Thursday, 26. June 2008, 01:39:27
I want my life back or my death. I can't stay in this fucking line in between. What a hell! I won't lye down and wait for dear death. I'm gonna get it by myself. Beeing a vegetable sucks! Well, I got sick in New Zealand and several times after that too. But I never gave up on anything or ran away from the consequences of my acts.
I am a responsable person, nobody recognizes it cuz they just don't know. The pain is mine and I always fought to get out of the victim position; I stood up for my acts even when I didn't have a clue to get close to understand them.
My suffering was never in first place for me, dignity was. When I'm able to think properly, I naturally choose what I feel it's the right thing to do, not more for me than for others. After New Zealand, I just never lived for myself anymore, everything I did or tried to do was to find a way to make it up for my familly. I put my entire soul on this.
Yes, I failed, I fell down so many times I can't explain what really happennd, just don't know. No person ever knew what I passed through to do what I did, like in college, Vestiba, tennis, tae kwon do, french, get out of drugs, hang on all those sheet concours, swim and surf as well. None of these was easy as it may seems.
When people thanks God for it, oh, I feel like screaming that the effort was mine; but when I fail then they feel sorry for me cause I'm a poor retarded, mental disturbed person who spiritually they think all of these is related to sins and punishement.
For sure I don't need to say I don't agree with it, however when did they give me a chance to have my own opinion about it? It sounds awkward, I know, but if life for me has to be like a war, I'm out of it. Just doen't worth...
Sunday, 20. January 2008, 18:33:08
art, blogs, together, literature
...
"Heidegger says that the question of the origin of a thing asks about the source of its nature. He asks about the origin from which both artist and work are seen to derive: namely, art. That which takes its rise from art is both artist and work. And art itself, he asserts, is the source of artist andbe what they are. Heidegger generates a tripartite relation between art, artist and work in an encompassing hermeneutic. As Joseph Kockelmans has observed, "if art is the origin of the work of art, art lets those who intimately belong together in regard to the work, namely the one who artistically produces it and those who try to preserve it artistically, each in his own essence, be what they are."
Thinking and visualising are not indistinct categories, as Maurice Merleau-Ponty reminds us: they are constitutive powers in our understanding and seek a legitimate place in daily life. The thinking that arises from the place of art in society is crucial to the experience of art and its survival. Art's flourishing is proportionate to its quality, and its quality is determined by the impact of its beginning. It is by adherence to its beginnings in an origin, and not simply that of an enjoined art historical tradition, that art gains its visible and social legitimacy. Thinking through material means and events provides the basis for an artist's practice. If the thinker thinks Being, and the poet names the sacred, as Kockelmans suggests, then the task of the artist is to draw forth works from the wellsprings of the in-visible.
To think thought is to think the work of thought, and to work the work of thought is to employ the hands. It is through his/her hands that an artist or writer establishes contact with "the austerity of thought," as Henri Focillon once remarked. The hand holds and carries. But the hand also runs everywhere through language, and is "in [its] most perfect purity precisely when man speaks by being silent." And so for Heidegger, every movement of the hand carries itself through the element of thinking, for "every bearing of the hand bears itself in that element." Indeed, he submits, "thinking itself is man's simplest, and for that reason hardest [handwork]."The hand and thinking share some mutual obligation: to think is to think and work with the hand.
The hand is an extra-organic implement of thought, but it is also the extra-organic organ of sight. The hand is, in its dexterous motility, a handling of the things imparted to it by the tactile senses of touch and sight. The artist sees the world with a keener sense, Henri Focillon believes, and as his art is made by his hands, so are his hands the instrument of creation. But before that, such hands are an organ of knowledge; for the artist "starts from the very beginning." The hand as a principle of knowledge brings about a factual clearing of sight for creative action. The impulse toward knowing and sightfulness is accomplished through the hand. But what bearings might this have on an artist who is intent on originary beginnings in works of art?
Contemporary art has moved away from a determined conceptual stance to one of interactivity. Contemporary artists have been induced to leave the solitude of the studio and engage with the social order. Such artists now deal with a demanding repertoire of social tools and art institutional prerogatives in exhibiting their work. Here we need a discourse that recognizes the artist's perception as mover and shaper of his/her creations. The evident materiality of an artist's discourse must be allowed to forge open-handed aesthetic values, so that we learn to interrogate those practices which are at odds with themselves or with the world."
• by: Derek Whitehead has a background in the visual arts, Classical languages, and Continental philosophy. He holds a PhD from Sydney University, Australia, and is a practicing artist, independent researcher and writer in the areas of aesthetics, aesthetic education, and varying themes in art research from historical and contemporary perspectives. Contact email address: dhw@acay.com.au
Saturday, 10. November 2007, 15:33:28
blogs, education, internet, ideas
...
Well, I was thinking about all these new features and amazing tools almost all of us are able to access nowadays. I'm not so old and I remember when nobody of middle class could have a computer or a cell phone and it wasn't even in our minds it would achieve what it did.
Who could imagine? It looks like magic, or brilliant brain making machines work for us. Isn't it nice? Suppose you have a school work to do, what will be your source of research? The library of the school, which you know all your teachers know by heart about those books? Nope, don't think so, budy. Why not wikipedia? Oh, sure, first you put anything you want to research at google, farway the best engine for that.
Thousands of informations is avaiable and at first page always wiki. Isn't that practical? You go to some other sites, ctrl+C ctrl+V of the conclusions of each one of them and open wiki to edit with what is already there as extra. What a great fast work we do withouting even violating author rights.
Just change the order of all, get some easy words to put instead of the big academics ones, you only have to take the little dictionary, put some as citations and quite a rich bibliography, aye? Nice, it's done, your grade is A+.
--
Now, let's wait till tomorrow.
The next day: did you do your school work? oh yeah, and it was awesome, evereybody loved it. Ah, good on you! And what was it about? Whatttt???? It was... oh...it was something like... han, wait, let me take it and I'll show you.
The end.
Tania Montandon
