Re: [-empyre-] the N-space

To both emails

----- Original Message ----- From: "Dirk Vekemans" <>
To: "'soft_skinned_space'" <>
Sent: Saturday, March 11, 2006 1:58 AM
Subject: RE: [-empyre-] the N-space

Correct me if i'm wrong, please, otherwise i'll be talking complete

N-state, i think, refers to a time dimension.
N-space, i think, refers to a virtual mapping of this dimension,
all mappings of previous states.
It's very topological,

May be you are in a post-structural conception of the relationship between time and space; because topology subject is not mapping nor states but the question of continuum and of plasticity (as you quote of haywire). That allows this field to approach the non euclidian surfaces and spaces (for example the bottle of Klin) to tribute to actual Physics. That suggests another conception of time and space time and precisely working larger, as you tell but not exactly by the way you tell.

Both time Lacan worked on the same post-dialectical complex continuum as
psychology/knowledge structures in terms of topology precisely - that one in opposition to the
comportementalism of Palo Alto which drives to conditioning informations -for a part.

It is to say if states are not states but other. Numbers ans signs in the
code are such as you tell. But not the moving living things.

set theory gone haywire into the ontological.

Utopia, as derived from Thomas Moore's book,

And the same of Thomas More invented the word about the critical governing on earth, but from Augustin the critical ideal... of course it is pragmatic to begin utopia at Thomas More's work but could be too much easy. Even he is far from Augustin regarding the North, yet is is a mixed culture. Nothing is pure. Nothing was never pure I guess.

refers to a timeless ideal
state, a platonic abstraction that because it doesn't exist, because it
isn't taking place, has no place.

Both capitalism and religion are pretty much accounted for in an N-state
description of things.

Can be appearing much more -of techic -for example

I an N-state description of things, the individual
and its personal history are reduced to subliminal presences taken 'en
masse' by a pixel on the map of a visualisation process drawing its

As we live here, so what? And whatever: what of chaos theory?

Futurism is by all means the most ugly phase of Modernism.

Can be there is not beautiful and huggly in modernity but both of it

Modernism to Futurism is,

He does not make reductionism. He gives an exemple.

very much the same as reducing an
individual and its personal history to a pixel on a map and then giving it
the wrong colour. Nevertheless i find your view of things as expressed
very valuable, because it enforces a moral

he speaks of a relative convention, not of moral

duty upon us to try and give
dealings with art some content that would ensure a different perception of
it. You are ofcourse perfectly right in giving prevalence to analysing our
condition more in terms of political-ideological power. Things like
don't offer hope in a practical way, because there's no horizon beyond

Baudrilliard is in the business of producing prose. He's very good at it.
It's nice to hear he's making pictures now to. It's always good to

You know of God, when his achieved work appears boring for him, that he makes pics to see otherwise his world:) Baudrillard is not God but he has made an inevitable work...

On a personal note, the Cathedral Mother wants me to ask you who is the mother of Modern Turkey.

Exactly that one said the young Turkish both realizing the genocide of Armenians (horror) and modernizing (in the good way) Turkey. Albert Speer -remember..

Why do you accord value to the things. If they are intense they exist. If
they are the symbolic value they do not need that we give them a value. Modernity is a
structural mode of space time that is not the eternal concept of
change. I mean of modernity the same of God : too much integrism in it would signify that they would no exist with intensity - perhaps they have still disappeared.

??? May be yes, may be no:)

greetings, dv

-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
[] Namens G.H. Hovagimyan
Verzonden: donderdag 9 maart 2006 14:25
Aan: soft_skinned_space
Onderwerp: [-empyre-] the N-space

Right now we're in a clash of civilizations. The modernist world, the capitalist consumer utopia vs. The religious. Neither world is very appealing. An N-space then is anything that is not this. It may be that Hakim Bey is right in the idea of a TAZ.

My father was born in Istanbul in 1927.  For people outside
of Europe or on the fringe of Europe the idea of modern was
anything but where they lived. It meant escape from religious
oppression, racism, xenophobia and genocide.  After World War
II, America exemplified that same idea of modern.  My father
came to America. He studied engineering. He became an
electrical engineer. He worked in computers and
communications.  He was the epitome of an American modern
technocrat but he spoke with a foreign accent.  The idea of
modern is linked to the idea of Utopia which I am told
translated means (no
place.)  Now the Chinese are more modern than the Americans
or am I mixing up contemporary with modern?

The European idea of Modernism can be summed up by a quote from the
Futurists , F.T. Marinetti, "...war is the universal hygiene."   The
notion of revolution is always a call for the death of an
entire political class.  Baudrillard in his latest book the
Conspiracy of Art  talks about how all art since the 1960's
has been a simulation and rehashing of art historical styles.
Now we are in a simulation of a simulation.

I can't help but think that the West is being sold a
reflection of itself by the East (Japan, Korea, China).  It's
similar to British bands taking American Rock and Roll and
doing it better than the Americans or Alfred Hitchcock
creating the absolute image of American Modern in North by
Northwest or Vertigo or Marnie. If I were totally
crazy I'd say we are living in the Matrix. We just don't know it.
And what about the rest of the world, specifically Africa,
The tropic of Cancer and the Tropic of Capricorn, how do they
define modern. Is it a (no place) dream?

The 2006 Whitney Biennial follows this same course of
Europeans defining America's dark night of the soul. It's odd
because I feel that America is the place where everyone goes
looking for their own personal (no place).  Baudrillard in
his book is interviewed by the press about his exhibition of
photographs.  They ask him if this is a contradiction to his
idea of being an outsider critiquing the system.  He says
that of course you can be inside the system while critiquing
it at the same time.

Kemel Attaturk is called, "The Father of Modern Turkey."

empyre forum

empyre forum

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