Ken, I had a look at the site a few days ago. The paintings are a lot different to those I last saw on your blog. The one with the red/ochre/cyan face, next to the "critically human think I am therefore" photo, I thought was sticking his fingers up to the viewer, but eventually saw it's a bloke falling headfirst. That right? Or's it a umm, thingy like old what'is name, picabia, double image?
The three figures below it are quite entertaining too. It's interesting what you mention about the local; familiar territory, and thought. Ideas which might be something to do with what I do with art, or maybe just what I think I do. But whichever, I'm still not quite yet familier with them infact to both know exactly what the difference is, and put it into practice. james On 19/11/2006, "Ken Turner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >Hi James > >One of the issues that Virilio deals with is the idea of speed as it >effects perception. >I think it also effects/infects subjectivity. >If you are interested in painting please see the site below. > >http://www.imaginativeeye.co.uk/theoldship.html > >cheers >ken > > >On Nov 16, 2006, at 00:47, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Has anyone read "The Accident of Art" by Paul Virilio and Sylvère >> Lotringer? It is an "extended conversation" between them. I generally >> find it difficult to understand criticism, the terms used, but by the >> end of the book I think I had a vague idea of what they were talking >> about. >> >> It goes something like this: The accident of art, or in fact it seemed >> more general, the accident of globalization/capitalism, is the >> correction of perception by machine. And, that we need to constantly >> fight against the machine and get inside of it to change it. Anyhow it >> was interesting but I thought that in particularly the way they talked >> about the digital and analogue and the internet, Sondhiem (probably >> others do too but I'm not aware of much) goes into greater depth. >> >> But the biggest thing that bugged me was the quick discussion about >> software. Initially they spoke of architects and how they should write >> their own software. Then a bit later, they question who are the >> programmers? They're sure it's not Bill gates. And they lamented the >> fact that no one goes about writing their own software. Me thinks they >> need to research that a little more. >> >> I probably read it too quickly to understand more. >> >> James. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> NetBehaviour mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour >> > > > >_______________________________________________ >NetBehaviour mailing list >[email protected] >http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour > > _______________________________________________ NetBehaviour mailing list [email protected] http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
