Sunday, June 26, 2016

contemporary art has no future


alFreDo tRifF

introduction
when we speak of future we mean a reserve of time.  

contemporary art (CA from here on) by defintion happens in the everlasting now.

CA is pure presence.

CA is (to use a music metaphor) always "on the beat." what gives the beat of CA? modernity! (a five-headed hydra monster defined by opportunistic theorists).

"modernity" is not properly "in time" either. "modernity" occupies a time-interval with open ended, un-referable limits, as diverse, as the trending theorist defending it. for many, modernity phased into post-modernity (a more pluralistic, less imperialistic phase). others, pulling modernity's rubber-band back to the present called it "late" modernity. meanwhile an entrenched few solemnly proclaimed that modernity is still perduring.


what you see is a folding of a thing onto oneself: a klein-bottle.

pure presence means that no "now" will be different from the previous moment. modernity and CA's substance are always (like the message in a bottle) inside the bottle:


without this temporal ecstasy, there is no currency to afford the past-future axis which provides modernity with its "presentness."

axiom I: CA is neither concrete nor abstract (?)

analysis: by definition, CA cannot be a concrete substance, since a substance could only have an instance through an interval of time, but CA transcends time! CA plays the part of of a res cogitans überobject, a Cartesian God outside time.

on the other hand CA cannot be abstracta: abstract entities don't happen in time!

are we dealing with a conceptual mystery?

axiom II: CA is not original

analysis:
"original" means different tropes vis-a-vis what comes before, i.e., change. but CA being pure presence doesn't change. better, CA doesn't have time left to change!

this non-originality needs to be problematized with CA's delivery. the moment a certain art object is presented as CA, we necessarily have a presentation (of (a presentation)).

(about an art object) one can only prove originality when comparing it with past instances. but CA de facto presents itself  always  as original, with no proof ever seeming de rigeur.

and yet, originality means more than present-past comparisons. there exists a present-future mark as well, that is to say, the present sets the tempo (to bring music back) of what's coming in the immediate future. CA however, doesn't deliver. CA is wrung out!

axiom III: CA has no future 

analysis: 
1- in virtue of axiom II, any residue of so called "originality" vanishes the moment CA becomes pure presence.
2- consider the prospect that, as pure presence, CA goes on forever. the future, as we know it, is kidnapped by the present.
in other words,
3- CA has no future (let's refer to this essential property of CA as non-futurity). there is one more consequence:

4- non-futurity makes CA automatically self-identical.

which brings me to the following pleonasm:

CA is necessarily redundant.

(to be continued)

Thursday, June 23, 2016

for infinity lovers! a levinasian definition


Emmanuel Levinas has a difficult language, in a way as oracular as Heidegger, as obscurely atavistic as Rosenzweig (both important influences on his thought).
... in the trace of illeity, in the enigma, the synchronism falls out of tune, the totality transcended in another time. This extravagant movement of going beyond being toward an immemorial antiquity we call infinity.
the quote resonates with music counterpoint, history, ontology, ethics, and poesy. there's more:

"the trace of illeity" (in late Levinas, illeity is a kind of purveyor of being's alterity)
"synchronism falls out of tune" (interesting musical comparison: Levinas favors diachrony over synchronicity, i.e., present-bounded time is limited)
"totality transcended in another time" (before chronological time. This is not a  prehistory, i.e., before the written record), on the other hand, "totality in another time," seems redundant, unless one knows that Levinas refers to diachronic time as irrecuperable.
"going beyond being" (jab at the early Heidegger of Being and Time)
"immemorial antiquity" (unrepresentable in chronological egological memory?)
"infinity" for levinas is dense, a cipher for open-ended super set.

Saturday, June 11, 2016

Heidegger's Dasein lingo pales when compared to L.E.J. Brower's mystic cipherings

 L.E.J. Brower in action: blackboard, chalk, Lizst hair, Nehru jacket
 ... the intuition of two-oneness, the basal intuition of mathematics, creates not only the numbers one and two, but also all infinite ordinal numbers, inasmuch as one of the elements of the two-oneness may be thought of as a new two-oneness, which process may be repeated indefinitely...*
this comes from L.E.J. Brower, one of the most important mathematicians of the 20th century and defender of contructivism in mathematics. Reading Brower is like tripping on set theory.


_____________________
*Benacerraf P. and Putnam H. (eds) (1983) Philosophy of Mathematics, 2nd edition, (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press). p. 80

Friday, June 3, 2016

irreversible tripping



consider the factors influencing the likelihood that someone will trip --or the likelihood that, having tripped, that such person will then fall.

let's call it "irreversible tripping," as when one is doomed to fall once tripping has begun.

if that conditional probability is high, then one should avoid tripping at all costs though perhaps unsuccessfully.

Thursday, June 2, 2016

chaos wins!


1. Rig Veda (India): There was neither nonexistence nor existence; darkness was hidden by darkness; all this was water.
2. Upanishad (India): In the beginning the cosmos was self alone, in the shape of a person. This self (atman) split in two, husband and wife.
3. Pangu story (China): In the beginning only dark chaos prevailed in the universe.
4. Taoist story (China): There was confusion: primal simplicity, commencement, beginnings, material. Things were not yet separated.
5. New Zealand Maoris: The universe was in darkness; water was everywhere; there was no light.
7. Hawaiian story: There was deep darkness; gods came out of the night.
8. Mayan story Popol Vuh: The universe was resting, motionless and silent; the heavenly expanse was empty. There was only the resting water, the silent sea.
9. North American Indian story: The initial being awoke, wondered what to do, and finally began to cry. His tears formed the waters.
11. Greek Hesiod poem: At the beginning of everything was chaos, out of which came amid much violence earth, gods, and humans.
12. Icelandic Edda story: There was an initial chaos, the great void, from which various gods arose.
13. Babylonian creation story Enuma Elish: There was a chaos without heaven and earth; only water existed, from which the gods arose.