Humans manipulate animals, and create machines. Both are subservient to human desires-beneath the hierarchy of humanity. Training animals is a skill just a programming a machine, but the variable of emotion cannot be accounted for by an algorithm yet. Animals carry knowledge, not just intelligence-primitive and predictable as it may be, it still necessitates our respect. “For quite a long while, like Hitchcock, I’ve considered birds as a kind of metaphysical feat. The bird is never what it is empirically, it surpasses itself, it is already spiritualized, inscribed as something which can kill or save.” (46, Life Extreme) Machines have not been given this sort of power. Can code surpass its own code? This is an issue of artificial intelligence, machines coding for other machines is a topic I will not digress into. Right now, if humans did not have any interaction with the sensuous world, animals would continue evolving, machines would not.
Ribofunk and its projection of the future beings about wild machine/animal beings. Their place in the world is still for mankind’s using. Programmed as a machine but still with animal instincts is the splice. There are various forms of control, but there are loops to be found. Krazy Kat for example, the bad splice. This splice has the ability to be good or bad-outside of our control. The Kat has feelings, ambitions, and anger. This thought revolution is very possible with such human, animal, and machine mergers. The more we become dependent on these creations, teaching them, programming routes of existence of near self sufficiency. The less they become dependent on the human race, their creators.
Ribofunk’s representation is that of a future time, Life Extreme accounts for today. We create animals with no feathers, enlarged chicken breasts that disable their ability to even walk. These manipulations are convergent to human desires and divergent to Darwinian evolution. “What is the living being? The stability of life or of the living is thrown off course-especially when one invokes technology or machinery, which lean more towards death.” (13, Life Extreme) Humanity is pushing animals away from their life and pushing machines towards a virtual human life in a way. In with the new and out with the old. Machines will dominate the landscape; animals are defenseless to our actions. This is so because it is too difficult to cater to animals in a wild setting-turn the tables and have them cater to us.
Everything created by humans is held dear to our hearts. We assimilate machines as apart of ourselves-growing with/into them in the future. Animals are a divergent evolution of the past, our own primitive cerebellum brain of fight or flight. When Ribofunk reigns supreme, the Splice will more machine then animal. Modified with the best parts of both-there will be no distinction at this point. But it is the animal part that we can relate to, embrace through eye contact. There is home in a beating heart. Life desires life, filling the roll of the exotic Other in the far off future when there are more machines than humans. Humans are top of the food chain, and top of the life chain. Puppeteers of the sensuous world- carrying on towards death in this form of living. 51% or 49% Both are alive, but it is a dominance over the rest that is decided by a fraction. Animals were regarded as less important in the past, and will be until their numbers are so few that we will desire them once again. Remixed and re-imagined through machinery. Technology on the other hand will only grow, with or without of compliance in due time. We may grow tired of it in time. Its relationship with humans compared to animals and humans are inversely proportional. More of less of one of the other comes in cycles. Do not forget that there was a time when animals dominated humans with their size, speed, and natural ability.
Monday, June 8, 2009
Sunday, June 7, 2009
Dopplegang Musings
What is within the spectrum of a photograph? A photograph is always a representation of something created in the past. It contains a manipulated moment in time-nothing more. There is no soul in a photograph. A photo may be copied again and again to reproduce the same image, or an altered image in the dark room. But is the moment when the photo was taken ever truly copied? No. There is no recreating an entire moment through a lens. When a picture or even a movie is taken, hindsight is confined to the screen or print.
Photos from the past may be recreated, a cut up or collage is new, but its parts are not. When a photo is changed physically in any way, it is no longer a copy. Only the negative, a true image stands unique as art, which is a manipulation. Photographs are not copies of a time and place-they are fractions of the whole. If every angle were taken in an image, by an infinite number of cameras, the situation would still just grow exponentially, never reaching a whole number of being there.
Film takes time into consideration and an evolving space. Moving pictures or not, the lens is still only half the world. The art form is creating more with less. More emotion, and sensation by capturing from a fresh perspective and new angles. Film watchers never interact with the situation-though film makers do right up until that camera starts rolling. It is a fabricated whole, bringing up a curious point that being in Hollywood seems so fake to people. Props, sets, makeup, script, actors, the whole production is hours and hours of filming and multitudes of different takes. All to be edited down to one hundred and twenty minuets of entertainment.
Even biological doubles do not have entirely the same DNA. Mitochondrial DNA, unique to DNA contained in the nucleus is entirely its own. This may just be a finite portion, but in a physiological sense, different is different. Nature (deoxyribose nucleic acid) and nurture (experience) I remember hearing of a new clipping to clone Jesus so he can be in every home. All from the blood sample on the shroud of Turin. In no way can experiences of a lifetime be recreated. Yes it is possible for someone to have the same DNA in the nucleus- but controlling growth is entirely out of our range of creation. Nature and nurture of life is a combination of them both. Weather it be a clone, or identical twin-each would be an individual.
The issue of a splice follows this same idea. In Ribofunk, all splices were still grown from zygote form, blending of DNA. What if I grown body were somehow split down the middle, brain and all and joined with another body having the same operation. Left and right brain will then come into conscious play. A rewiring would take place, a growth into something new, never a copy.
The Filth and this idea of amnesia induced personality is a fragmented whole. A suggested livelihood pushed on the subject from his surroundings. With such calculated forms of control. The cat, the commie chimp smoking marijuana cigarettes. Tried and true responses growing in a lab. There is a choice if one is wise enough to listen to an innate intelligence of self as Ned Slade did. Each new round of Ned Slade will be a bit different. The issue of time travel and having multiple forms of the self as in Primer. The difference in each individual is the knowledge; the first multiple would have no knowledge of a second or third multiple. They could not be the same then. The nurture aspect of life is beyond recreation. As for the pataphysical realm it to is open to suggestion because it is not tangible through immediate experience. Being that it is individual imaginations that word it into being. Each realm is the eye of the beholder, isolated, crafted by nurture and nature.
Photos from the past may be recreated, a cut up or collage is new, but its parts are not. When a photo is changed physically in any way, it is no longer a copy. Only the negative, a true image stands unique as art, which is a manipulation. Photographs are not copies of a time and place-they are fractions of the whole. If every angle were taken in an image, by an infinite number of cameras, the situation would still just grow exponentially, never reaching a whole number of being there.
Film takes time into consideration and an evolving space. Moving pictures or not, the lens is still only half the world. The art form is creating more with less. More emotion, and sensation by capturing from a fresh perspective and new angles. Film watchers never interact with the situation-though film makers do right up until that camera starts rolling. It is a fabricated whole, bringing up a curious point that being in Hollywood seems so fake to people. Props, sets, makeup, script, actors, the whole production is hours and hours of filming and multitudes of different takes. All to be edited down to one hundred and twenty minuets of entertainment.
Even biological doubles do not have entirely the same DNA. Mitochondrial DNA, unique to DNA contained in the nucleus is entirely its own. This may just be a finite portion, but in a physiological sense, different is different. Nature (deoxyribose nucleic acid) and nurture (experience) I remember hearing of a new clipping to clone Jesus so he can be in every home. All from the blood sample on the shroud of Turin. In no way can experiences of a lifetime be recreated. Yes it is possible for someone to have the same DNA in the nucleus- but controlling growth is entirely out of our range of creation. Nature and nurture of life is a combination of them both. Weather it be a clone, or identical twin-each would be an individual.
The issue of a splice follows this same idea. In Ribofunk, all splices were still grown from zygote form, blending of DNA. What if I grown body were somehow split down the middle, brain and all and joined with another body having the same operation. Left and right brain will then come into conscious play. A rewiring would take place, a growth into something new, never a copy.
The Filth and this idea of amnesia induced personality is a fragmented whole. A suggested livelihood pushed on the subject from his surroundings. With such calculated forms of control. The cat, the commie chimp smoking marijuana cigarettes. Tried and true responses growing in a lab. There is a choice if one is wise enough to listen to an innate intelligence of self as Ned Slade did. Each new round of Ned Slade will be a bit different. The issue of time travel and having multiple forms of the self as in Primer. The difference in each individual is the knowledge; the first multiple would have no knowledge of a second or third multiple. They could not be the same then. The nurture aspect of life is beyond recreation. As for the pataphysical realm it to is open to suggestion because it is not tangible through immediate experience. Being that it is individual imaginations that word it into being. Each realm is the eye of the beholder, isolated, crafted by nurture and nature.
The Other of Radical Alterity "Roof Top Origins"
Here. I am. A primordial sense of explanation for existence, searching to be satiated. First I search a world beyond worlds. The spirit interaction with an All-mighty being of love. Sacrificing a self through service. Manipulated and twisted by time-unanswered questions are now drawing conclusions. The arts and science of the Islamic golden age, a union of god and science-picking up on Gods rhythms through knowledge. Leading towards science without God, yet the formalities are kept alive. We are atoms, all except hydrogen originating from star dust and nothing more, nothing less. Random chance of existence is a hell bent reality. A mentality that cannot be accepted by the evolving mankind. Majority of manimals identify with an ego, which is not stardust. Who is left to question but the self. Attempting to determine the self through knowledge of electrons and atoms. The more a location of an electron is known, less is understood of origins and destinations.
Accepted science goes onto quantum-particles being more than one place at once. Existing yet nonexistent. Still incapable of solid ground; looking, longing for something greater than the self to manifest our duty. Science is the new foundation for explanation, pillars holding the united goals of mankind on its data tables and analysis. It attempts to reach the Other of Radical Alterity- a code in which there is no longer any law or constraint. Just as religion of past. Knowing how way leads on to way, science turns inwards-back to the spirit. But more importantly it changes its scale for this introspection. A size beyond our bodily understanding. Nano represents an amount of zeros that our conscious mind is only able to guess at.
This is a way to get back to the spirit. We alter what is, to what we have control over. Nano is a sense of control. A whimsical idea that being able to manipulate the surrounding on such a scale-we will to change the self to Godly forms. We no longer feel the devine mothers presence-why not create our own? Jean Baudrillard informs that “Fundamentally, the secret of alterity is to think that everything comes from the outside.” (69) No guilt, selfless in a way-existing in the formalities of code and conduct. A system that is highly respected in certain circles as a means. On the very next page Baudrillard speaks of the distance of the Other. “That is the principle of exoticism according to Segalen: keep your distance. Curiously, we would be tempted to enter the opposite form, which would be to go towards the Other, to assimilate or even played with difference to a certain degree and following a global and universal principle. That the Other as Other. There is no universal, there is an Other. (70)
The nano world is close in its teasing ways, but the west will not allow itself to embrace it completely. With the distance gone, our means of living is gone. Our Omega point as prophesied by Technoapocalypse is a point of convergence into a realm beyond. Gods will die. The secrets of the world will no longer be secret. Without myth there is a loss of wonder. That finality of being may be too great to undertake- having nothing greater than the self. Our finitude with shock us from our ignorant bubble of perception.
The irony of all this technology as a means to reach and understand a universal spirit in the end. A spirit that is under complete nano control and understanding. The exoticism of life is swallowed- and we die from life as we know it. Every new renaissance of the search has a new context only. It is not so much the knowledge at the end, but the process that keeps us wanting. We kill the Other by reaching it. “…radical alterity cannot be found, reaching the goal is impossible… this search: it is not an eternal truth; it is located in its time, its context.” (75) Baudrillard. The Other is a way of a round robin back to the root of existence. A new perspective on a repeating thought pattern of unanswered questions.
Education is this searching of the Other. All of us being home schooled in this undertaking of the self. The incomplete manifesto for growth. This is forever incomplete until it is finished in the singular sense. Beyond words, our nurture aspect of existence. We put in the time just as all other artists of this spectrum-learning what cannot be taught. Our own "how to" guide to really see the yellow rose of Borges. We are forever expanding outwards to understand the inner workings of the soul and duty. Take it apart and put it back together again. It is a beautiful process and rhythm of life, tried and true.
Accepted science goes onto quantum-particles being more than one place at once. Existing yet nonexistent. Still incapable of solid ground; looking, longing for something greater than the self to manifest our duty. Science is the new foundation for explanation, pillars holding the united goals of mankind on its data tables and analysis. It attempts to reach the Other of Radical Alterity- a code in which there is no longer any law or constraint. Just as religion of past. Knowing how way leads on to way, science turns inwards-back to the spirit. But more importantly it changes its scale for this introspection. A size beyond our bodily understanding. Nano represents an amount of zeros that our conscious mind is only able to guess at.
This is a way to get back to the spirit. We alter what is, to what we have control over. Nano is a sense of control. A whimsical idea that being able to manipulate the surrounding on such a scale-we will to change the self to Godly forms. We no longer feel the devine mothers presence-why not create our own? Jean Baudrillard informs that “Fundamentally, the secret of alterity is to think that everything comes from the outside.” (69) No guilt, selfless in a way-existing in the formalities of code and conduct. A system that is highly respected in certain circles as a means. On the very next page Baudrillard speaks of the distance of the Other. “That is the principle of exoticism according to Segalen: keep your distance. Curiously, we would be tempted to enter the opposite form, which would be to go towards the Other, to assimilate or even played with difference to a certain degree and following a global and universal principle. That the Other as Other. There is no universal, there is an Other. (70)
The nano world is close in its teasing ways, but the west will not allow itself to embrace it completely. With the distance gone, our means of living is gone. Our Omega point as prophesied by Technoapocalypse is a point of convergence into a realm beyond. Gods will die. The secrets of the world will no longer be secret. Without myth there is a loss of wonder. That finality of being may be too great to undertake- having nothing greater than the self. Our finitude with shock us from our ignorant bubble of perception.
The irony of all this technology as a means to reach and understand a universal spirit in the end. A spirit that is under complete nano control and understanding. The exoticism of life is swallowed- and we die from life as we know it. Every new renaissance of the search has a new context only. It is not so much the knowledge at the end, but the process that keeps us wanting. We kill the Other by reaching it. “…radical alterity cannot be found, reaching the goal is impossible… this search: it is not an eternal truth; it is located in its time, its context.” (75) Baudrillard. The Other is a way of a round robin back to the root of existence. A new perspective on a repeating thought pattern of unanswered questions.
Education is this searching of the Other. All of us being home schooled in this undertaking of the self. The incomplete manifesto for growth. This is forever incomplete until it is finished in the singular sense. Beyond words, our nurture aspect of existence. We put in the time just as all other artists of this spectrum-learning what cannot be taught. Our own "how to" guide to really see the yellow rose of Borges. We are forever expanding outwards to understand the inner workings of the soul and duty. Take it apart and put it back together again. It is a beautiful process and rhythm of life, tried and true.
Journey Down Blog Lane
As such the super organism we are. The evolution of this course is entirely singular. The fluidity that blogging makes available-everyone having experiences from the foundation of thought Tony has bestowed to the classroom and beyond. From that each has breathed into it more and more. Different parts of the whole. As it should be, allowed to fly on in self induced direction. The progression starting with the photo of morel, on to images of The Ticket That Exploded. Then the Other of Radical Alterity. And so forth, our thoughts evolving. Branching towards new personal growth, which is parallel with super organism expansion. Blogs catered to these thoughts and emotions-not manifested or refined in class. The evolving context of material and discussions were tools to process the bigger fish just beneath the surface. What is knowing, the idea of living, evolution of technology, linear time. All of there are valid and intricate points strung together in an oriphidnet of our own. All are forms to introspect the Other we have created.
The topic of knowing had its meanderings in both William’s and my blog postings. The curiosity was able to be undertaken with thought and writing. The blogs were out personal paths woven with class topics. This is where the most diversity of the class was found. Borges’ claws still deep in my abdomen, the first topic to undertake on will be essences and ability to “know”. William contributes:
“What is knowing something? Can we ever know something in its entirety? I figure it's maybe something like this: you can know a person, or to be more precise, select aspects of a person, not the entire person; I seriously wonder if you can even know everything about yourself, but I digress. You can also know facts such as what chemicals a desk is made up of, under the same category, you can also know something’s status, such as where someone is. You can know how to do something from experience although this is somewhat questionable since no two situations will be exactly alike, I still feel that there is something to be said about memory, but I guess it's really more of a system of estimating probabilities than actually knowing something, again, since no two situations will be alike.”
William is in question and setting guidelines to help define answers. This taxonomy necessitates a thinker to be impeccable with his or her words. It is amazing how much more conviction words carry when they are defined from the inside out. Through processes just like this-thought meanderings bring a context of association that avoids confusion within the self and communication. My digestion of this topic of knowing has been molded by different knowledge, both valid, neither incorrect.
“Where do today's words come from? What power do you and I put into words. A dictionary holds supreme power-but do many people speak in vernacular oxford English? Our journey of language is experience and interactions. But in today's world, the power of the word is gained from you, I, and so many other not so constant forms all in different contexts and unrelated sensuous surroundings. Building into the internal paradox of communication, "the more we communicate, the more we destroy communication; or, the less we exchange, the more we have to communicate." Baudrillard, Jean (45)
Capturing essences is beyond the codes capabilities-only manipulation is possible.
Our super organism is growing. Such vastly different approaches to an open ended issue. William begins with knowing traits of a person-not essences. I speak of words and the complexity of communication and its internal paradox of verbal or written exchange. Neither of our ideas have essences as conclusive. William speaks of tangible knowledge such as chemical contents of a table. He speaks of the singularity of situations-never repeating alike. I speak of knowing words, which are already a representation of something outside the Other. Both thoughts maturing from an innate intelligence of our own manifestations.
Compare and contrast two people for example-traits can be known and defined, but the whole is greater than the sum of the parts. A paradox of evaluation. This course of Nanotexts is radically different in all of our minds and hearts. Using sci-fi of the near future to build opinions and essentially draw lines in a forth coming context. What is being alive? Downloaded into a computer-transmitting that incalculable essence-27 grams of the soul. Let us now jump down the path of Morel in this yellow wood. I see no other dimension for Morel after his meticulous recording-he dies at the end of the week. I agree with William completely when he speaks of the impossibility of free will in Morels device.
“Leaving out something’s identity in physical space we have senses, what can be perceived, and, though this is somewhat of an assumption, we have the interactions between these beings. Personally I think that there's more to being alive, especially to being human than that, but even if there's not, its all just a damn recording. Even if these recordings can think and feel, they are only acting on the world they were recorded in, they have no means to interact with anything new. then again maybe that's what life is if you don't believe that free will exists. maybe this idea of "new" is just an illusion.”
This necessity for free will to be living is fantastic food for thought. Freedom is an illusion and the reason why we fight. When William talks of interacting with anything new, that caught me a bit off guard. I believe that all is a circle, passing and returning- but how free is the return then? Is it fresh in some new way, or is the ignorance of a new situation that allows a “free mind” to live and think, feel, regurgitate? I am alive, as is William- I have no reason to doubt that-but free will-there is reason to doubt. Will, free or subjected, has nothing to do with living. People going about their lives unconsciously, victims of a world they created-living, breathing- yes, but are they truly alive to the potential of creation?
Fueled by class discussions, we branched into the idea of "free will" simply being a buffer to extremes-both, judged as good and bad. Intriguing because the action of dulling the sensuous world has an enlivening on the opposite end. Connected at the hip. Hao Huynh spoke of understanding the extremes of life as being intrinsically connected- to know happiness, one must know sadness. The spectrum of feeling increases with all interaction weather it be leaving one utterly fragmented, or wholly inspired. Now to circumvent the issue of living, the virtual world. Our senses are dulling to regard virtual activities as normal. Where does this virtual world we are creating leave us on this spectrum? Safe. All the interactions are found there, love life, multiple parapersonas, even life and death. What does this have to do with living? Nothing, the pixels will never be able to capture essences. "Reality has fallen prey to Virtual Reality, the final consequence of the process begun with the abstraction of objective reality - a process that ends in Integral Reality." Jean Baudrillard. Our actions on reality and living are viral. Our virus will go on procreating-but living is what we don't know about life. Waking up morning after morning ready to take it all on with a smile and grow.
The topic of knowing had its meanderings in both William’s and my blog postings. The curiosity was able to be undertaken with thought and writing. The blogs were out personal paths woven with class topics. This is where the most diversity of the class was found. Borges’ claws still deep in my abdomen, the first topic to undertake on will be essences and ability to “know”. William contributes:
“What is knowing something? Can we ever know something in its entirety? I figure it's maybe something like this: you can know a person, or to be more precise, select aspects of a person, not the entire person; I seriously wonder if you can even know everything about yourself, but I digress. You can also know facts such as what chemicals a desk is made up of, under the same category, you can also know something’s status, such as where someone is. You can know how to do something from experience although this is somewhat questionable since no two situations will be exactly alike, I still feel that there is something to be said about memory, but I guess it's really more of a system of estimating probabilities than actually knowing something, again, since no two situations will be alike.”
William is in question and setting guidelines to help define answers. This taxonomy necessitates a thinker to be impeccable with his or her words. It is amazing how much more conviction words carry when they are defined from the inside out. Through processes just like this-thought meanderings bring a context of association that avoids confusion within the self and communication. My digestion of this topic of knowing has been molded by different knowledge, both valid, neither incorrect.
“Where do today's words come from? What power do you and I put into words. A dictionary holds supreme power-but do many people speak in vernacular oxford English? Our journey of language is experience and interactions. But in today's world, the power of the word is gained from you, I, and so many other not so constant forms all in different contexts and unrelated sensuous surroundings. Building into the internal paradox of communication, "the more we communicate, the more we destroy communication; or, the less we exchange, the more we have to communicate." Baudrillard, Jean (45)
Capturing essences is beyond the codes capabilities-only manipulation is possible.
Our super organism is growing. Such vastly different approaches to an open ended issue. William begins with knowing traits of a person-not essences. I speak of words and the complexity of communication and its internal paradox of verbal or written exchange. Neither of our ideas have essences as conclusive. William speaks of tangible knowledge such as chemical contents of a table. He speaks of the singularity of situations-never repeating alike. I speak of knowing words, which are already a representation of something outside the Other. Both thoughts maturing from an innate intelligence of our own manifestations.
Compare and contrast two people for example-traits can be known and defined, but the whole is greater than the sum of the parts. A paradox of evaluation. This course of Nanotexts is radically different in all of our minds and hearts. Using sci-fi of the near future to build opinions and essentially draw lines in a forth coming context. What is being alive? Downloaded into a computer-transmitting that incalculable essence-27 grams of the soul. Let us now jump down the path of Morel in this yellow wood. I see no other dimension for Morel after his meticulous recording-he dies at the end of the week. I agree with William completely when he speaks of the impossibility of free will in Morels device.
“Leaving out something’s identity in physical space we have senses, what can be perceived, and, though this is somewhat of an assumption, we have the interactions between these beings. Personally I think that there's more to being alive, especially to being human than that, but even if there's not, its all just a damn recording. Even if these recordings can think and feel, they are only acting on the world they were recorded in, they have no means to interact with anything new. then again maybe that's what life is if you don't believe that free will exists. maybe this idea of "new" is just an illusion.”
This necessity for free will to be living is fantastic food for thought. Freedom is an illusion and the reason why we fight. When William talks of interacting with anything new, that caught me a bit off guard. I believe that all is a circle, passing and returning- but how free is the return then? Is it fresh in some new way, or is the ignorance of a new situation that allows a “free mind” to live and think, feel, regurgitate? I am alive, as is William- I have no reason to doubt that-but free will-there is reason to doubt. Will, free or subjected, has nothing to do with living. People going about their lives unconsciously, victims of a world they created-living, breathing- yes, but are they truly alive to the potential of creation?
Fueled by class discussions, we branched into the idea of "free will" simply being a buffer to extremes-both, judged as good and bad. Intriguing because the action of dulling the sensuous world has an enlivening on the opposite end. Connected at the hip. Hao Huynh spoke of understanding the extremes of life as being intrinsically connected- to know happiness, one must know sadness. The spectrum of feeling increases with all interaction weather it be leaving one utterly fragmented, or wholly inspired. Now to circumvent the issue of living, the virtual world. Our senses are dulling to regard virtual activities as normal. Where does this virtual world we are creating leave us on this spectrum? Safe. All the interactions are found there, love life, multiple parapersonas, even life and death. What does this have to do with living? Nothing, the pixels will never be able to capture essences. "Reality has fallen prey to Virtual Reality, the final consequence of the process begun with the abstraction of objective reality - a process that ends in Integral Reality." Jean Baudrillard. Our actions on reality and living are viral. Our virus will go on procreating-but living is what we don't know about life. Waking up morning after morning ready to take it all on with a smile and grow.
Monday, June 1, 2009
Book groups' Life Extreme
The Queen city of Cincinnati, “en-livened”. Denoting the creation of a state to become more lively, or interesting. Our book group analysis continued and branched anew from class topics. First and foremost, the possibilities of the nano world expanded. Hindsight informs that I have no way of knowing where the nano future will go. Futuristic details of movies after the Second World War have not all paned out. But the fringe must be made hazy with a melting pot of dreams. Random chance as well, making a power beyond our immediate control- what capabilities or options will proceed. How it will evolve in thought, action? Which maniac will hold the cards in all of this progress?
The work distribution was fantastic in the group setting. A verbal accord, with the simple understanding of the necessary contributions. Everyone carried their ideas; with the small numbers this can make or break the group. Some plurkers can fade into the background, and being a digital interface-I take what I see as what is. That becomes the standard of viewing and we accept it. One must give to get in a communal setting, all holding the pillars aloft separately. It is refreshing to share strictly with my peers. The issue was entertainment, bouncing ideas and building with one another. The setting was much more contained than plurk, with a sort of timing and mutual activity. A limb of the super organism, functionally pseudo independent.
A void was satisfied through the book group. Completely taking apart a text, tangents, and more the merrier. Stretch the text then watch it coalesce again. Plurks got off base- but there is no worthy creation in gibberish, one tires of nonsensical typing for sake of plurk karma of all things. Texts left on the back burner and me, me, me typed out and shared. This is totally fair and easy to participate in-but I was left wanting more material focused on the class. The book group situation reminded me of the Kafka and Borges dialogues starting with the text then sprouting anywhere relevant or even beyond. Always from a foundation of the text.
Something that caught me off guard with the book group was the timing-one lengthy, supported post a week. All of us on similar page readings as well left us with the entire week of reading to refine ideas within our own heads. This allowed for a branching effect-loose ends of the text were allowed to be tied up in eight different ways-all valid. Some played true, others not so by the end of the book. It is those loops that make the text. An intrusive vagueness, necessary and placed throughout. Time bombs of thought and analysis.
Climaxing at the dead end dynamic of teacher student setting. We crazy eights were allowed to mentor as peers. All both teachers and students. Prichard has devoured these texts for years, not the mention the plethora of other knowledge to utilize. The all Seeing Eye, catering to our thoughts and emotions, building them among us. Prichard has had this class building in his head since the age of eight years. QJC group were first time amateurs with this book. Fresh and excited all the same. Foundation for sharing was through the text alone-we had no “big toe” to steady us. Little direction except completion. The sharing of pollinated ideas was spontaneous, not planned, as a classroom. With out expectation, perception is free. In class I have an urgency to pick up on Prichard’s interaction. His words and the silence between them. So delicately placed, a thought link passed along through the texts, class, plurk, and blogs. I feel within a Borges text, telling in not telling, informing bluntly and vaguely. But intention is placed to build a conclusion. A conclusion of our own, Tony’s, and everyone in the classroom shared. There is no recreating the QJC group, but how far off is the spectrum of class evolution through the teacher and mass of students from previous settings? Low and Kai returning to nurture our thoughts using the same texts, movies, and a familiar lesson plan-a quarter more refined. Living and reliving, there are a multitude of paths in this yellow wood. QJC had a freshness, unique and untouchable.
The work distribution was fantastic in the group setting. A verbal accord, with the simple understanding of the necessary contributions. Everyone carried their ideas; with the small numbers this can make or break the group. Some plurkers can fade into the background, and being a digital interface-I take what I see as what is. That becomes the standard of viewing and we accept it. One must give to get in a communal setting, all holding the pillars aloft separately. It is refreshing to share strictly with my peers. The issue was entertainment, bouncing ideas and building with one another. The setting was much more contained than plurk, with a sort of timing and mutual activity. A limb of the super organism, functionally pseudo independent.
A void was satisfied through the book group. Completely taking apart a text, tangents, and more the merrier. Stretch the text then watch it coalesce again. Plurks got off base- but there is no worthy creation in gibberish, one tires of nonsensical typing for sake of plurk karma of all things. Texts left on the back burner and me, me, me typed out and shared. This is totally fair and easy to participate in-but I was left wanting more material focused on the class. The book group situation reminded me of the Kafka and Borges dialogues starting with the text then sprouting anywhere relevant or even beyond. Always from a foundation of the text.
Something that caught me off guard with the book group was the timing-one lengthy, supported post a week. All of us on similar page readings as well left us with the entire week of reading to refine ideas within our own heads. This allowed for a branching effect-loose ends of the text were allowed to be tied up in eight different ways-all valid. Some played true, others not so by the end of the book. It is those loops that make the text. An intrusive vagueness, necessary and placed throughout. Time bombs of thought and analysis.
Climaxing at the dead end dynamic of teacher student setting. We crazy eights were allowed to mentor as peers. All both teachers and students. Prichard has devoured these texts for years, not the mention the plethora of other knowledge to utilize. The all Seeing Eye, catering to our thoughts and emotions, building them among us. Prichard has had this class building in his head since the age of eight years. QJC group were first time amateurs with this book. Fresh and excited all the same. Foundation for sharing was through the text alone-we had no “big toe” to steady us. Little direction except completion. The sharing of pollinated ideas was spontaneous, not planned, as a classroom. With out expectation, perception is free. In class I have an urgency to pick up on Prichard’s interaction. His words and the silence between them. So delicately placed, a thought link passed along through the texts, class, plurk, and blogs. I feel within a Borges text, telling in not telling, informing bluntly and vaguely. But intention is placed to build a conclusion. A conclusion of our own, Tony’s, and everyone in the classroom shared. There is no recreating the QJC group, but how far off is the spectrum of class evolution through the teacher and mass of students from previous settings? Low and Kai returning to nurture our thoughts using the same texts, movies, and a familiar lesson plan-a quarter more refined. Living and reliving, there are a multitude of paths in this yellow wood. QJC had a freshness, unique and untouchable.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
