Re: [-empyre-] "appropriation prohibited": iconoclash

[nakazawa@aloalo.co.jp (Hideki Nakazawa)]

Dear Christina,
Thank you for the questions and the interests.
But your interests toward "Method" seems to go to Shigeru Matsui's 
thinking.  The poet, Shigeru's thinking is similar to mine, but not 
exactly the same.  
(We, methodicists, are the poet Shigeru Matsui, and the composer 
Masahiro Miwa, and me, the artist.)


> > Editor's notes:
> > Poetry is a bomb.  Poetry has to be terrorism which harms your life.  I
> > would like to announce what I have been thinking for a long time.  In
> > view of the present international poetry movement, poetry should not be
> > the notation to pursue one's pleasure, because if so, there will be no
> > future for poetry.  We have to find the strictly adhering notation for
> > poetry.  There are still many things that a method poet has to work on.
> > (SM)

Above "Editor's notes" is Shigeru's sentences, not mine.
But I have similar idea to Shigeru.
The most different point is the "future for poetry."
I do not want to talk about the future.

> 
> "Corruption and appropriation are prohibited"
> > 
> > Although you can send on this bulletin freely, each writer still holds
> > the copyright.  Corruption and appropriation are prohibited.  Your sound
> > judgement is required in forwarding this bulletin to others.
> 
> So there is a moral action here:  sound judgment.

Christina, I suppose you took a misunderstanding here.
This sentence "Corruption and appropriation are prohibited" is not the 
statement of us, as the Methodicists.  It is only the consideration to the 
guests for the bulletin. Some guests approve the methodicism, but some do
not.  This sentence is only the technique to edit a bulletin.  Do 
not cofuse our policy and the technique.

Is this discrimination at
> the core of the Method?  Is the Method a moral position? Is there a Right
> Action, in a Buddhist sense, involved in the making of a Method work?
> Is there an individual acting at the core of the Method?  Does that
> individual have anything to 'express' that could be copyrighted as being an
> individual expression?  Is the Method iconoclastic?

No, the Method is not a moral position.
And also it is your lack of understanding, we are not Buddhists.
(Do you know buddhism is religion but very different from the monotheism like
Christianity?  It is more close to the philosophy.)
Methodicism is close to crime rather than goodness if you judge things from 
the viewpoint of humanism.  I believe in this era humanism and rationalism 
are opposit, and we, methodicists, involve the latter, rationalism.

And about the individuality, I already wrote in MY manuscript, the "Q & A":
>>
[Q1] What is individuality for method artists?
A: Individuality is not requested, because method should be universal.  
Method painter A's works and method painter B's works are not 
necessarily to be distinguished from each other.  This is similar to the 
works by Picasso and Braque during the period of analytical cubism.
<<


> Millie's artistic motifs are protean, Rabelaisian, perhaps Epicurean,
> linking things, echoing and reflecting.  Perhaps they respond to a metaphor
> of biologic processes. Hideki's are pure, discrete, mathematical, Stoic, and
> seem to involve metaphors of quantum mechanics.

I am sorry, I do not involve metaphors of quantum mechanics.
Shigeru do.

BTW for your understanding, I separate myself to be as a citizen and as a 
(Method) artist.
As an artist, I am Stoic, as you know.
But as a citizen, I am not necessary to be Stoic.  For sxample I eat meal 
every day but this eating behavior is as a citizen not as the artist.
But I do creat artworks as an artist not as a citizen.
And when I creat artworks as an artist, I obey to a cirtain dicipline, 
which I call the method.

Hideki