<$BlogRSDUrl$>

17/12/10

I mean by this that I am now feeling that I've exhausted my own potential in attempting to create unique parts that nonetheless individually both create and amend an homogeneous whole. That "whole" is still compelling, but it is an illusion. I'd thought it necessary.

Maybe it is. All systems require dialogue, and I am alone here. I am expressing myself poorly because I'm talking to myself.

I'm having a hard time explaining myself because my brain is creating a syllogism here between my lives creative and "romantic."

I want to make groove-oriented music, or art, or love. Or whatever. I'm running with this. Each part is simple, boring, even, but the whole is heterogeneous in the sense that it all works together, a celebration of synchronized, teleoglogical cacophony. This is not a new idea, but it is one that's never taken hold. The systems of love may seem irrational; they are nothing but; too often in the modern argument is reason confused with empiricism; too often in the postmodern argument are these things excused as phantasmagoria, simulacra, or simply fashion.

How to, how to. If we can't create a chord in passing, then I have failed. My dick has shriveled to a thumbnail. I bet Baudrillard never had a satisfying love experience either. If this is truly impossible, then I want to make parts that create a unified whole expressing this. What bothers me is that I must do it alone; I don't know if I have the wherewithal or the means to manufacture the incredibly simple music ? I hear in my head. It still requires the participation of others, but not in this same "band" way. I need to have clearer vision, a means of capturing it, and a legion of people willing to play individually mindless parts. Or I could just retreat into mindless visual art.

|

08/12/10


|

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

Weblog Commenting and Trackback by HaloScan.com