Re: [-empyre-] Method Manifest

Dear Eryk and all,

> >But I put letters AS bitmap pixels to make PAINTINGS. 
> >
> I'm really interested in this, because this is similar to my approach of
> ascii-based artwork. I've been to the site and I am still confused if
> your work is text-based or object-based. The email art from the Banff is
> clearly text, but there are charts for " Money amount No. 23" for
> example- is this the work? Or is it a representation or blueprint for
> the work?

"Money amount No. 23"
is the work.
And at the same time,
"Composition table of 'Money amount No. 23'"
is the work, too.  This is not the blueprint.

I do not want to separate object-based from text-based, 
because they are using the same "method."
The actual form is only the phenomenon, I think.
And I do not think the phenomenon as important.
(In this meaning I am not a phenomenologist, and 
in this meaning I am not a formalist which include 
minimalist as phenomenologist.)

For example, below two are the same work:

> >BTW I want to deny mysteries and spiritualism. 
> >
> Why?

Below is from my manuscript "Q & A."
Can this quotation meet your question...?

[Q3] Can method art touch humans' heart?
A: I do not know, because it does not intend to appeal to humans' 
feelings.  Rather, apathy or apatheia, or Stoicism, is close to 
methodicism.  Still more, it does not intend to be mysterious.  Simple 
arithmetic is sufficient to make method art come into effect.

> >But I know also we cannot discard them completely...
> >
> Why not? :)

We cannot extract only N or only S from the magnet.
Like this, we cannot extract only one side from dualism, I think.
We can talk about only the will or the tendency from dualism, I think.


This archive was generated by a fusion of Pipermail 0.09 (Mailman edition) and MHonArc 2.6.8.