Decontextualization | xltronic messageboard
 
You are not logged in!

F.A.Q
Log in

Register
  
 
  
 
(nobody)
...and 338 guests

Last 5 registered
Oplandisks
nothingstar
N_loop
yipe
foxtrotromeo

Browse members...
  
 
Members 8025
Messages 2614087
Today 0
Topics 127542
  
 
Messageboard index
Decontextualization
 

offline dog_belch from Netherlands, The on 2004-04-20 18:16 [#01153239]
Points: 15098 Status: Addict | Show recordbag



what is language if not mental imagery?


 

offline qrter from the future, and it works (Netherlands, The) on 2004-04-20 18:18 [#01153241]
Points: 47414 Status: Moderator | Followup to dog_belch: #01153239



mental imagery maybe, but not visual imagery.

it registers differently.


 

offline deepspace9mm from filth on 2004-04-20 18:18 [#01153242]
Points: 6846 Status: Addict



William Burroughs. James Joyce.

Is one any better than the other? Does how the work was
created, or how long it took, actually make a difference to
the quality of the content? Is it actually possible to
consider their work objectively?

Postmodernism does not decontextualize, but rather sees the
past and present simultaneously, not influencing each
other's time but feeding from each other subjectively.

Postmodern art, music, literature, whatever: not better, or
worse... there is no such thing. Just different. Maybe not
even that.


 

offline fleetmouse from Horny for Truth on 2004-04-20 18:20 [#01153243]
Points: 18042 Status: Lurker | Followup to qrter: #01153237



I think there are "traditional" and "collage-y" ways of
working in any artistic discipline.


 

offline dog_belch from Netherlands, The on 2004-04-20 18:21 [#01153245]
Points: 15098 Status: Addict | Show recordbag



I admire your cock shrivelling arrogance, the way you can
confidently state that it is "pointless" to compare collage
and cut up writing techniques. I wish i knew what it felt to
be so assured, to consider myself knowing fucking
everything.


 

offline qrter from the future, and it works (Netherlands, The) on 2004-04-20 18:22 [#01153246]
Points: 47414 Status: Moderator | Followup to fleetmouse: #01153243



certainly. but a musical collage is a different beast to a
textual collage.


 

offline qrter from the future, and it works (Netherlands, The) on 2004-04-20 18:23 [#01153248]
Points: 47414 Status: Moderator | Followup to dog_belch: #01153245



I'm sorry, would you like me to put "imo" after each post of
mine, so as not to confuse you?

it must be awful to be so insecure to feel attacked by
someone stating his or her opinion.


 

offline dog_belch from Netherlands, The on 2004-04-20 18:25 [#01153249]
Points: 15098 Status: Addict | Show recordbag



I don't feel attacked. I said i admired you. Don't confuse
how you feel with how you think i feel.


 

offline deepspace9mm from filth on 2004-04-20 18:26 [#01153250]
Points: 6846 Status: Addict | Followup to qrter: #01153246



...but a musical collage is a different beast to a
textual collage.


Why? Collage in the sense i think you mean relies on firing
off associations between materials and allusions... surely
this works very similarly in both textual and more
conceptual musical collage, if not simply using collaged
sound as texture.


 

offline qrter from the future, and it works (Netherlands, The) on 2004-04-20 18:26 [#01153251]
Points: 47414 Status: Moderator | Followup to dog_belch: #01153249



well, you wording was slightly agressive.

I'm not saying I know it all, only that this is what I
think. if you think differently, that's fine, come up with
good arguments.


 

offline qrter from the future, and it works (Netherlands, The) on 2004-04-20 18:30 [#01153252]
Points: 47414 Status: Moderator | Followup to deepspace9mm: #01153250



yes, but collage refers to the process, not to actual work
itself.

I'm saying it's silly to compare, for example, music and
text, as if they were on the same 'level'.

it's like comparing a table and a lamp. both are furniture,
but both have their inherent uses and functions, and
therefore rules. so if you compare a table and a lamp made
by the same designer, you look at them in the context of
being designed by the same person, but they are still a lamp
and a table, very different things.


 

offline fleetmouse from Horny for Truth on 2004-04-20 18:31 [#01153253]
Points: 18042 Status: Lurker | Followup to qrter: #01153246



certainly. but a musical collage is a different beast to
a textual collage.


Yeah, I'll admit that a collage approach to text has a much
more decontextualizing / alienating /
original-meaning-annihilating effect on its source material
than a sound collage - mainly because writing has far more
semantic content than music. Sometimes, maybe. And stuff.



 

offline qrter from the future, and it works (Netherlands, The) on 2004-04-20 18:33 [#01153256]
Points: 47414 Status: Moderator | Followup to fleetmouse: #01153253



exactly!


 

offline fleetmouse from Horny for Truth on 2004-04-20 18:34 [#01153259]
Points: 18042 Status: Lurker | Followup to qrter: #01153252



Jeez qrter, a pavane and a madrigal are very different
things, better not compare them either.


 

offline dog_belch from Netherlands, The on 2004-04-20 18:34 [#01153260]
Points: 15098 Status: Addict | Followup to qrter: #01153251 | Show recordbag



Sorry, you're right. It was only that i felt you dismissed
the Mouse's point out of hand. It's harsh to say something's
"pointless". It isn't pointless, imo, to compare anything
with anything else. That's all.

I am turning into the trollish nob i always feared i'd
become.


 

offline deepspace9mm from filth on 2004-04-20 18:37 [#01153262]
Points: 6846 Status: Addict | Followup to qrter: #01153252



I see where you're coming from... It's the rule of "reading"
a certain artform in a certain way that stumps me. How DO we
appreciate art? Personally, i believe that our expectations
of how certain artforms behave determine how we perceive
them, not through any inherant objective meaning.

The idea of not collaging, but simply reusing, duchamp or
jeff koons-style is something i find rather fascinating. How
do we use it? Just because it has somebody else's ideas
contributing to its immediate appearance, is this actually
all it means? And what the fuck is meaning? Where does it
come from? Me or you?

I've been itching for a thread like this.


 

offline fleetmouse from Horny for Truth on 2004-04-20 18:48 [#01153268]
Points: 18042 Status: Lurker | Followup to deepspace9mm: #01153262



Things have meaning only in relation to other things - if
you change the relationship, you change the meaning. There's
no such thing as inherent meaning. That is why context has
to be preserved. Hell, postmodern collage (in the broadest
sense) relies on the audience being aware of the original
context in order for the clash to have a spark.


 

offline deepspace9mm from filth on 2004-04-20 19:02 [#01153281]
Points: 6846 Status: Addict | Followup to fleetmouse: #01153268



Hehehe, "context is everything" is pretty much my mantra.
The personal relationship between artwork and viewer is
certainly more important to me than the original context
that an artwork was created in. This is why a lot of
postmodernist visual art (the subject i'd know best in this
area) works for me personally: the implications of material
and technique, lack of original context, the fallacy of
"universal" meaning...

To cut a long story short, i'd certainly agree that
things have meaning only in relation to other things
but i'd add that only to YOU, or to ME my dear fleetmouse.
Meaning is one-person-specific. I'd disagree that context is
something to be preserved, though. Anything but personal
context is a lie.


 

offline fleetmouse from Horny for Truth on 2004-04-20 19:06 [#01153285]
Points: 18042 Status: Lurker | Followup to deepspace9mm: #01153281



Barbecue anthill wedge snake lithograph eulogy? Anxiety
porous filibuster!


 

offline deepspace9mm from filth on 2004-04-20 19:10 [#01153287]
Points: 6846 Status: Addict | Followup to fleetmouse: #01153285



You take that back right now, vacuous beanraker.


 

offline sneakattack on 2004-04-20 19:37 [#01153313]
Points: 6049 Status: Lurker



Humans are irreverent and heavily abstracting beings, so
it's completely inevitable for everything to be used in
every which way..

also, people are definitely self-aware to a paranoid degree
these days.. I certain think about doing things
2381093821093x more than actually doing anything.


 

offline fleetmouse from Horny for Truth on 2004-04-20 19:39 [#01153317]
Points: 18042 Status: Lurker | Followup to deepspace9mm: #01153287



LAZY_TITLE


 

offline deepspace9mm from filth on 2004-04-20 19:43 [#01153319]
Points: 6846 Status: Addict



LAZY_TITLE


 

offline pomme de terre from obscure body in the SK System on 2004-04-20 19:58 [#01153333]
Points: 11941 Status: Moderator | Show recordbag



LAZY_TITLE


 

offline DoctorMO from London (United Kingdom) on 2004-04-20 20:14 [#01153344]
Points: 99 Status: Regular



the idea that artwork might in some form present it's
context to the viewer must be a shock and awe to artists. or
maybe not. is art the result, the process or the meaning or
some amalgamation.

perhaps when I look at your painting of the apple and know
not why you did it or even how, I can just appraise it's
link with what I know of the world around me, yes if I know
more I may appreciate it more, but once created you have
little control over what you've done and it's link with
viewers.

hey I have an idea, why not call art the creation and then
you can forget the viewer ;-)

-- DoctorMO --


 

offline corrupted-girl on 2004-04-20 20:17 [#01153345]
Points: 8469 Status: Regular | Followup to sneakattack: #01153313



yes.. YES!


 

offline DoctorMO from London (United Kingdom) on 2004-04-20 20:29 [#01153354]
Points: 99 Status: Regular



You can't agree to several conflicting views, thats
politics!


 

offline corrupted-girl on 2004-04-20 20:41 [#01153362]
Points: 8469 Status: Regular | Followup to DoctorMO: #01153354



YESS, i says.


 

offline DoctorMO from London (United Kingdom) on 2004-04-20 20:44 [#01153367]
Points: 99 Status: Regular



oh well. that makes sense.


 

offline sneakattack on 2004-04-20 20:49 [#01153369]
Points: 6049 Status: Lurker | Followup to DoctorMO: #01153367



change the context, abstract the premise, and all the points
can agree.

yes that's right, I get slaughtered for a living.


 

offline DoctorMO from London (United Kingdom) on 2004-04-20 20:50 [#01153372]
Points: 99 Status: Regular



your a pig?


 

offline fleetmouse from Horny for Truth on 2004-04-20 21:56 [#01153391]
Points: 18042 Status: Lurker



Minnie, the love pig.


 

offline DeadEight from vancouver (Canada) on 2004-04-20 21:59 [#01153392]
Points: 5437 Status: Regular



hurray for all of you! i really wish i hadn't gone to my
soccer practice (well that's a lie... but i wish i could've
been here for all of this)


 

offline fleetmouse from Horny for Truth on 2004-04-21 06:16 [#01153816]
Points: 18042 Status: Lurker | Followup to DeadEight: #01153392



I wish I'd gone to your soccer practice instead. I feel all
poncey.


 

offline DeadEight from vancouver (Canada) on 2004-04-21 13:37 [#01154664]
Points: 5437 Status: Regular



fuck that shit! i'm not going to apologize to someone who
thinks this conversation is to high brow or some stupid shit
like that... if they don't like it, they can go start
another thread about nothing...


 

offline DoctorMO from London (United Kingdom) on 2004-04-21 14:14 [#01154718]
Points: 99 Status: Regular



"only when the words escape your mouth do you betray your
true intentions."

so anyone who thinks they're better than the rest gan bog
off.

-- DoctorMO --


 


Messageboard index