[-empyre-] old media cycles to new: Signal Culture and Jason Bernagozzi

Renate Terese Ferro rferro at cornell.edu
Thu Feb 12 06:51:08 AEDT 2015

Hi Ben,  I will just quickly respond right now as I am waiting between
meetings.  I never meant to set up a dichotomy between the technical and
the conceptual but simply to think about them in tandem with one another
in a give and take or flow.  You alluded to the same inbetweeness in one
of your earlier posts I think. The critical process for me also works that
way.  Where there is always a flux between these zones.  More later
though. Renate

On 2/11/15, 1:43 PM, "B. Bogart" <ben at ekran.org> wrote:

>----------empyre- soft-skinned space----------------------
>Hello Renata, see my comments below...
>Renate Terese Ferro wrote:
>> That said the idea or the concept usually comes first, however I
>> find working through with materials helps me to develop the
>> conceptual premise.  The making and the thinking are in tandem. Then
>> as the tension between the making and the theoretical develops there
>> is a criticality that ensues.  That criticality helps me to figure
>> out if there are political or social consequences in the work.
>I think there is something interesting in the sense of concept/form as
>independent domains where one could exist without the other. This seems
>congruent with mind/body dualism.
>I like the idea that concept (mental simulations inspired by the world)
>and form (realizations of concepts manifest in the world) interact to
>structure a reinforcing pattern that is not reducible to either in
>isolation. A concept that perfectly reproduces reality is objective and
>global, lacking a relation to context and agency. A concept that is
>imposed on reality is subjective and local, lacking a relation to
>reality and culture.
>Making (and any cultural interaction, including writing, conversing,
>reading, etc.) gives us the opportunity to escape from our solipsism and
>see the manifestation of our ideas as independent of us. When I write of
>the Dreaming Machine not generating "a perfect illusionary
>representation of the world", I mean the system's "concepts" are not
>mirror copies of external stimuli that are objective. When I write that
>the Dreaming Machine does not "project a prescribed structure into the
>world", I mean that its "concepts" are not totally subjective, private
>and unrelated to external stimulus.
>We make reality, and reality remakes us.
>Reality makes us, and we remake reality.
>empyre forum
>empyre at lists.artdesign.unsw.edu.au

More information about the empyre mailing list