noise was replaced with silence. And a great stillness filled his ears. However, it remained silent only for a second. Ever so slowly returned, murmurs, too faint to interpret as anything but whispers. They never stopped. He was driven insane by these voices, he was deafened by their quiet ambiguity, all of his attention forever captured by their evasive meaning. Hoping one voice would gain enough force to become intelligible.

Lost in this sea of whispers he remembers the one thing that can reestablish his own existence. He drums, he makes his own noise. So loud and violent that nothing else can be heard. And so finds himself. Surrounded by noise. Again.

This is the way humanity forever fails to communicate. When one talks one can not listen to or observe others, if one is to remain connected with what is being communicated. Therefore, there is no way to verify that the audience is listening. Faith alone assures this reciprocation.

Those times when one all of a sudden reaches a moment. One realizes the past twenty minutes of one’s unconscious inner monologue as a whole. Those jumps in time, jumps between levels. These are signs of gross imbalance. Instead of talking and listening on a faith that one must develop consistently in order to realize. One either spends four hours talking in order to say one thing that is actually real and devoid of paranoia, or spends five hours paying attention in order to hear one simple idea. The philosopher’s childlike, minimalist, eyes are truly broken to the beautiful world of particulars. To the interaction between the smaller currents, the subtle energies, the schools of fish, that embody the sweeping and graceful movements of life, not the solitary sharks whose cold, harsh, and direct actions make up the blunt and colorless world of reason.

So much stimulation in this world scrambles our desires. We must either block it out somehow or wander haphazardly through all of the dissociated meaning. Give me my noise and I shall silence it all.

Created: Saturday, September 11th, 2004
Modified: Saturday, February 15th, 2005

On repetition

Making the conscious, unconscious.

We solidify our identity by doing it over and over, as though gradually digging down into ourselves to reach the deepest level possible, of who we are, of what we do.

We are what we repeatedly do. Greatness is a habit. But so is failure.

In the same way, by repeating conscious actions, they gradually become unconscious. They become habits and require less mental attention to perform. In order to remain conscious we must continue to try new things, to perform new actions, while at the same time maintaining the continuity of the older unconscious ones. In the same way, unconscious actions become conscious again, after they have become deeply ingrained beyond all conscious thought, our waking awareness often comes back to them all of a sudden. In a passing moment of awareness, we become aware of some previous failing in an old habit and through making it conscious again, are able to refine it further into ourselves.

Created: Friday, August 30th, 2002
Modified: Saturday, February 15th, 2005

On sanity and insanity

Sanity is the fragmentation of understanding and experience. It is sane to see the world divided between two forces at odds with themselves. It is insane to identify with one of these forces and not encompass the duality. Examples include religious fundamentalists and those who believe there is one truth, objectivists.

This is interesting because it would seem our hearts yearn for something that is not divided. As we grow and develop we find the urge to gain acceptance within the world. To work towards harmonizing and accepting the divided forces into one unified perspective of the world. Perhaps this definition of sanity is also the definition of consciousness. As one’s mind grows old and performs actions that work within the world out of habit. As it becomes more climatized and unified with the workings of the world. It becomes less awake and adaptive. Less sane, less alive. Sanity therefore becomes the unstable state of having to be ready, to move, to fluctuate between viewpoints as new situations arise and present themselves. Those who embrace the idea of finding true individual balance within the world would appear to be able to last longer in this sane state of mind. They are not so easily satisfied with the lesser spoon fed versions of insanity, granted by mass religion, television, and modern media.

And so sanity becomes the desire and will to program oneself from the ground up.

Sanity becomes being half out of touch with one single “reality.” Being dissociated. Existentialism. People who think something is actually real are dubbed religious extremists.

Created: Thursday, September 5th, 2002
Modified: Tuesday, November 11th, 2003
Modified Again: Tuesday, January 18th, 2005

On simplicity through complexity

The most profound ideas are simple. However, they often require a complex analysis in order to fully appreciate that simplicity. Likewise, the appreciation of complex ideas if often simple as all of their components are explicated. One simply has to follow them as they are empirically detailed.

Innovation comes not in the form of complexity but through complex thought, a new connection and a new perspective upon a simple truth is discovered.

The duality of life’s extremities also encompasses this. Simple binaries holding all of the complex gradients. The thousands of particulars held in simple principles.

Created: Monday, March 5th, 2004
Modified: Saturday, February 15th, 2005

On the accessibility of art: contact juggling

When considering how accessible one wants one’s art to become there are several points of interest. I believe the practice of contact juggling embodies an ideal level of accessibility.

It might be visually enjoyed/experienced by everyone. When incorporated as performance, the simple aesthetic of contact juggling might be appreciated by any audience with eyes. The medium tends to display a high level of accomplishment on its surface. It is to some extent an art of illusion, therefore appearance is one of its main considerations.

Contact juggling might also be practiced by everyone. Anyone and everyone can practice, learn, and enjoy contact juggling. However, it does require practice, time, dedication, focus, persistence, etc. These are the ideals that allow for its creation and the ideals its practice cultivates. Hence, anyone wishing to experience contact juggling might quest past its surface beauty and begin to explore the depth of its practice.

This is a good balance between aesthetic appreciation and actual experience. It becomes as accessible and intimate as one desires. One might be amazed by the illusion and/or be focused and dedicated as a practitioner. It is universal on both accounts.

It is true that contact juggling has a somewhat steep learning curve up its first steps. However, the resulting satisfaction from completing those harsh steps is all the more intense. To those who would subordinate the development of a particular skill and wish to make art accessible on sheer surface or even intellectual levels, I would not recommend contact juggling. In order to appreciate the majority of art I believe one must practice it for oneself. The analysis of theory and idea can only go so far when it is not grounded by physical, temporal action. Solid action has a way of allowing one to process theory in much more meaningful and intimate ways. True, notions of romanticism are often lost, (such as the persona of the classical painter, or the presence of the magician) but the reality and personal growth of actual practice are far more valuable than the fantasies of theory/history students.

Created: Wednesday, September 16th, 2003
Modified: Monday, January 17th, 2005

On the combination/separation of ideas: stop abstraction now

Most of my recent philosophy takes one definition and attempts to blur it or draw deep comparisons with another definition. Otherwise, it attempts to break correlations that I find unsound, distracting, or simply not useful.

Visually as well, I attempt to combine two ideas into one. I look to merge the visual with the mental. A form of symbolism where the symbol is not simply decorative but intricate and specific to the meaning it holds. They might be appreciated as simply a “pretty picture” or a “meaningful thought,” but when the two are connected I hope to communicate a profound sense of revelation (normally reserved for realms of abstract thought/religion/philosophy) through an actual, specific, and visual, symbol.

The ideas being combined can vary greatly and might be appreciated on several levels. Drawing comparisons not only between like visual technicalities, but also relevant situations and compositions. My feeling of the spiritual as something that is literally experienced is the overall point.

We often appear to have our heads buried in intellectual sand. Abstraction and fantasy have invaded along with an obsession for theory and idea rather than practice. The senses are no longer used for the same things they were twenty years ago. Now we simply walk around recognizing symbols, adverts, signs of what to do and not to do. The non-pragmatic world has been obscured into abstract philosophy books with no pictures or age-old stories with repetitive imagery and excessive decoration. Stories that while still useful have not been developed in recent times. I desire to put a new face on the spiritual. Meaningful social, actual, artistic, creation. By combining piece by piece I hope to re-unite the individual with the social and the meaningful with the actual, leaving the abstract experience of abstracts in its troublesome obscurity and disinvolvement.

STOP ABSTRACTION NOW.

Created: Thursday, December 11th, 2003
Modified: Tuesday February 17th, 2004
Modified Again: Tuesday, December 18th, 2005

On the definition of “fine” art

Okay. I am not exactly sure why the term “fine” is still around, and what its nature or significance to modern art has become. It suggests a separation between common art and professional art. It implies we ought to pay for the fine artists to make art and forget the common art. But as most things, the simple common beginnings of say, drawing from nature, are far more innocent than spending three weeks on a photorealistic painting. Why is the later necessary? But I am getting away from myself. My point here is to define “fine” art. I would say “fine” refers more to a socially accepted process of “re-fine-ment” where by one studies a particular facet of art, or even life, and refines it into a precise vision. We pay and appreciate people for this act of self refinement.

There is my definition. I would rather this refinement be replaced with a “common perception” attitude, where by society would prize the efforts of trying new things and attaining a wider view of reality. I feel the process of refinement might be healthy to have in some aspect of one’s life, but to base one’s life work around such a tunneled vision might be dangerous. Indeed, we can not pay people for this self refinement, pay for the product of their self discipline, and all of a sudden expect to have it ourselves. We all must undertake this act of responsibility and not just pay others to do it for us.

Created: Monday, October 28th. 2002
Modified: Wednesday, November 12th, 2003
Modified Again: Monday, January 17th, 2005

On the personification of death

I have recently taken a liking to, noticed, and been inspired by artistic works that personify the abstract idea of death. In Western culture death is a taboo. It is a cold, lifeless, and feared end to all things. Science and medicine have declared war upon it. We devote lifetimes and billions of dollars towards eliminating it. Why is this when death is fifty percent of life?

Death is not some alien enemy to be fought off. It would be to fight half of oneself! Death is what gives life. Why must we always portray it as some enemy that with which we are forever at odds? Are we not chasing our own tales?

Having grown weary of these American conceptions that seem to be in denial of humanity’s mortality, I have been appreciating works that personify death. For example, the use of the “black rabbit” in Watership Down. Here death is symbolized by a black rabbit. The more sensitive and visionary rabbit actually sees and talks to this black rabbit. However, it is not so cold a conception as a grim reaper with a scythe. It is simply another rabbit, a messenger of some greater unexplained force. The dark side of its nature is only symbolized by its black color. Otherwise, he has a warm and inviting tone. A sleepy, warm, and comfortable vibe.

In a scene the visionary rabbit actually dances with the back rabbit of death, following him through fields. At one point in the fog it becomes uncertain which rabbit is which, and who is following who. Is the black rabbit of death chasing the living rabbit? Or is the living rabbit chasing the black rabbit of death? I immediately though of a Yin Yang relationship. Both extremes chasing each other in a continuous dynamic.

Hence, death is not some strange alien force. It is the force that allows for life to die and be reborn again. Death moves towards life and life moves towards death. One might only locate oneself in relation to the other. Without the opposite example of death our life would have no life. If you see what I mean.

I therefore consider the idea of death as a form of mirror image of oneself to be highly inspirational. As though there is some other side to life, where some other aspect of myself is growing in unison, just in an inverted manner. At one point I will become unified with this symmetrical other and perhaps switch over, the dead becoming the living and the living becoming the dead. As for where I stand in this progression, the living side or the dead side, who knows? And why would it matter if both sides of the coin were the same in the first place?

Overall, what I am trying to say is that this duality is necessary for life, there must be death. We look around our world and see everything in a duality. Why should we not assume that greater forces do not also operate in this manner? After day comes night, after night comes day. After life comes death, after death comes life. As humans we simply can not see the other side of the coin. But really, how could we imagine there not being something continuing after death? Everything in our life continues. We are never free of the repetition of life granted by time. Indeed, the traditional notion of death as an “end” would seem to be unimaginable in a sense as every time we experience an end, say falling asleep at night, we always wake up again. The moment we realize the end a new beginning comes.

For this reason I find the personification of death to not only be comforting but also logical, life affirming, and faith building. We often rationalize to certain ends. But why is this when life is not so? Why not rationalize into action? Into perpetual motion? In to reasons why everything is in motion and shall remain in perpetual motion. Looking at the world in such a manner allows one to gain much benefit.

In the current moment. Not experiencing pain in order to receive pleasure. Not working a life of back breaking sadness for some retirement with a nice bag of cookies to eat like some hibernating bear waiting for the summertime of death. But relishing and appreciating the fact that life has no end. Its experience is the end. Now is the end. But the end is in itself, in motion. As close to a communion between motion and stillness. Acceptance of death in order to actually live life. Not fighting it as the enemy but realizing it for what it is, not a means to an end but a means to a conscious life.

Fluidity.

Created: Tuesday, August 13th, 2002
Modified: Monday, January, 2005

On the movement of the mind (thought) and the movement of the body

One observation I have made involves the connection between mental movement and physical movement. To clarify on definitions, “thought” refers to mental movement and “physical activity” refers to the movement of the body. “Movement” refers to change, continuation, repetition, development, growth, activity, and most abstractly, the act of life.

When one’s body is still, it is one’s thought that moves out of stillness, yielding the inspiration to physical activity. Likewise, when one’ thought is still it is one’s body that moves out of stillness, yielding the inspiration to thought.

The two forms of progression are intimately connected. When one ceases the other begins. It is through their fluid coordination that a balanced development is realized. Part of this balancing process involves visiting extremes of thought and physical movement.

The effect of realizing either extreme of thought or physical movement is to encourage the coming of its opposite. This is inevitable due to the constantly progressing nature of thought and physical movement. For example, if one practices a form of focused physical movement (where one’s self resides entirely in physical motion), one’s mind has no time to move. It is effectively dead while the body nears the peak of life. However, when one ceases the moving meditation the returning thoughts stand out like the first stars of the night sky. One actually realizes thoughts that so frequently remain unconscious. The restarting of mental activity brings with it a new clarity. When pure action ceases there is a moment when the reborn mental action gains insight before its motions become routine. This is the moment Yang and Yin switch positions. With an abundance of space now available new ideas surface from the depths of the mind while the old are revitalized. Physical meditation is a rebirthing process for the mind.

In the same way, when focused thought is performed and ceases one is inspired to action. The build up of mental energy spills over into physical energy. With the realization of new theories comes the desire to put those theories into physical practice. The body is re-realized.
Thus, when one’s body is still it is one’s thought that moves out of stillness, yielding the inspiration to physical movement. Likewise, when one’s thought is still it is one’s body that moves out of stillness, yielding the inspiration to thought. This appears to be a constant and never ending cycle. By visiting the extremes of thought or movement one encourages the coming of the opposite extreme.

Examples:

One summer I worked in an office, sitting at a desk, staring at computer. I finished my mind numbing database creation work in no time and spent the rest of the day writing emails to everyone on the planet. I could not stop screaming out all my mental energy. From being forced into the inaction of sitting in a chair for 8 hours my mind flooded with ideas.

After contact juggling for several hours, or during a juggling session, I find myself becoming aware of new thoughts. All of a sudden I realize my own train of thought in a longer sequence. A new idea is born.

Created: Wednesday, August 14th, 2002
Modified: Monday, January, 2005

On Worship

Humans are natural worshippers, givers of the spirit. The soul is brightest when it views its reflection in others. Historically, minimalist religions were at the center of worship. People were not so different and did not seek to become different than their fellow men. In modern times we give ourselves, our praise, our identify, to an assortment of pagan gods. Capitalist America yields a fresh crop of pseudo-artistic icons every year keeping our identity forever changing but shallow.

One may pick and choose exactly which artist or combination of artists expresses oneself. The more egotistical might even be inspired to become an icon for worship themselves. And so we buy the music, we buy the t shirts, we buy the artwork, we buy our faith, we buy our identity. And as with all things bought, we can sell them back or exchange them for a new icon when one comes along. Our faith is disposable. Our identity is weak.

But with these purchased idols we do become faithful. We do sing along with the music. However, the depth of worship is lost. Perhaps this is a testing ground for those aspects of life that really do require a greater faith. A preparation for that time when one will have given of oneself (in worship) so completely that one feels entirely comfortable taking.

When a certain depth of committed decision is made, when all alternatives have been exhausted, a single true path presents itself. The more wrong moves one makes in life the clearer this path becomes. And when this final goal, this faith, presents itself, one can not help but pursue it in worship with all of one’s being. There is no disposing of this god. There is no buying a new one in two months. It is the all encompassing, overbearing faith. Through its abstract worship the practical identity of oneself becomes enhanced.

One feels justified in taking pride in oneself. Not in one’s ego but in one’s vision of how one is meant to proceed. In time, all of one’s actions become aligned towards this ultimate worship. The subjective agents that surround oneself witness the effects of this vision in turn receive a reflection of worship and are inspired. Loving actions encourage loving actions in others. When they are true, without doubt, without fear, one can not help but worship the one who embodies such a vision.

And it would seem that most healthy humans desire to worship even the slightest sign of this love. They want to be loving, they want to be loved, and so they love others. Often this desire to worship and love obscures the actual reality of the love being worshipped. But in time when the desire balances itself, finds a solid ground and discovers the truth of worship, a motion is started that is difficult to stop. Gradual, sure, and unceasing. The kind of motivation that would take a lifetime to reverse. To have a single unifying purpose and principle behind every little action and movement one takes. This is the key to true worship.

Such inspiration comes only once in a lifetime. But when it does come it tells one who one is. One knows what one has to do. One knows where one is going. The Tao is clear. Doubt is erased. The mind loses all ambiguity. All goals are realized, perfection is achieved. And all of this occurs on a steady ascending scale, reaching death at the highest point of progression, when one’s potential energy finally becomes something actual and the other side reveals itself as Yin becomes Yang and Yang becomes Yin, the world is turned on its head. With the subtlety of a dream one leaves this world and enters another.

Thus, worship fulfills itself, others follow, and the cycle repeats.

Created: Monday, September 13th, 2004
Modified: January, 17th, 2005

Quoting sickly

floating quickly quoting sickly
devoting thickly cramped
slithering stamped withering
revamped dithering forgetting
betting declined setting

Created: Sunday, July 25th, 2004
Modified: Monday, January 17th, 2005

The snake

There was once a very long and very wide snake. He lived in a large and magnificent garden. Every day the snake would slither around and look for small unsuspecting animals to feed upon.

One day the snake wandered so far he found himself looking at his own tail. “How amusing!” The snake thought. “Which way should I go now?” He could either pass his tail on the left, or pass his tail on the right.

One choice would lead him into a coil of decreasing size, trapping him in a spiral. The other direction would lead him out of that coil. However, the snake could not remember which side he had come from or which way led out of the spiral!

Alas, he could not make up his mind so the snake sucked on his own tail to comfort himself. When he did this time froze and the snake instantly turned to stone.

Today, people wander upon the stone remains that form a circular path around the garden.