If a man gives way to all his desires, or panders to them, there will be no inner struggle in him, no ‘friction,’ no fire. But if, for the sake of attaining a definite aim, he struggles with the desires that hinder him, he will then create a fire which will gradually transform his inner world into a single whole.
the definition of voyeur, or perhaps the cultural definition of voyeurism, emphasises the observers dislocation from the event viewed but implies a sexual aspect in the tone of the gaze, stresses the vulnerability of the observed, that which is seen is the bare minutiae of life & that the normal state of affairs would insist that ‘it’ would (perhaps should) not be seen. seedy.
power plays, foucaults panoptican, blah.
observing the banal.
emotional drama that runs through – gives weight / narrative to – the mundane functions as a quick release / quick to come down psychic energy fix. (confirmation of compulsive behaviour) any discomfort in breaking cultural rules balanced by knowledge that cultural rules are there to be broken & that breaking them confers status to an essentially compulsive behaviour.
we live in is materially and physically rotten with actual poetry, with obscene appearences, wih venomous spirits, with infected organisms which you can see with the naked eye provided you have, like myself, lengthily, bitterly and systematically suffered from it.
And hallucinations or delirium are all out of the question here:
it is a question of this confirmed sophisticated elbow-pushing from an abominable world of souls in which every imperishable actor, every uncreated poet of the breath has always been made to feel the shameful parties making filth of his purest flights.
And no political or moral revolution will be possible so long as man continues to be magnetically held down-
even in his most elementary and simple organic and nervous reactions –
by the sordid influence
of all the questionable centers of the Initiates,
who, sitting tight in the warmth of the electric blankets of their duality-schism
laugh at revolution as well as wars,
certain that the anatomical order on which the existence as well as the duration of actual society is based
I see the task of architecture as the defense of the authenticity of human experience.
Juhani Pallasmaa, Encounters
the isolation of the senses. sight is visual, touch is touch, taste is taste, hearing accounts only for hearing and smell – while associated with taste still only really functions as smell. i am pointing out the obvious but; each of these bleed into each other.
the totality of experience necessitates the conjuring of all. the sensual.
our experience is also subconscious – mass conscious – a psychic reading.
a building cannot be a selection of forms generated purely to be visually inspirational. we are affected by a multitude of its ‘impressions’ on us (‘the eyes of the skin’ juhani pallasmaa) – our experience of it. potentially as inhabitant.
the warmth of the material, the exploitation of darkness as well as light
The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum – even encourage the more critical and dissident views. That gives people the sense that there’s free thinking going on, while all the time the presuppositions of the system are being reinforced by the limits put on the range of the debate.
Noam Chomsky;The Common Good, 1998.
much of the language around art is indistinguishable from the language of public relations (or mills & boon).