[...] my performances) organizes itself='strcls'>*

what concerns Seurat (in ="trms">different terms of color image or human figures) is a ='strcls'>***tension between cohesion and dis="trms">integration='strcls'>*** (='lgc'>='lgc'>--> that has been also my constant ="trms">aesthetic concern)
='lgc'>--this is evident in ='mywrk'>my work='lgc'>:
='lgc'>[='strcls'>*my paintings busy with='lgc'>] ="trms">questions of how diverse stimuli become tentatively “bound” into a coherent constellation
='lgc'>[='strcls'>*my performances busy with='lgc'>] ="trms">questions of how contents referring to a ="trms">social ="trms">world are fused or ="trms">integrated into a ="trms">network of ="trms">relations

(in ='mywrk'>my work) experimenting with='lgc'>:
="lsts lst1">•the unity of subjective experience (myself performing under influence, mad ="trms">lectures, ="trms">excessive synthesis, pathological and disruptive ="trms">storytelling)
="lsts lst1">•="trms">integrity of ="trms">social institution and processes (the loci and conditions of us coming together, space of art)
='lgc'>=/= ="trms">social tranquility ='lgc'>='lgc'>--> economic productivity
='lgc'>=/= ="trms">social fantasy of “solidarity” ='lgc'>='lgc'>--> health and functional unity, individuals transformed into “="trms">social beings”

in a way most of us artists unconsciously in some way in an utopian projection of a sensory wholeness and fulfillment
(dream of) fabricators of powerful ="trms">imaginary ="trms">social ="trms">figurations

Durkheim and Seurat's ="trms">question of ="trms">social ='and'>& sensory='lgc'>: from what viewpoints significant manifestation of organization become apprehensible

="large lg2" stl="font-size:112%">
my paintings
="lsts lst1">•(unstatistical) distribution of isolated and ="trms">categorized units ='lgc'><='lgc'>== additive principle of formal adjacency ='lgc'><='lgc'>-- (my belief='lgc'>:) depleted atomic ="trms">relations ='lgc'>[should='lgc'>] predominate beneath the spurious appearance of ="trms">social concord ='lgc'>[in my ="trms">world='lgc'>: ="nms">Iran='lgc'>]
='lgc'>}='lgc'>='lgc'>-->='qstn'>? ho="trms"nttrm="listen,alist,ilist,llist,olist,ylist,ulist">listic mode of as="trms">sociation (='lgc'>=/= my performances) ='lgc'>='lgc'>-->='qstn'>? desire for (="trms">modern forms of) cohesion (in the absence of inflexible forms ='lgc'>[='lgc'>~ dis="trms">integration of the mechanical solidarity of tradition, ="trms">religion, myth, consanguinity='lgc'>]) ='lgc'>='lgc'>-->='qstn'>? wanting an ='strcls'>*o="trms"nttrm="righ,rigo,riga,rigi,trig,rign">riginal solidarity='strcls'>* (='lgc'>-='lgc'>='lgc'>--> ='gtrw'>go to the image of the ‘harmonious vision of industrial ="trms">society’ in my early paintings, self-regulating landscapes of feedback loops ='lgc'>='lgc'>--> ='strcls'>*state of equilibrium='strcls'>* that i wanted to achieve in the painting not ="trms">symbolically)

(i prefer ='strcls'>*pseudo solidarity='strcls'>*)

emergence of aggregates
manifestations of complexities

(this is happening in)
late 19th century is also the age of attempting to validate a relatively stable and domesticated image of the dynamism and destructiveness of capital

="trms">modernity ='lgc'>='lgc'>--> state of harmonious equilibrium ='lgc'>='lgc'>--> ="trms">interaction in ="trms">relation of agreement and ="trms">mutuality ='lgc'>='lgc'>--> new set of moral imperative ='lgc'>='lgc'>--> ='strcls'>*solidarity='strcls'>*='lgc'>: the duty to become a “="trms">social being” (='lgc'>~ to become ="trms">socialized in ="trms">relation to a wide range of institutions)


anomie='lgc'>: breakdown of an organized set of connections and adjacencies, deranges a normally regulated flow of ="trms">communication and feedback (='lgc'>=/= solidarity) ='lgc'>}='lgc'>='lgc'>--> thermodynamic framework

anomie (used to be) a celebrated passage is when the individual worker is no longer the living cell moved by continual contact with neighboring cells (='lgc'>=/= now in late liberal capitalism anomie is the mode of labor)

anomie (in thermodynamic framework) describes a statistical distribution of elements in which insufficient contact or adjacency prevents the flow of messages our information within the ="trms">system as a whole. ="trms">systemwide increase of local zones of dis="trms">sociation and dis="trms">integration ='lgc'><='lgc'>-- Durkheim



(Durkheim was ="trms">writing at the time of) crisis of ="trms">social cohesion within a ="trms">transitional period ='lgc'>='lgc'>==> a ="trms">systematic ="trms">response was being shaped (foreshadowed in several of Seurat's major works) -='strcls'>*-='strcls'>*-='strcls'>*='lgc'>='lgc'>--> the making of a ="trms">society whose effective unity was founded on the ubiquity of ='strcls'>*="trms">spectacular ="trms">consumption through mass media and ="trms">technologies of illusion='strcls'>*
if ='strcls'>*="trms">religion='strcls'>* was the key “collective re="trms">presentation” (in Durkheim pre="trms">modern mechanical solidarity) ='lgc'>='lgc'>--> ='strcls'>*="trms">spectacle='strcls'>* was to become the primary simulation of cohesion and unification within 20th century ="trms">modernity='strcls'>****
='lgc'>='lgc'>--> (="ppl">Debord='lgc'>:) capitalism's solidarity='lgc'>: unity of subjects in their very separatedness

="large lg1" stl="font-size:116%">
(="ppl">="ppl">Crary >) Seurat's entire visual output='lgc'>: ='lgc'>[="trms">systematic movement between:='lgc'>]
="lsts lst1">•large engineered re="trms">presentation of ="trms">social collectivities (='lgc'>~ crowds)
="lsts lst1">•images of isolation and separation

“='lgc'>[...='lgc'>]the unity of his optical aggregates was always an ephemeral subjective construction that never objectively modified the abstract and segmented status of his dots, so his assembling of provisional ="trms">social aggregates never alters the obdurately insular character of their individual human character.”

Seurat stakes out a darker and more skeptical ="trms">position than Durkheim about the possibility of ='strcls'>*="trms">positive knowl="trms"nttrm="knowledge,Knowledge">edge of “="trms">social reality”='strcls'>* ='lgc'>='lgc'>--> his works are determined by a sense of ='strcls'>**impalpability and evanescence of the ="trms">social itself='strcls'>**


(what is my “="trms">sociology” in ='mywrk'>my works='qstn'>?)


='lgc'>{ great ="trms">social catastrophes of the 19th century ='lgc'>+ accumulated bourgeois ="trms">anxiety over the disorders of revolution (1848 and 1871) ='lgc'>}='lgc'>='lgc'>==> (emergence of French 1890s of) “="trms">science” of ="trms">sociology


let's stop mourning about the earlier model of political theater being displaced by by the ="trms">modernized forms of ="trms">spectacle (='lgc'>='lgc'>--> my critic on Kurzgesagt is outdated='qstn'>?)


(for Seurat='lgc'>:) ='strcls'>*art work='lgc'> = soli="trms">citation of attention='strcls'>*

play of attraction and absence (in ="frds">Sina and ="frds scrmbld">Foad's work)='lgc'>:
a visual or performative work designed around the cancellation and suspension of what it promises

Seurat ='lgc'>='lgc'>--> (="frds">Sina and) ="frds scrmbld">Foad's ob="trms">literation of the scenographic conditions of the work even as he simulates their persistence

Seurat ='lgc'>='lgc'>--> ='mywrk'>my work has always been scenic, ="trms">positioning its viewers before an apparently ="trms">stagelike space ='lgc'>[without orthogonal guides ='lgc'>='lgc'>==> assemblage of disjunct planner elements='lgc'>]
my (painting before and even more now) mimics a classical theatrical space, and (in play with that) at the same time it establishes an illusory ="trms">world extending away from the ="trms">spectator (collapsing that “="trms">stage,” dramatically sealing off possible avenues of entry into the work for our eyes) ='lgc'>==='qstn'>?='lgc'>='lgc'>==> a ="trms">world related to the viewer's own point of view

deliberate archaism
(='lgc'>='lgc'>--> medieval mystery plays)
closed-off antiscenic space ='lgc'>='lgc'>--> forms of popular display (shadow figure, puppet theatre,) that only simulate or evoke the “cube” of theatrical space


to be careful with ='strcls'>*grid='strcls'>*
='lgc'>[='strcls'>*='lgc'>--="trms">stories that the grid tells='lgc'>--='strcls'>*='lgc'>]
(="ppl">="ppl">Crary > Krauss='lgc'>:) by its very abstraction, grid conveys one of the basic laws of knowl="trms"nttrm="knowledge,Knowledge">edge='lgc'>: ='strcls'>*punctuality='strcls'>* ='lgc'>[='lgc'>-='lgc'>='lgc'>--> ='gtrw'>go to ="nms">apass psychological optics and image of knowl="trms"nttrm="knowledge,Knowledge">edge incorporated in ="trms">presentation of projects, ='at'>#workshop on topology='lgc'>] ='lgc'>='lgc'>--> the separation of the perceptual screen from that of the “real” ="trms">world
='lgc'>[='strcls'>*='lgc'>]grid='lgc'>: (19th century) emblem of the infrastructure of vision ='lgc'>='lgc'>--> becoming an increasingly insistent and visible feature of neo-impressionist painting
(='lgc'>='lgc'>~/= ="ppl">="ppl">Crary is hesitant to characterize Seurat's flatness structurally as grid)
="prgrph">-tabular field with rows and columns making impossible a point to point (= punctual) ="trms">relation between ="trms">spectator and image

(="ppl">Martin Jay='lgc'>:) two scopic regimes='lgc'>:
="lsts lst1">•metric and homogenous tableau loosely synonymous with classical space
="lsts lst1">•decentered and destabilized perceptual regime with its mobile and ="trms">embodied observer

the evocation of a scenographic setup in Seurat (Parade de cirque) is a ="trms">veil over the desiccated, nonhomogenous, and additive construction of the work


frontality and unity of framing (of “primitive” cinema...)

="large lg3" stl="font-size:111%">
='lgc'>[='qstn'>?do we need to='lgc'>] (in an illusionist mode) satisfy the principle of unitary organization of the scenic space


(how should you be concerned with ='lgc'>[public record='lgc'>] of your intellectual and ="trms">aesthetic formations='qstn'>?)

="large lg4" stl="font-size:112%">

Seurat's Parade de cirque ='lgc'>=/= ="frds scrmbld"nttrm="Leonardo">Leonardo's Last Supper
(Seurat broke free from ="frds scrmbld"nttrm="Leonardo">Leonardo, and i should from Seurat)

both of these paintings are concerned with the revelation of a mystery='lgc'>:
="lsts lst1">•="frds scrmbld"nttrm="Leonardo">Leonardo='lgc'>: the mystery of ="frds scrmbld"nttrm="Christianson">Christian sacrifice as it coincides with a lucid apprehension of in="trms">finite extension
="lsts lst1">•Seurat='lgc'>: the “mystery” of the disenchanted and quantitative order of capita="trms"nttrm="listen,alist,ilist,llist,olist,ylist,ulist">list exchange (and its overturning of homogeneity and legibility of space)

witness to='lgc'>:
="prgrph">-holy ="trms">communion -="frds scrmbld"nttrm="Leonardo">Leonardo
="prgrph">-rituals intrinsic to ="trms">modernity -Seurat

="large lg5" stl="font-size:163%"> in terms of orthogonal illustrated in ="frds scrmbld"nttrm="Leonardo">Leonardo is precisely what Seurat dismantles in Parade de Cirque

the ="trms">question of value
movement of abstract quantities
(transactional dimensions of Seurat's work)

lost transparency:<[...]