On Jul 11, 2008, at 10:46 AM, William Conger wrote:
As an artist I think fuzziness is a virtue. In art
it's hard to be fuzzy but so necessary to achieve any
degree of genuine quality or symbolic content.
Fuzzier the better I say. But fuzziness needs to be
balanced so that one vague "stirring" (another
Cheerskep logo) reveals another without altogether
disappearing. And another, and so on. It's even
better when one fuzzy stirring begets an opposite
fuzzy stirring. Ah, paradox, the elemental life
force, the anti-matter, the invisible other side of
mass, the secret thought propping up the social
thought. Name an artist and you name a fuzzyist. The
poets call it, flatly, ambiguity.
I'm witcha.
I'll repeat my earlier post from March 30:
Another thought: Words are spoken in long strings of sounds that
aggregate and blend together. But because we can move small sections
of the sounds around--what we call words--we disaggregate the whole
stream. Orthography has followed suit: word spaces were introduced
long after entire sentences and thoughts were inscribed in an unbroken
parade of marks. Nowadays, we hear separate words with the
reinforcement of having seen the words written as separate entities.
(I'm sure you've had the experience of not being able to figure out
what the hell that song lyric says, until you read the words on the
album cover. Then you can hear the words as "meaningful," rather than
as a blur of unfathomable sounds.)
Somehow, our attentive faculties enable us to perceive things clearly
as they blur by. But when those things are static, when the passage is
halted, they are like photographs of friends that make them look odd
or funny, because they face is frozen with one eye squinted and the
tip of the tongue sticking out of the lips. We don't see that when
they speak. Per contrast, when we are allowed to arrest the passage of
experience in some way, we can figure out what those fuzzy or
ambiguous or incomprehensible parts are, at least long enough to put
them into the context (of the constantly moving experience).
Cheerskep is stopping the game film and pointing out how this or that
word or thought or notion is hard to understand or follow, and William
is saying, "For crying out loud, let the play develop and you'll know
what's going on."
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Michael Brady
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
