Words on the Obvious

De Funkt 2003-01-18 17:50:04 ET Mmmm....wine. My roomate and best-friend JOSH has taken an interest into the etiquette of proper wine tasting/indulging. There's a lot to know about wine. Everything is multi-tangent in this world. (Ed: Daniel is pretty drunk off Cabernet right now, so just relax) It seems as though our world and human consiousness is being consumed by the nature of in-out, 1's and 0's, digital processing. For the most part, this tactic works wonderfully. Yet it still seems that it cannot be wholly reduced to such abstraction, that every indiviual component, no matter how far you break it down, still maintains a sort of fractal-esqe nature. I take comfort in this ideal, however bland and regular it may seem. I've been thinking of chemicals lately. I've read a little out of this book my dad gave me about the history of color. In that book, it explores the medieval techniques of achieving color and paint substance and it very much is a chemical process, thus pushing the 'artist' to the level of 'chemist.' Okay, whatever. My point here is that I think the future of artistic expansion is chemical interaction. I think the artist of the future will use the medium of chemical influence to make his/her point known, through a medium likened to taking a drug. This chemical substance would be created by the artist and would perform results to the artists' liking, to create an effect of somesort that would express what the artist means to convey. And like all art, this chemical would have different effects on everyone who encounters it. Reviewing tendencies of the 20th century, primarily conceptual art, this concept doesn't seem far-fetched to me. What I like best about this idea is that the artist becomes a sort of drug-manufacturing mechanism that can't be caught 'cause the drug itself is the art, plus the drug will, ideally, be original in form. I don't really know how exactly how it'd be done. Let us not forget that we are on the brink of a new step in human evolution. Nano-eloctronics, Molectronics, all that shit. The idea that you can organically manifest memory storage that supercedes all known processing powers that we have as to date. That's increadible. My opinion is that what is happening now politcally w/ America or whatever is not for instant gratification, but for future development. The administration isn't looking to solve an immediate solution; they're looking to stake their claim to the up-coming dawn of humanity. Shit's gonna change drastically, and they're setting up their bases, getting ready to take hold of that shit. Genome shit. Hey, check out Hewlitt-Packart...they've actually been innovating nano-electronics since the get-go. Them and IBM. just like General Electrics manufacturing warheads for the government. Let me get emotional for a second: I would love to have someone to hold right now. That is all. Peace the fuck out. The sunshine is beautiful.

Emptied 2003-01-18 19:07:45 ET let me just say wow. i had just skimmed over that and thought hey i should read this and reply cause i've nothing better to do on here tonight...and wow. i read it and i think wow is all i can say. perhaps i'm thinking too much on it and trying to understand it way too much, but it's definately a mind-boggaling bunch of statements, but I think that's just me. ok i'm going to quit babbaling incohearently now...though i am thinking if the wine did that to you perhaps i should go get me some i may do better with my reasoning on things...

sinthetik1 2003-01-19 11:37:28 ET The artist as a drug manufacturer, reminds me of eve klein. During one of his gallery openings(mind you there was nothing on the walls, it was an empty white room),he served these blue drinks to all of his guests, the drink ended up causing everyone to pee blue for three weeks.

De Funkt 2003-01-20 20:49:49 ET "Eve?" Shit, you mean Yves! YO! I'M JUST KIDDING!!! Everytime I see the name Yves, I gotta be like "Yeeves." No, but those 60's/70s muthafuckas tore shit assunder. The 70s definately challenge my brain. There seemed to be this certain aire of anarchy and annihilation, under the epidermic layer of increasing smog and increasing convenience. Everything seemed not to go through a smooth transition of change, but a violent explosion of innovation. 70s seem like a big trunk of a tree being not cut down, but twisted and narled and painfully torn apart limb by limb. I think it's funny that the general sentiment towards the 70s is that it was a stagnant decade of leisure and comfortability. I guess the same can be said about the 80s. (Fuck, I hate doing this....) I guess the same can be said about THE ENTIRE HISTORY OF EVERYTHING. Yo Emptied, it's nice that you go "wow" to things. The sentiment of the expression "wow" is so nice, so pure. I love things that make me go "wow." I saw this movie last night, and you two should see it FOR REAL! The movie is called "THE CRUISE" and it's got like a fro-haired boy riding on a double-decker bus on the front cover, so you can't miss it! NO, BUT PLEASE, it's a wonderful documentary/movie. I can't get enough of it.

DanPratt 2003-01-21 04:20:14 ET The only problem with mechanically and/or technologially influenced evolution is that it will ultimately be rebelled against by true evolution, "natural" evolution. As a matter of fact, anthopologically human beings are at the cusp of deevolution because our lack of neccessary evolutionary factors (i.e. isolated populations, survival of the fittest, etc.) I am personally NOT excited for this impending technological explosion, because then we have "Judgement Day," like in the Terminator. When that shit goes down, you know my ass is going to be in a fallout shelter with some Dinty Moore.

sinthetik1 2003-01-21 07:51:03 ET 60's and 70's would've been an interesting era to have been an artist, but then again i love that era because of the whole pop movement. the 80's was kind of leisurely but they were also trying to prove that they weren't so self absorbed by trying to develop some sort of social conciousness.

Emptied 2003-01-21 13:37:53 ET I love anything that makes me go wow...slightly off your art era but "Paris Street, Rainy Day" makes me go wow every time i see it...espeically the orignial in Chicago full sized looks like the people are going to walk out at you...I stared at it for hours...ok sorry way of topic. As for evolution, natural or not, I think we will ultimatly need both...I don't think tech. will survive w/o some natural selection...and I don't think we've strayed too far from survival of the fittest the "weak" are still "weeded out" by the "strong" just in different ways.I dunno maybe i'm just totally off..

De Funkt 2003-01-22 12:26:48 ET I agree Dan with the Natural evolutionary idea in regards to those de-evolutionary factors such as overpopulation, eco destruction, etc., especially when you keep in mind the reality that we are bound to the earth. I think that these new innovations in science are close to being able to over-power certain de-evolutionary factors, though it is impossible to foresee these innovations being available to the world population. Thus, there will be ever-increasing death and destruction and despair for the majority of humanity. Those elitest fucks with the money will be the new terminators, or better yet, the T-1000s! Then they'll blast off to space and be a-sexual biological space robots! Now that sounds good! I agree with the 80s pop art thing in that it wasn't gorging itself with influences from history and society and concepts and post-modernism in general, and it was a nice contrast from the 70s. I like the whole wildstyle thing that came out of New York and I think it'd be a bomb, fertile ground to work in, but I don't really feel it. I tend more towards art that sort of devulges its form into expression that beckons philisophical contemplation. Aesthetics are important in anything, but when art teeters on being/expressing something that breaks out of itself and becomes it's own entity with it's own reasoning, that's when I get turned on. Know what I'm saying?

syntheticdream 2003-01-22 13:05:41 ET dude.. ok seriously.. only about 70% of the people who taste wines actually know what they're looking for ie. level of Tanins, oak, acidity, legs, etc. by far the best wines are the one's that you enjoy, don't get caught in teh snobbery of it all, 'cause there's very little there... had one of the top Sauvigniers (sp?) as my wine instructor and he managed over 70% of the extremely riches wine cellars in the LA Metro area... very good teacher... and the best thing he ever taught... "crack open another bottle of the yum-yum juice.. hope this one's not as nasty as the last..." he was a picky mo' fo'.. but agreed that the best wine was what you thought it was..

sinthetik1 2003-01-22 17:04:19 ET the best art brings an awakening inside. the reminder that there is something more to life. with pop i enjoy the irony,the reminder of how shallow and materialistic society is. yes i know i could get the same thing hanging out at the mall, but there is something to be said about standing next to a 30ft tall popple.

DanPratt 2003-01-23 04:17:57 ET SythDream: My parents used to be MEGA wine conessuires (<----I don't know French, therefore I can't concieve of how to spell that word). I remember being 13 and waiting outside of the "Wine Dungons" in France while they were inside doing tastings. They don't do it anymore though because my mom came out as an alcoholic about 2 years ago...oh well.<BR> But because of that, I sort of have a knowledge of fine wines even though I really don't like wine.

Return to De Funkt's page