[...] (at the level of lss="trms">affect theorylss='qstn'>?)

shyness<lgc clss='lgc'>:lgc> looking otherwise and feeling lss="trms">differently

to act shamed of exactly that which he is exlss="trms">cited. (is this a queer subjectlss='qstn'>?)

queer is not isolss="trms">morphic with gay or lesbian or any other fixed identity, rather, queerness undoes all identities into an endless multiplicity and unbecoming. (liquefaction of any solidification)
queer seems to hinge much more radically and explicitly on a person’s undertaking particular, performative acts of experimental self-perception on a filiations.
Indeed, the performativity of both queer and shame can be reiterated lss="trms">differently; the subject can disidentify from such lss="trms">interpolations and re-deploy the abjecting and/or disciplining of the terms in unforeseen ways, which Warhol did.

<lrg clss="large lg2" stl="font-size:112%"> In surrender the head bends and meets the heart. The head that does not bend has no value, and the head that is stiff will have to bend sometime, either in surrender or in shame. The head that bends in surrender will never have to bend in shame. Shame accompanies arrogance. Shyness accompanies lss="trms">lss='trgt hghlght 1'href='?q=L'>Love. See how lss="trms">children are endowed with shyness, that is lss="trms">natural. Shyness is inherent. Shame is inflicted by lss="trms">society and is acquired. Shame brings guilt and shyness adds to onelss='qstn'>? beauty. Retain your shyness and drop your shame. (lss='qstn'>?)

shame is simply the first and remains a permanent, structuring fact of identity<lgc clss='lgc'>:lgc> one that has its own, powerfully productive and powerfully lss="trms">social lss="trms">lss="trms"nttrm="metaph,metamorph,metabol,metal">metaphoric possibilities.
lrg>
deciding not to care how people thing (or feellss='qstn'>?), because those are the things i don't want to change! (or i don't think i should want to change) (warhol)
what do i want to changelss='qstn'>? just having fun with my stuff. can i decide not to care what people thinklss='qstn'>? shyness...

in shame i wish to continue to look (or talk, or make or perform) and be looked at (or spoken to or seen in my performing of myself), but i also do not wish to do so. (Silvan Tomkins)

i am embarrassed to show the shy singing.

chronically embarrassing my self. (Aula lss="trms">presentation, shy singing, ...)

on passivity, note for the lss="trms"nttrm="already,spread">reader<lgc clss='lgc'>:lgc> not to mistake it for endurance in this discourse. here we are talking about a philosophical term, in lss="trms">relation to the “being” and the “other”...

an architecture that tries to be modest, a performance that tries to be intimidating as much
as it can.

just in time shyness

what are the pitfalls and lss="trms">abysses of philosophical reflection on and with shynesslss='qstn'>?
what am i trying to shortcutlss='qstn'>?
was l clss="ppl">Socratesl> intruding in his punk philosopher, stopping people at back allies and perform philosophy. he doesn't hold back, he intrudes, tattooing the body of the other, lss="trms">questioning.
the problem of his projectlss='qstn'>?

i am not shy in the work that i am trying to lss="trms">present publicly (lss='qstn'>?)
where am i shylss='qstn'>?

posture of lss="trms">position or lss="trms">gesture

the moment you stand in front of the audience you stop being authentic.

when we lss="trms"nttrm="listen,alist,ilist,llist,olist,ylist,ulist">listen to something very carefully and allow ourselves to be moved we can tune in ti=o the art work and absorb its lss="trms">methods. i have found myself moved when i allowed it, by the most lss="trms">childish and stupid works of arts.

open minded and eager to make connections

(jane jacob,) (1) lss="trms">community is spontaneous, the tissues of lss="trms">community are not something that can be planed, that they happen spontaneously. (2) and this only happens when you are at the local scale. so in this sense, design is suspect, because design is set to be post spontaneity.
find a way to think locally, and thinking about the city as a product of spontaneous lss="trms">interaction between people who are lss="trms">different. but the design can also make something that has a lss="trms">social character.

we perform an experiment to prove or disprove a hypothesis, we are working within a framework of a closed lss="trms">system, the olss="trms"nttrm="righ,rigo,riga,rigi,trig,rign">riginal prolss="trms">position governs our procedures and observations, at arriving at yes or no. but when performing the experiment we come across something unforeseen, or prompted by evidence to jump tracks and think about a lss="trms">different issue. then we are working within the framework of an open lss="trms">system. we move beyond yes or no to exploring something emergent, something whose elements was there but whose form was unknown to us. a fancy and careful way of saying “something new”, because it is new to our understanding.

William Empson
art results from overcrowding(lss='qstn'>?)

when one is lss="trms">responsive rather than assertive one can't lss="trms">imagine where one will end Up<lgc clss='lgc'>:lgc> thinking. this lss="trms">responsiveness is lss="trms">different than the state of being active or passive. a passivity that motivates and mobilizes the subject into places that are yet unknown to her/him.
Thinking, as l clss="ppl">Heideggerl> says, may be much the same as wandering. my lss="trms">lectures are like wandering.
someone who studies paradoxes, lss="trms">poetry and philosophy
(keeping what you know away from lss="trms">society, lss="trms">history and away from art, not to acknowllss="trms"nttrm="knowledge,Knowledge">edge what you have learn)

incompatibility between a particular lss="trms">love and a particular lss="trms">social arrangement for lss="trms">love.

when you play with others, not try to shine and not try to shy. (shyness is dlss="trms"nttrm="danger,stranger">angerous to lss="trms">society)
it is like being lynched by kukluksklan.
curios about somebody else rather than identifying with them.
i really learned how to work with people by learning how to keep people from killing each other in street.

if we are very lss="trms">sympathetic, saying “i know how you feel” is privileging solidarity<lgc clss='lgc'>:lgc> “we are all in this together”. but well we can't all be in this together in the same way, so what is it that we do together, despite this fact.

instead of the declaring voice “i believe this or that”, we can say “i would have though” or “perhaps” introducing a zone of ambiguity in people's lss="trms">relationship with each other you might get something lss="trms">social. subjunctive mood (konjuktiv) not only is to zusammenbinden the elements of semantic also to zusammenbinden the the people who are speaking in these terms.
lrg>
cooperation is a rehearsal not a performance.

public real made of people who don't argue in behalf of their own lss="trms">interest but to think most dislss="trms">interestedly.

my talks/works is about how we make sense of our environment, the lss="trms">network that we live in and the texts and discourses that we are lss="trms"nttrm="already,spread">reading and lss="trms">writing.

how shyness (even) look likelss='qstn'>? can we recognize it when we see itlss='qstn'>?
what is feeling comfortable in the lss="trms">presence of strlss="trms"nttrm="danger,stranger">angerslss='qstn'>? not lss="trms">verbally i mean, physically.
lss='thdf'>the notion of being comfortable in the lss="trms">presence of lss="trms">difference. being physically comfortable in lss="trms">presence of the people who are not like yourself.

the subjunctive is the lss="trms">language that the shy uses lss="trms">naturally, which is one of the necessary elements of cooperation. in contrast to subjunctive speech, there is declarative speech is a form of declaration invites sublss="trms">mission, and it invites sublss="trms">mission because somebody else defines for you clearly what something is about. there is almost an lss="trms">erotic of that, they really now what they are on about, they really know who they are, and you become a lss="trms">spectator to their delss="trms">finiteness. giving yourself up to somebody who seems more defined and more purposive.

<lrg clss="large lg6" stl="font-size:132%"> cooperation in islam is not a personal experience, it is something that is enlss="trms">coded in very strict ritual. it is not an act of choice. cooperation is not a duty but a desire.

my talk is a fancy and careful way of lss="trms">responding to the voices of other. the ones that are sounding in my ear. (inslam, shakespear, math, that girl in enghelab square, etc.). i am not good at immediate reaction, so i lss="trms">respond with a delay and a lot of playfulness and black holes that come in to be of the part of this, by this lss="trms">relationship to the Other, that is manifesting itself through the lss="trms">language of the Other (islam)

In my performative practice, I seek a way to approach thinking about things that arrests my curiosity. It is a form of commitment to what comes forward and calls for thinking, an attention before what I do not know. My Talks are fancy and careful lss="trms">responding to that otherness, to the voice or face that speaks to you from somewhere that you cannot yet locate. This call could be from a sadistic super-ego inside or l clss="ppl">Shakespearel> or kleinen Maulwurf, der wissen wollte, wer ihm auf den Kopf gemacht hat.

i am not just lss="trms">interested in my own foundational lss="trms">lss="trms"nttrm="metaph,metamorph,metabol,metal">metaphors.
is there an amateurishness at the lss="trms">intersection of art and philosophy that i am drawinglss='qstn'>?
what is amateurlss='qstn'>?

the fact that i am giving talks is very much related to the lss="trms">social culture around me, in Germany the culture has a taste to lss="trms"nttrm="listen,alist,ilist,llist,olist,ylist,ulist">listen and there is an lss="trms">interest for speech. now i get it like in the case of warhol he is rethinking his surrounding culture which is dominated at that time by pop, media and celebrity. i am rethinking the academia and philosophy that is in lss="trms">relationship with the arts, my issues and lss="trms">interests are lss="trms">different than warhol for that lss="trms">matter. i am enthusiastic and extremely lss="trms">interested in the lss="trms">material that i am working with, and at the same time overthrown by it and i believe in it, in the same way that maybe warhol believed in pop culture and business.

<lrg clss="large lg10" stl="font-size:125%"> the nightmare after performance

lss='thdf'>the notion of lss="trms">skill in art, performance, life, work

trauma, in the experience of the trauma, the source mixes, and lss="trms">articulate in lss="trms">lss="trms"nttrm="metaph,metamorph,metabol,metal">metaphors and hubric signifiers.

<lrg clss="large lg14" stl="font-size:130%"> lss="trms">relationship between older works and performances, the issue of lss="trms">skill and lss="trms">technology.
it took 60 years after the developments in tempering lss="trms"nttrm="metaph,metamorph,metabol,metal">metal, for barnors to learn new nigf lss="trms">techniques. this is common in the lss="trms">history of lss="trms">technology, that a tool appears before people know how to use it. do we know how we can use computerslss='qstn'>? when we master a lss="trms">technique, its uses are not immediatly clear.

getting lss="trms">interested in the wrong answer in the four answer lss="trms">question.
no lss="trms">skill develops without a good dose of curiosity. which enables us to think about what might be, rather than what is.

There is a half-relss="trms">membered discussion of Sigmund l clss="ppl">Freudl> I lss="trms"nttrm="already,spread">read once in a lss="trms">book and which I have been paraphrasing regularly ever since. It said that for l clss="ppl">Freudl> dreams were a way of thinking by doing. You run, you cry, you kiss, you lss="trms">love, you cheat, you argue, you fall, you kill, you eat, you sing, you get lost, you lss="trms">travel back in time, you become somebody else – but you do it all in your head. You do it in your head and so it is thinking, just not a thinking we recognize as thinking. When I am dreaming I am lss="trms">composing thoughts in the way an artist lss="trms">composes a painting or a witch a potion – an assemblage made of bodies and places and actions. An lss="trms">embodied thinking, that is no less eloquent or extraordinary or transformative for being so.

<lrg clss="large lg1" stl="font-size:142%"> lrg>lbrkr stl="display:block;white-space:nowrap;margin-bottom:-1em;overflow:hidden;">...................................lbrkr>lrg>

...One can chat and gossip but it is forbidden to preach, lss="trms">lecture or lss="trms">instruct.”
Claudio Magris’ Micronismi

lrg>lbrkr stl="display:block;white-space:nowrap;margin-bottom:-1em;overflow:hidden;">...................................lbrkr>

(butler)

the structure of address itself

although I did not know in whose voice this person was speaking, whether the voice was his own or not, I did feel that I was being addressed.

To lss="trms">respond to this address seems an important lss="trms">obligation during these times.

<lrg clss="large lg14" stl="font-size:131%"> It is about a mode of lss="trms">response that follows upon having been addressed, a comportment toward the Other only after the Other has made a lss="trms">demand upon me, accused me of a failing, or asked me to assume a lss="trms">responsibility.

The structure of address is important for understanding how moral lss="trms">authority is introduced and sustained if we accept not just that we address others when we speak, but that in some way we come to exist, as it were, in the moment of being addressed, and something about our existence proves precarious when that address fails.

...the lss="trms">demand that comes from elsewhere, sometimes a nameless elsewhere,...

We think of presidents as wielding speech acts in willful ways, so when the director of a university press, or the president of a university speaks, we expect to know what they are saying, and to whom they are speaking, and with what intent.

...perhaps we should think more lss="trms">seriously about the lss="trms">relation between modes of address and moral lss="trms">authority. (also one of the issues in today's performance art)


lss="trms">narration is always judgment
lss="trms">affective lss="trms">intervention


why should i lss="trms"nttrm="listen,alist,ilist,llist,olist,ylist,ulist">listen to youlss='qstn'>?
because i have a voice!


visual culture has lss="trms">different strand from lss="trms">lecture culture. people are able to express themselves with lss="trms">verbal signs long before they can draw anything, using visual sign (picture<lgc clss='lgc'>:lgc> a drawing by lss="frds scrmbld">Hanno). lss="trms">verbal lss="trms">language because of its easy everyday usage has become mundane and lss="trms">instrumental to lss="trms">communication, visual sign due to its learning curve and lss="trms">skillfulness belonged to the art domain.

lrg>lbrkr stl="display:block;white-space:nowrap;margin-bottom:-1em;overflow:hidden;">...................................lbrkr>
<lrg clss="large lg6" stl="font-size:130%">
lss="trms">transitive lss="trms">verb constructions are the ones that require a direct object in order to complete the meaning and to be grammatical. Used in theater, between director and actor, by lss="trms">communicating with lss="trms">transitive lss="trms">verbs actors can perform the lss="trms">language of the director.


lss='mywrk'>my work lss="trms">embodies and lss="trms">communicates a desire to lss="trms"nttrm="already,spread">read (and lss="trms">write) texts



<lrg clss="large lg3" stl="font-size:111%"> <lgc clss='lgc'>[lgc>steiner<lgc clss='lgc'>]lgc>
in lss="trms">Greek mythology the lss="trms">poet and the seer are blind so that they may, by the antennae of speech, see further.
lrg>
One thing is clear<lgc clss='lgc'>:lgc> every lss="trms">language-act has a temporal determinant. No semantic form is timeless. When using a word we wake into resonance, as it were, its entire previous lss="trms">history. A text is embedded in lss="trms">specific lss="trms">historical time; it has what lss="trms">linguists call a diachronic structure. To lss="trms"nttrm="already,spread">read fully is to restore all that one can of the immediacies of value and intent in which speech actually occurs.

The process of diachronic lss="trms">translation inside one’s own native tongue is so constant, we perform it so unawares, that we rarely pause either to note its formal intricacy or the decisive part it plays in the very existence of civilization. By far the greatest mass of the lss="trms">past as we experience it is a lss="trms">verbal construct. lss="trms">History is a speech-act, a selective use of the lss="trms">past tense. Even substantive remains such as buildings and lss="trms">historical sites must be ‘lss="trms"nttrm="already,spread">read,’ i.e. located in a context of lss="trms">verbal recognition and placement, before they assume real lss="trms">presence.

lrg>lbrkr stl="display:block;white-space:nowrap;margin-bottom:-1em;overflow:hidden;">...................................lbrkr>
<lrg clss="large lg4" stl="font-size:111%"> lrg>
(notes - december 15, 2011)

<lsts clss="lsts lst1">•lss="frds scrmbld"nttrm="Robin,Robot,Robert,Robocop">Robots making lss="frds scrmbld"nttrm="Robin,Robot,Robert,Robocop">Robots
lsts> <lsts clss="lsts lst1">•what a robot wants (and how it wants it)
lsts> <lsts clss="lsts lst1">•cataloging computer generated stones smoke
lsts> <lsts clss="lsts lst1">•digital to digital convertor
lsts> <lsts clss="lsts lst1">•physical lss="trms">interaction (between a user and a media object, pressing a button, choosing a link, moving the body) versus psychological lss="trms">interaction (the psychological processes of filling-in, hypothesis forming, recall and identification, which are required for us to comprehend any text or image at all)
lsts> <lsts clss="lsts lst1">•Mechanical lss="trms">Monsters
lsts> <lsts clss="lsts lst1">•blown away roof
lsts> <lsts clss="lsts lst1">•lss="trms">Technology<lgc clss='lgc'>:lgc> the new lss="trms">nature
lsts> <lsts clss="lsts lst1">•-error and - lss="trms">horror(-terror)
lsts> <lsts clss="lsts lst1">•lss="trms"nttrm="knowledge,Knowledge">edge of the earth
lsts> <lsts clss="lsts lst1">•gold and dream, gold price and power law
lsts> <lsts clss="lsts lst1">•the lss="trms">story of the viewer
lsts> <lsts clss="lsts lst1">•fact and perspective (elucidation)
lsts> <lsts clss="lsts lst1">•lss="trms">love at first sight (digital)
lsts> <lsts clss="lsts lst1">•continual production of the new is what allows things to stay the same, (logic of the same)
lsts> <lsts clss="lsts lst1">•noise lss="trms">story
lsts> <lsts clss="lsts lst1">•the ‘content’ of any medium is always another medium (Mclss='trgt hghlght 1'href='?q=L'>Luhan)
lsts> <lsts clss="lsts lst1">•The mediation of lss="trms">religion through buildings
lsts> <lsts clss="lsts lst1">•start with lss="trms">lss="trms"nttrm="metaph,metamorph,metabol,metal">metaphor and end with algebra
lsts> <lsts clss="lsts lst1">•a “model” is a lss="trms">system of objects (any kind of objects) that make all of the sentences in a theory true , where a “theory” is a lss="trms"nttrm="listen,alist,ilist,llist,olist,ylist,ulist">list of sentences in a lss="trms">language.
lsts> <lsts clss="lsts lst1">•lss="trms">lss="trms"nttrm="metaph,metamorph,metabol,metal">metaphors somehow mobilize the lss="trms">difference between the two domains
lsts> <lsts clss="lsts lst1">•arena of alienation
lsts> <lsts clss="lsts lst1">•Cut the Noise
lsts> <lsts clss="lsts lst1">•mirrors with (/without) lss="trms">memories
lsts> <lsts clss="lsts lst1">•substitutability
lsts> <lsts clss="lsts lst1">•optical appearances (mind <lgc clss='lgc'>~lgc> eye)
lsts> <lsts clss="lsts lst1">•Dioptrics (lss="trms">science of refraction), catoptrics (reflection),
lsts> <lsts clss="lsts lst1">•that could not be spoken of or relss="trms">presented, because it was empty of discourse and thus of meaning.
lsts> <lsts clss="lsts lst1">•innocence of the eye
lsts> <lsts clss="lsts lst1">•Poor Unfortunate Souls
lsts> <lsts clss="lsts lst1">•being useful, like a prison guard
lsts> <lsts clss="lsts lst1">•autolss="trms">poetic (complex self-referential lss="trms">systems)
lsts> <lsts clss="lsts lst1">•to take up the motives from the external lss="trms">world
lsts> <lsts clss="lsts lst1">•will-less perception, “the pure eye of genius”
lsts> <lsts clss="lsts lst1">•bringing from the artificial lss="trms">world to the art lss="trms">world
lsts> <lsts clss="lsts lst1">•object oriented programming / subject oriented
lsts> <lsts clss="lsts lst1">•Observer, lss="trms">system and environment
lsts> <lsts clss="lsts lst1">•a lss="trms">system (designed) with a purpose of itself
lsts> <lsts clss="lsts lst1">•magnifying or light-collecting optical device
lsts> <lsts clss="lsts lst1">•lss="trms">social selfish
lsts> <lsts clss="lsts lst1">•un-computational
lsts> <lsts clss="lsts lst1">•gray area
lsts> <lsts clss="lsts lst1">•self-identity is bad visual lss="trms">system
lsts> <lsts clss="lsts lst1">•Vision requires lss="trms">instruments of vision; an optics is a politics of lss="trms">positioning. lss="trms">Instruments of vision mediate standpoints;
lsts> <lsts clss="lsts lst1">•Identity, inlss="trms"nttrm="cluster,club">cluding self-identity, does not produce lss="trms">science; critical lss="trms">positioning does, that is, objectivity
lsts> <lsts clss="lsts lst1">•docile body
lsts> <lsts clss="lsts lst1">•lss="trms">technological visioning (vector of secret texts, lss="trms">books within lss="trms">books, ancient curses, digital dreams, and medieval cyber-art)
lsts> <lsts clss="lsts lst1">•empty space left by theory and philosophy
lsts> <lsts clss="lsts lst1">•lss="trms">technical visioning
lsts> <lsts clss="lsts lst1">•lss="trms">Technology is never merely “used,” never merely lss="trms">instrumental. It is always ” incorporated” and “lived.”
lsts> <lsts clss="lsts lst1">•In his last paintings, such as the Bride of 1912, Duchamp both elaborated an iconogralsts>[...]