Personal Exploits: Pallid Prose

Design in Essense
The creed for the uninitiated.

The first principle of visual communication, is that aesthetics are secondary to purpose. A design is distinct from decoration in that it carries meaning. It is an answer to a particular set of problems, employing aesthetics to maximize it's potency. Basically, it is better to have a conceptually sound but poorly crafted solution then a meaningless visual marvel.¶

But what about the graphics? It used to be, that the secrets of the craft were kept better then the most dire of political affairs. An apprentice would come to learn them after years of laborious chores under a harsh abusive master. The tools of the trade were passed down in generations along with a complicated, secretive lingo. The simplest of actions were injested with rituals and wrapped in obscure metaphors. Enter — the age of information. Millions of articles, thousands of sites, hundreds of books on any given topic of any given trade, can be found in an instant by anyone. But we, have not changed. There is still a mischievous smirk at the edge of the designers mouth. We know something the rest of the world does not. There is an unspoken creed, by which we have gauged our peers for thousands of years, and have ensured our survival in the future.¶

This secret is the source of our power, a reason for casual elitism and vain pride. To know it, is to be a designer. The secret is this: There is an underlying harmonic relationship that is not affected by time, location or culture, a quality that cannot be captured in diagrams or described in words. A variation from this platonic form, brings irritation, an almost physical discomfort, to the viewer. A design perfection is measured by the suffering it causes. There are no rules, devices, or guides essential to design. They are merely ways to organize our thoughts, secondhand clutches. The illusive harmonic relationship is not a result of following the rules, but vice versa. The best designers are those who suffer from the smallest imperfections. An Ideal designer would not be satisfied with anything at all. How do we learn to recognize this quality? Time and observation — are the key components. We are all born with a latent appreciation of harmony, but the ways of reaching it by the most optimal routs must be learned. This is where the "rules of design" come in handy. Through careful application, and continuous analysis, one attunes their vision gaining increased sensitivity.¶

So, there we find ourselves — a guildless lot. Our secrets squandered away, our tools in every home, at the fingertips of every child, our argot diffused to a handful of words. But our resolve is as strong as ever, and our future is bright, for we are protected by the magic, deeper then the carving on the stone table. Amen.¶

Muted Compliments
Evaluation of a designed environment.

The Watch Station & Sunglasses Hut International is a rare example of harmonized duality in a retail environment. The two respective trades are joined under one roof with a use of a witty interplay of contrasting elements that make up the brand's visual components. The established oppositions such as squares and circles, complementary colors, thicks and thins, that have been a part of the visual language for centuries, are employed to coexist harmoniously, subtly accenting the distinction between the wares.¶

The store occupies a rather limited area measuring roughly 8x10 meters divided in such a way as to produce two smaller rooms of 5x8, lined with shelves and various display cases. Each room is dedicated to its particular product line, and the two are connected by a broad portal. The main colors used in the decoration of the store are soft pastel versions of blue and yellow, cleverly placed together to produce a sense of moderate excitement. The two colors can be found in the identity marks, wall treatment, posters, display cases and promotional material. Yet, at the extent of their proliferation, they never become bothersome or overbearing. This subtlety can be found in most aspects of the design, it is in the modest texturing of the walls, the understated shifts of the wooden floor tiles, the simple but elegant san-serif typography. The limitations of space are also turned to be used for the benefit of the store. It combats the cold dehumanizing nature of the modernistic style. The environment is naturally proportioned to the human body, neither humbling, nor elevating the visitor.Overall, the designers succeeded in creating a singular identity for a dual brand.¶

Yarr! There be Ribbons!
Yo Mama's Last Supper (by Renee Cox)



(Fictional) Except from Derrida's Article "On Supperology" first Published by Ad Busters in December 2004

"...but it should be noted that the deconstructive commentary is not limited to religious institutions, it is a parergon that encompasses a much broader area, including feminism, racism, classicism, art history, concept of originality, even linguistics. There has been much discussion over gender ambiguity in Hebrew and Aramaic writings. Still, despite (or perhaps because of) this grandiose scope of disciplines and institutions that are being questioned and tried, the work falls short to dent the systems and engage us in a serious discussion. It is the response of those who believe themselves to suffer from Cox's affront, that requires the most attention. Such and emotional and forceful attacks can only indicate the innate instability of the systems and a looming collapse."

(Fictional) Except from Bell Hooks's Article "She—A Black Messiah" first Published by Ad Busters in December 2004

"...as such, the image of black Jesus is not unknown in predominantly black communities. But a black female nude is quite a different subject. It is a direct and powerful slap in the face of white religious patriarchal society. It goes without saying, that none of them were prepared to turn the other cheek. Christianity and especially Catholicism, as Renee herself pointed out in a number of interviews, traditionally repressed women, had direct ties to European slave trade and endorsed fascism. A rather large Eucharist for a black woman to swallow. On a different level, "Yo Mama's Last Supper" offers a chance for men of both colors to practice their gaze."



Semiotics of Booze

A known British art critic and philosopher Clive Bell left the exhibition accompanied by his American college, a distinguished modernist and scholar Clement Greenberg. A unilateral decision was immediately reached that both behemoths of art criticism were in desperate need of drinks. They set in a dimly lit pub with a row of mugs dissecting the table in half. After a generous amount of beer has been consumed by both men, Clive Bell cleared his throat and broke the silence:
— My dear friend, this is a perfect opportunity to show you a practical application of my Aesthetic Hypothesis. To have blunt copies of established archetypal works, elevated to a status of art is little more then a crude exercise in rhetoric. Granted, it is a peculiar concept, but it wouldn't pass even as a descriptive piece of work. In fact, it is little more then a banal philosophical exercise. The only significant form is that which is left by the original artist and the lass is claiming authorship for a whiff of air.¶

Greenberg listened to the impromptu lecture with a mysterious smirk on his face and emptied another mug before replying:
— Ahh but she did get you, didn't she? Was it not you who defined art as objects that promote emotions? True, the actuators aren't exactly of the visual nature, but really all that entails in the narrowness of your original hypothesis. Personally, I find the idea quite rejuvenating, as the new avant-garde rising like the phoenix from the ashes of the kitsch! Look around, in this day and age; we are practically surrounded (much as I predicted) by the mass-produced and commodified art. The girl came up with something fresh; the new creation uber-naturalistic in it's representation of the original and at the same time complete abstraction of its meaning.¶
...

The result of that legendary meeting is unknown, as the critics woke up with no recollection of what followed, and rather severe headaches.¶



A Play for a Homeless Pomo

Joseph Kosuth — Conceptual artist and critic
Judith Butler — Gender theorist
Jean-Francois Lyotard — Philosopher and literary theorist

Act I
Scene I

(The small dimly lit room of Don's Club Tavern. Only few casual diners before the bar section.)

(Enter Kosuth, Judith Butler and Lyotard. All three appear to be in the middle of an ongoing discussion as they settle around a table and order drinks.)

Lyotard — As I already stated and repeated through the lecture, Habermas's definition of the nature of Postmodernism is rather flawed. He stubbornly continues operating with opposing terms, refusing to acknowledge the continuity of the two projects and indeed their oneness. If you read Kant...¶

Joseph Kosuth — Oh please! There you go again, quoting philosophers, those morticians of crumbling ideas. You spoke (as some length) of the post modern connection to modernism and hereditary nature of arts, yet you miss the point that the only connection between earlier works and pieces is determined when the new demands cause us to discover some aspects of those works that have relevance today.¶

Butler (to Lyotard) — Your implications about the lack of direct distinction between the Modernist and Postmodernist theories makes about as much sense as some of the Wittig's claims...¶

Kosuth (under his breath) — Not the Wittig's quotes again!¶

Butler (continues) — If we look at just one area of thought, such as gender identity, the difference is overwhelming. While no one in her(sic!) right mind will deny that the roots of Postmodernism are in the Modernism (such a denial would be foolish even on a purely linguistic basis) there exist a wide gap between the two theories. As the restrictive patriarchal supremacy (glares at Kosuth) denies me the right to quote whom I will, let me move on to express my sincere concurrence with your definition of art as boundless and unobstructed by totality. A belief that all three of us seem to share.¶

(The trio hugs and storms out of the tavern holding hands and dancing along the 6th Avenue.)

(Curtains)

Occident with a redwood chopstick

The sour and musky air of Wan–Tong Lucky Tiger restaurant mixed with a quick gust of fresh wind, as a curious trio stormed into the main lounge. A slender aging man with mild middle–eastern face positioned himself near a small table in the corner. He was immediately joined but two companions, a tall black gentleman with a small beard and a petite lady whose features betrayed her Indian origin. After ordering three plates of General Tao Chicken and a bottle of rice wine, the woman spoke in a deep soothing voice:¶

— Now Edward, I can not agree more wholeheartedly with your assertions about the depth to which the west misunderstands the east, and indeed the very nature of this crude distinction. But the constructed charm and appeal of the oriental rests in its relative isolation from the European influence. At least, you have a sense of the way things are in reality amongst yourselves. What the post-colonial cultures have to go through is confusion over the actual nature of our presupposed values. The western perception of India has penetrated deep into its very soil and is now almost inseparatable from the authentic. I think Olu will confirm my words.¶

The tall man disposed of another chunk of succulent chicken, then proceeded to wash it down with a hearty gulp of wine. Finally, he spoke:¶

— Yes Gayatri, you are quite right. After all, there should be a sense of camaraderie between those who lived in the ex–British colonies. (Olu paused for a second observing the effect his Marxist joke has had on his colleagues) Nigeria today really is a peculiar eclectic mix of reality and it's perception that takes root and becomes just as real. As I am sure can be said about India or even this merry ex–colony where all three of us happen to end up. But it would not perhaps be prudent to suppose that the same process did not take place in the context of the orient. In fact, Eddy pondered the very subject in the beginning of the lecture that you had to miss.¶

The older man looked at his companions and a broad smile spread across his face.¶

— My dear friends, have I forgotten to mention that I grew up in Egypt? We are all three of us products of British colonialism. My lecture was not however centered as much around the impact of the west, as it was a discourse on the constructs that originated in the west and continue to propagate here. We have to acknowledge the problem with the source, before we can attempt to counter the effects it has on our respective cultures. Now, I have always wanted to try sushi, will you care to join me in this little exotic experiment? ¶

Heidegger and the Juden Dasein

(I)
Give one way of presenting a differences among each of the following three characteristics of "Being":
1) "Being" considered as the name of the highest "genus" of beings;
2) "Being" considered as the "substance" underlying all categories;
3) "Being" considered as the "What it is to be" of a particular being, such as chalk, a nation–state, a high school, a mountain range.¶

The Being as the highest "genus" of all Beings, summarizes the essential qualities that make up all other Beings as essential categories that individual beings of those categories share. So, the Being of apple trees as a whole, is different from a being such as a particular apple tree that possesses accidental properties that can differ from those of other Apple Tree beings but also the essential properties that establish it as Being the Apple Tree. The Being of the apple tree is included in a higher "genus" of a "tree" which in turn falls under "plant" and so forth, with the highest "genus" of all Beings that encompasses all.¶

(II)
Give an objection to the idea that there is such a Being (a to be) in each of the above cases/examples. Why or how do these characterizations avoid the split between Being as essence and Being as existence? (Of course, you must characterize, at least in a preliminary way, "essence" and "existence" ¶

The essence is a set of attributes that establish what a being is, the necessary qualities that are agreed upon to be enough to establish categories. Existence can be seen as just another quality of a being, so a non–existence of a particular tree would not undermine its essence. In fact, there can be an essence without any instances of existing beings. For example, there are no dodo birds in existence, but the essence of a dodo bird as a particular set of qualities is in Being. The essence and existence are of course not applicable solely to material things, but are descriptive of categories, ideas and concept, any being that is considered by the Dasein. Therein lies a problem with the Being (to be) of the examples, as it is depended on the artificial categories set in an attempt to rationalize and simplify the relation to beings by the Dasein. A particular piece of chalk is a descriptive device for referring to a portion of matter that has what is agreed upon as the qualities that establish it as chalk. The portion of matter is in existence (though it constantly changes on particle level) but the "white damp piece of chalk with a chewed–off end" exists only for someone who understands the language and operates with such categories. An example with nation state is even harder to fathom, as it does not point to an isolated portion of matter but rather to a scattered instances of occurrences and relationships that are considered to resemble a pattern against which they are judged. While the question of the existence of a particular piece of chalk mostly revolves around issues of terminology, a nation–state is subject to different opinions and points of view. A High School is a set of material and conceptual beings that create an identifiable structure considered to represent an essential Being of High School. The problem of the existence of a particular High School lies in a discrepancy of what is considered to constitute a High School. Of all the examples, the Mountain Range is perhaps the hardest to refute, as it is the only Being that is not created by the Dasein and thus it's essence can be seen as predating the human being. But it is human beings who came to regard what they considered to be closely positioned protrusions from the earth, as mountain ranges. Thus, all of the examples revert back to a question of weather a particular being fulfills the essential requirements of it's essential Being, as thus can be considered to exist under a specific name.¶

(III)
If "Why are there beings rather then nothing?" is in some sense the first question how can we be forced to ask the question "How does it stand with being?" as a prior question?¶

"How does it stand with Being?" is a prior question to "Why are there beings rather then nothing?" not in a sense of stature or importance but because it provides the groundwork for the latter. It establishes the status of particular beings in the relation to their essential categories, allowing the inquiry into the reasons behind their Being. A simple question, why is there a brick on the lawn is predated by a prior set of questions that are aimed to establish the presence of a thing that holds the qualities of a "brick" Being.¶

(IV)
What kind of argument does Heidegger for suggestion that the asking of the "prior" question is "itself historical" and belongs to the "world–history of the earth"? Does Heidegger give or imply an adequately explicit difference, or set of differences, between "earth" and "world history"?¶

Heidegger presents the question of "How does it stand with Being?" as being historical in a sense that the essential relations are formed in regards to time, events and places. Heidegger makes a distinction between "history" and the "science of history" which is, an academic and scholarly account of the past. History, for Heidegger, is not content to looking back, it grows from aspirations of the future that determine the allusive with regards to the past. There also seems to be a distinction between the terms "world" and "earth." A "world" for Heidegger is largely concerned with the spiritual state, while the "earth" exhibits physical qualities and points to our home planet. So a "world history" reflects the spiritual quality of the beings in time.¶

First Paper on Heidegger's treatment of Scheler

In Being and Time, Heidegger provides a summary of Sheler's position on the questions of actions and personhood. We are given an incentive to draw distinction between the psychical being, as a secluded inner entity, and the personal Being, that in Scheler's view (as presented by Heidegger) "exists in the performance of intentional acts." This leads to an investigation into the nature of the acts.¶

To establish a link that connects the acts and the person, it is necessary to investigate what it means for the acts to be performed. Performance is usually viewed as an effort to begin a certain task with intent of carrying it to completion. The problem arises, when the outcome does not reflect the intent. Should such an attempt be considered a performance of an act? If an act is defined in terms of the correlation between intention and outcome, failing to perform a certain task should not be considered as an act, but could be composed of an array of other acts. For example, a writer who spends a year unsuccessfully trying to publish a book, does not perform an act of "publishing a book" but accomplishes performing a number of underlying acts such as purchasing notebooks and writing pages. Similarly, "failing to publish a book" should also not be regarded as a genuine performance of the action. However, such a hardline definition does not accommodate for "trying to publish a book" — a performance rooted in a supposition of a desired outcome. Similarly, mistakenly publishing a movie script, due to sending the text to a wrong address, should not negate the act of trying to publish a book.¶

We are discouraged from viewing acts as mere physical manifestations, yet an act usually carries with it a physical component. They can be argued to originate from our spirits in a form of motivation and be physically enacted by our body. Granted, some motivations reflect the needs of the physical body, but it is the spirit that gives them meaning. This union of body and spirit in act has traditionally been seen as the basis for personality.¶

A spirit for Sheler, is not locked in the confines of mechanic rationality, it is a driving force and the originator of all that separates us from objects such as tables and pieces of chalk. The concept of a "soul" is subject to religious interpretation and it's meaning, properties and value are inseparatable from a particular system of belief. It can be seen as either an involved originator of action or as a mere bystander that has little effect on the decision making process. Thus, it will perhaps be fitting to limit the consideration of the concept of a soul that leads directly to a lengthy theological discussion, and is practically useless without resolving the questions of faith. A spirit, though frequently used as a synonym to soul, is free from dogmatic connotations and does not rely on a belief of certain incorporeal presence.¶

Let us assume that a spirit is a sentient quality that arises from physical phenomena such as the firing of electric impulses between the neurons. That entails that a "meaning" could be charted and represented in its entirety as a consecutive series of signals. But would such a measure provide a valuable insight into the value of the meaning? Similarly, a painting can be represented in binary code that a machine can use to put together, but it will not carry a full account to the meaning behind the piece. Thus, even a deeply materialistic view of the origin of meaning involves a presence of a certain spirit as a sentient manifestation of a virtual "presence" of the higher order then the body that creates it. We are thus left with a more inclusive definition of a meaning that will shed light on the question of its origin and it's relation to the intentions that are instrumental in formulation of the acts.¶



Second Paper on Heidegger's treatment of Scheler

In an attempt to observe and reflect upon Max Scheler's view of the relationship of personhoods and acts, presented by Martin Heidegger in a book "Beginning and Time," I have written a short essay that aims to trace the development of the thought process that led from the casual common-sense understanding to a more inclusive conception. This approach seemed as the only way for me to come to understand Scheler's position. In this paper, I will attempt to reevaluate the results of this approach and pick out the loose threads of thought that might have some relevance.¶

The essay begins, rather clumsily, with an attempt to define performance through a relationship of intentions and outcomes, spilling into a discussion over a possibility of identifying and validating acts (both intentional and unintentional) thought the consideration of an outcome. This progression seems to have some merit, as the discussion of the outcomes could easily have spread into the beginning stages of understanding the nature of the unity of meaning. The outcome is merely one of the facets of the non-psychical elements that relate to acts. Sadly, the point was not developed further, and the view quickly shifted to a simpler, traditional understanding of acts as the union of body and spirit.¶

As previously stated, the task of arriving to Schelers point from a simpler understanding of the acts has been at the heart of the essay from the beginning, but the appearance of that definition in the body of the text seems a little backwards. The following blunders of the terms spirit and soul did not help my credibility, but allowed to at least eliminated one of the extraneous elements that could've lured the unity of meaning into the depths of theological quicksand.¶

The next paragraph takes a step even further back and attempts to determine the presence of a psychical component in the mix that makes up a person. It is an important point, as it is not uncommon for the existence of some inner entity to be denied or questioned in our highly materialistic world. The paragraph provides a link between our biological composition and the sentient quality that arises from it and attempts to show why it should be considered on it's own grounds, separate from the electrons passing over the synaptic gaps. The placement of that discussion is counter–intuitive, as the psyche, or the soul, has already been dealt with in the preceding text, and any attempt to construct an integrated and continuous development of the idea of acts as non–psychical would have it be positioned close to the very beginning.¶

It is only at the end of the essay, that the problems posed in the section on performance are finally brought up and a few sentences are provided that introduce the unity of meaning in relation to the unity of acts as the basis of personhood. It is here, that such considerations as need and responsibility, are introduced, that a purely psychical being is barred from.¶

The essay could be seen as a good way to establish the groundwork that would allow for a leap into the understanding of Scheler's position, if it were to be reorganized in the consecutive order. It provides the basic tools and terminology for further development, but falls short of breaking the confines of the traditional understanding of the acts.¶

To make the leap from traditional view of a person as an integration of body and spirit, to a view of a person as of a performer of intentional acts, it will be instrumental to rely on some simple examples that would illustrate intention, performance and outcome in relation to the unity of the meaning and it's effect on the unity of the action as a basis of personhood.¶

For the first example, let us appropriate a method used in geometry of proving a statement through disproving the opposite claim. Let us assume that any act can only consist of the psychical meaning and physical performance. Painting a fence has an undeniable physical component of moving ones limbs in a semi–orderly fashion while balancing and shifting the weights to change the position in space. The possible inner intention that could be seen as contributing to the performance of such an act, would be a desire for new visual stimuli in a form of a painted fence, a need to break the monotony of the day, and a search for an outlet of artistic expression. All three are possible motivations that could easily lead to one picking up a brush. The first incentive presupposes the memory of an unpainted fence, as well as some consideration of taste. The memory of the fence probably consists of flashes of its state of being in time, related to particular context. A taste is in part an acquired and culturally determined preference that develops through interaction with the world in time. A desire to break the monotony of the day is a psychical reaction to a string of consecutive events that occur outside and suggest a certain mode of behavior. It touches the entire span of world history, leading to the current state of boredom of a particular individual. A need for artistic expression is even more loaded with extraneous connections and connotations and it's meaning can hardly be contained in a purely psychical realm. It is therefore evident, that our supposition of seeing intention as purely psychical cannot be true in all cases.¶

The aforementioned example questions the seclusion of the psychic meaning, summoning the need for time and context to observe the origin of action. But it is a supposition rooted in the past, one that relies to heavily on our limited capacity of storing, retrieving, and processing information. From the intention of the act, we come to actual performance that propels the act to its completion. When one performs an act of driving a car along the rough country road, the meaning of the act consists of more then an intention to deliver dairy products to the commissioner on time. The meaning also stretches over the actual performance, as the driver turns the wheel to steer clear of the pit and accidentally drives over a rattlesnake, or when he passes a field with a pretty peasant girl who smiles at him suggestively. The caution of evading certain death, the recklessness of taking a life, and the sense of duty that prohibits spending afternoon on a haystack, all add to the unity of meaning that relates to the unity of the acts of avoiding, driving over, and driving forth, that are part of the act of driving a car, and is part of the larger array of acts that stretch in time to be a basis of our driver's personhood.¶

The second example came closer to representing the emergence of meaning at the instance of the performance of an act, but fell shortsighted of the overstretching meaning of the outcome of an action. A young peasant girl, who came out into the clearing to lure an occasional stranger to paint over a fence that her previous contractor had turned into a work of postmodern art, has the intention, and carries on a performance, but does not receive a desired outcome, thus failing to perform an act. The unity of the acts of the driver, and the commissioner (who set the prices on milk) add up to the outcome of her attempt at performing her act.¶

As we have seen, the intention, the performance, and the outcome stretch outside of the psychical and physical domains of a human being. All three are required to construct the unity of meaning. But in order to present a person in terms of the unity of acts we need to add a notion of responsibility. For example, the painting of a fence entails responsibility to adhere to the wishes of the client. Accidental killing of a rattlesnake, can lead to regret as testament of partly accepting the responsibility. The attempt of luring the driver to paint a fence with promises of affection is likely to establish a certain role in the tight rural community. It is the responsibility that she consciously took in the performance of the intentional act. With the responsibility added to the concept of the unity of meaning, that contribute to the unity of the acts, it is possible for the latter to include all that makes up a person.¶



Skulls & Bones

I am not a vegetarian, for my love of the carrion food overpowers all emotional and ethical barriers that the mind constructs. I consume the flesh of the beings raised into the inevitability of the slaughter, and I find comfort in the superficial structures that shield me from the knowledge of the suffering endured. I gorge on the mutilated corpses, I eat them fried, and I eat them roasted, boiled and rolled into pastries, and every time my teeth sink into the torn flesh, I think of the nature of my deed, and I curse the silly buggers for being so damned tasty!¶

Surveillance

Titivillus
Abbot heaved a loud sigh as he rose from a tiny wooden table at the west corner of the dimly lit scriptorium. His back ached mercilessly from hours spent bent over the freshly lettered manuscript pages. But today, the pain was the last thing on his mind. He caught the rascal! For the last six months, the abbot harbored a terrible suspicion, that one of the scribes was literate. The vile implications of this possibility were too much to bear, and he effetely tried to shield himself from believing, but day after day, zealously leafed through piles of manuscripts for mistakes that only a literate man can make.¶

Memo
Vendemiaire was nearing its end, and Sanson's blade began to tire and slow down. A young man tiptoed out of the humble sanctuary in the dusty attic above an old abandoned house, which he hasn't left in two weeks. The boy that usually brought him food has not showed up, and fresh linens were coming to an end. The man skimmed quickly over the roof and landed on a narrow empty street. Forcing himself not to look at the lampposts, he briskly walked towards a small hovel, and disappeared in the passage.¶

— So wrote St. Just, president of the Convention for the Month of Ventose, Citizen of the Rupublic.¶

[Back]

Printer's mark of
Nicolaus Jenson