[Nettime-bold] [ot] [!nt] \n2+0\

[integer@www.god-emil.dk]

>thanks for your answers
>some i understand somewhat, some less so
>certain words escape me such as kr!!ket, k!va, s!mca  
>not a huge deal but obviously this can lead to misunderstandings
>which again is your perogative.

ma!z non. ! = u!sh 2 u!sh.

>first some thoughts and general reactions
>i am an artist who happens to be writing a book.
>with my artist hat on much of what you do makes sense to me.
>for example i have felt the need in my work to put aside traditional notions and conventions of taste because i felt that they were working as a sort of censorship, allowing only ceratin things to be said.  i see this too in the tone and structure of your writings. a rejection of certain ways of communications together with the development of linguistic devices that suit your agendas.
>i think as artists we all choose our communities our "target audiences" if you like in corporate media/military speak. 
>from your comment
>
>
>"I stream via pop3 elegantly + persistently" 
>
>i assume your community to be online.  is there anything else that defines it? (and this is a bad question but) whatt are your thoughts on this as a priveliged arena?  community/pubic artists broke out of the restrictions of the gallery system because of heirachical, elitist nature,  are we in danger of just recreating that here?
>
>
>
>>as for "You better pay me." i have a small budget for the inclusion of visuals in the book.  
>name your price i will see if i can afford you

you cannot afford me i assure you.
it must be i who gives. hence speak.



> i sense a mcluhanesque streak in you - extention of the  nervous system 
>and all that.


all that western that.


>any thought about this, techno-utopianism, technological 
>determinism etc?  
>
>also a preocuupation with abstraction and beauty.  am i getting any 
>warmer? strangely old fashioned on some level.


http://www.eusocial.com/nnnnnnnn/cccp/

c!ao.nn



>as for corporate fascism.  John berger said "thet the naming of the 
>intolerable is in itself the hope"  
>but there is a stage that comes after the naming and that is one of 
>action.  i am unclear what you propose here (forgive my simpleness again)
>
>as for this below
>
>Surely this is a great part of our dignity __... that we can
>understand. and through us matter can understand itself; that
>beginning with protons and electrons. out of the womb of time +
>the vastness of space [that space which lies between us] we can begin
>to know what to observe and where to act - to understand; that organized
>as in us - the hydrogen. the carbon. the nitrogen. the oxygen. those
>16 to 21 elements. the water. the sunlight - all having become us
>can understand what they are and how they came to be.
>
>need to think about it some more but first thoughts (and i'm begining to sound like a marxist which i don't think i am) what about organization?  what about power?
>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> As for
>>
>>Beauty has its reasons.
>>
>>I am the smallest fullerene.
>>I am a sphere with 12 pentagons distributed across my surface.
>>which are you +?
>>
>>Which bit of me is wiggling +?
>>
>
>Is that fullerene in it's definition as molecule or as follower of 
>Buckminster Fuller or both.
>What am I? not as eloquent as you, not sure I have the distance 
>necessary to decide. (unlike you)
>
>What else do I see/hear- a religious kind of revelation through 
>technology, but not religious in the conventional way.
>Use of sexual metaphors to suggest a unity, a mutual consumption again 
>consumated through technology.
>Maybe also  sex as power similar to the language as power I suggested 
>elsewhere.
>
>better get to writing





_______________________________________________
Nettime-bold mailing list
Nettime-bold@nettime.org
http://amsterdam.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold