Saturday, 24 July 2010

MOT International

As well as Daryl Brown's opening at The Magnificent Basement, today also sees the opening of this show at MOT. 

Below is a quote taken from Beatriz Olabarrieta's blog http://beatrizolabarrieta.blogspot.com 

 

"I like to say there is no penetration, that penetration in a certain way has no proper meaning. To penetrate is to enter into the internal structure of the matter, but in physical love as well as in spiritual, it is the same - there is no penetration into, there is everywhere only a touching.
- Jean-Luc Nancy, 'Love and Community: A Roundtable Discussion'

(...)
We wonder what, exactly, can release us from our inviolable faith in the permanence of objects. Can we undo that perception without setting everything afire, without uprising, without turning objects to dust? While imagining a gentler route towards revolutionising our relationship with objects, perhaps we should consider the role of the stranger, someone who historically operates on the threshold of associations, unknown and unquantified. Perhaps we can imagine a benevolent outsider - one who visits without desire to possess for him or herself."
Which in turn is taken from http://www.afterall.org/online/serra.bronx

Saturday, 10 July 2010

more arguments for the moment

"Certainly, our society is exceptional in many ways, and it should not be surprising if it determines to bring about new forms of social existence that are relatively scarce in the ethnographic record. Same-sex marriage evidently suits our own society's present needs better than, say, obligatory euthanasia and polygamy. But if what is desirable here and now is all that is at issue, why not just say so, rather than trying to argue for these practices in a context-independent way? I just don't understand what it could possibly mean to hold that any particular practice is in itself, independently of context, good or right or just (who would be making it independently right? God?), and I don't think that trying to find a particular cluster of practices and to argue for their goodness, etc., is what inquirers after truth ought to be doing."

from
http://www.jehsmith.com/1/2010/07/reading-nussbaum-an.html
 

Saturday, 3 July 2010

ten research questions

Ralph Dorey
Ten Research Questions
    28th June 2010

Human existence is experience at one time only, this being the present, however our intelligence's primary focus is upon the past (for reference) and the future (for anticipation). Can these two modes be reconciled within art?
Can an art work be made that is not a translation?
How far can instinct go? By what means is the capacity for a more fluid and immediate response developed?
The boundary between mineral and vegetable is life, the boundary between vegetable and animal is consciousness, the boundary between animal and human is self-consciousness (E.F Schumacher). We recognise objects by anticipating our relationship and potential for interaction with them (Henri Bergson). How do these observations relate to the areas between object, architecture, and landscape?
What methods best relay an experience? How can we render the unknowable?
Design is most pure in times of necessity, can the survival instincts be unlocked to develop beyond mere survival?
Can a poetic and subjective response reconcile with a rigourous objective one? Is this is an overarching problem of Modernism and if so how is it best understood?
How can one be more fluid? How can one be more authentic? Can we act without corruption and if we can does that render art mute?
The Heroic response! We are interwoven with everything and it is impossible to understand anything in isolation (Bergson), so how can we develop the individual heroic response that Modernism calls for as it prioritises this individual and their direct relationship with the present? Is it enough, as in psychoanalysis, to read any hero’s struggle with an apparently exterior force as a battle with the self?
Anecdotally, the Desert is a sucking vacuum of absence, and the Jungle an overwhelming extreme of complexity. These instances mirror one another and concern the Modernist dream of progress both as a ideal to aim for and a context of nature to balance against, how can we understand this concept better and potentially dispute it?