RE: [-empyre-] Method Manifest
Dear Jim and all,
> Purity, it seems, is specially of concern to fundamentalists looking for something easy to
OHHH,,, I have ever examined the "fundamentalism" before because I noticed
that the meaning of this word in Englsh is quite different from the one in
In Japanese fundamentalism is rather difficult than easy because compromise
is considered as easy than to claim his/her principal.
BTW I use this word in the latter, Japanese meanings, in my manuscript
"Art Fundamentalist's Rule of Life" at
In Japan fundamentalism is not the antonym of modernism.
We can say even "modernist fundamentalism," ...well, maybe
the meaning is close to "principalism" though I have never
heard this word before.
> Artistic purists are unfortunately in the position, it seems, of doing the same pure thing ad
> nauseum out of devotion to purity. Like ablutions. Though one wouldn't recommend people stop
> doing their ablutions, necessarily.
I do not think this is always "unfortunate."
Sometimes it might be fortunate.
But the case below in German seems to be "unfortunate," I agree.
> At least in English and, as you say, Josephine, specially in a German context, "purity" is
> perhaps irrecoverably sullied by the rhetoric and actions of those from the past who have
> pursued "purity" at homicidal levels of exclusion and zealotry, particularly concerning racial
> But even in artistic realms, purists oblige themselves to predictability, adherance to their own
> propaganda, to method or doctrine. Here's to dullness.
In artistic realms, the today's situation of "everything is OK" is more to dullness than
to adherance to their own claims, I believe.
> Is that what is going on here, Hideki, or something else? You deserve the benefit of doubt. I
> understand the language barrier is a problem, a source of possible misinterpretation.
There may exists the language barrier, but I think that my above saying are composed
after the understanding of your position.
> I looked at some of your URLs. "Corruption and appropriation are prohibited." Trying to keep it
> pure? Good luck.
This saying is rather for authority than purity, but yes, authority comes from purity.
> "These method arts, on the one hand, return to the tradition which each form depends on, and on
> the other hand, sing in chorus a single principle in the same age. We, methodicists, doubt
> liberty and equality which have produced license and indolence in arts and sciences, and
> reinstate logics as ethics."
> What do you mean by saying you (your name is at the bottom of
> http://aloalo.co.jp/nakazawa/method/03manifesto3_e.html) "doubt liberty and equality"?
You are better to look at "http://aloalo.co.jp/nakazawa/method/01manifesto1_e.html"
because this First Manifesto is the original and this only by my name...But this problem is
The meanings "doubt liberty and equality" is to doubt democracy itself of course.
I think liberty cause the today's dull license, and I think equality cause the today's
dull indolence....these are just as the sentences written.
> And what does it mean to "reinstate logics as ethics"?
I think today's ethics is humanism rather than rationalism though the humanism and
the rationalism are considered as the same in the past, like the Renaissance era or
I am against today's humanism which deny rationalism.
I want to accept rationalism again even dening humanism.
That is the meaning "reinstate logics as ethics."
BTW I consider today's situation to be similar to rococo era which were license and indolence.
My methodicism is like the neoclassicism which denied license and indolence.
This archive was generated by a fusion of
Pipermail 0.09 (Mailman edition) and