the ones everyone says are about so much are actually not about anything, and the ones everyone says mean so much actually don't mean much of anything.
title: art the nothingburger
@threadreaderapp unroll
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
learned last week that the east asian countries have bickered for decades about who has the oldest extant wood block text/scroll print, but the most interesting thing about the fight is that all of the content was buddhist.
made me wonder what the Uṣṇīṣa Vijaya Dhāraṇī says
they weren't in the original sanskrit usually, but translated into hanja, then painstakingly engraved into wood or clay and later, cast into metal
how powerful were the ideas for them to go that crazy over it in 704AD or earlier?
what i've found is that the people who are the most plug and play, copy and paste verbal/argumentation fingerprint spreaders are the least aware that this is how they sound.
they are inceptioned so hard they don't even remember those aren't their words or flow of argumentation.
also if someone tells me one of the playbooks that some famous group used in recent years to sociopathically experiment on innocent people online with, and then you, despite me giving you my trust, take all the same steps, then how am i supposed to make excuses on your behalf?
live in a way such that at least the people who love you can make excuses on your behalf. don't live such that you render all of your plausible deniability null and void, and your behavioral checklist is instantly, universally recognizable as pigheaded, toxic, and avoidant.
The other one, which I have already said turns every screen into a treasure object, gives you enchanted mood sand that behaves the way it might if gods were real or if you were one yourself. It's like a theological question in the form of digitally simulated sensory abundance.
The hook isn't the thing itself. It's the seed of autosimulation that is planted. What would the whole world and all of history have looked like if these people were gods. You want your work to make people nonverbally feel these questions and settle into dreams fueled by wonder.
This does that in spades by example, reminding you that this is at your fingertips, and asks, as such, what else should be? What would you express in this language with these parameters of freedom? What are you already saying? And still, this is not art. I have already said why.
첫눈엔 검정색 바탕에 은색 지의류가 많이 낀 느낌인 작품이 있는데 뭐지? 녹슨건가? 녹은 붉은색 아냐? 이랬는데 줌인 할수록 엄청 큰 켄버스에 아주 다양한 크기의 동그라미가 긴 실이 되어 꼬여서 이루어진 디지털 작품이더라. 정체 모를 친근한 자연물질일법한데 알고 보면 알고리즘 시각예술이다.
지의류 같았다가, 녹 같았다가, 생물학 교과서에 나오는 흑백 DNA 일러스트 같았다가, 사람을 아주 자유자재로 갖고 노는데, 애니도 아니다.
보는 이에게 신이나 가질법한 시력과 관찰력을 경험하는 착시현상을 4K보다 10배 이상 큰 인심 좋은(?) 켄버스로 장난처럼 담백하게 선물하는 게 핵심이다.
사람과 컴퓨터 사이의 거리를 그만큼 늘리니 시야가 몇배나 넓어진 만큼 나도 커진 기분 좋은 환상이다
초고해상도의 미시와 거시를 동시에 보는 신비로운 시야를 선사하는 재밌고 드문는 작품이라고 말해주기 싫어 봤다고 내색도 안 하고 타작도 별로라고 했다. 그럴만한 이유가 있으니 후회는 없다.
작품 질과 작가의 성품은 무관해 보여도 미학과 윤리는 긴밀히 엮여 있어 결국 하나의 문제다. 예술은 사랑과 같아서 사회적 수용과 관계 속에서만 성립되는 만큼 윤리와 도덕을 외면한 체 작품이 세간의 관심만 받으면 최고라고 생각하는 자가 유명세를 타봐야 길게 보아 인류 진보에 이로울 리 없다.
작품이 좋은데 작품*만* 좋으면 오히려 최악이다.
돈을 벌어준다면 좋은 제품일 수는 있다만 제품이 아닌 작품을 상상할 수 없어지는 시점이 바로 인류와 문명의 제삿날이다.
if you don't have the imagination or empathy to consider how often girls and women post sa need access to spaces guaranteed to be free from anyone with a y chromosome, and how often that's a bathroom, it shows misogyny or lack of readiness to set policy agendas that respect women
unless you come w/ equally forceful demands for structural changes to drastically reduce the prevalence of male-on-female rape and harrassment (look up the frequency before speaking), or w/ proposals including xx-female only spaces even as you hold bathroom sharing nonnegotiable,
you will be alienating and slandering women who disagree with automatic all genders integration BEFORE addressing the reality of countless girls and women needing post-sa accommodation but not yet having access to any substitute in the day-to-day besides sex-segregated bathrooms.