Date: Thu, 13 Feb 1997 15:42:09 -0600
From: ann klefstad <klefkal-AT-cp.duluth.mn.us>
Subject: Re: ostrow



>
>SO said:
> In other words
>why is so much of this premised on an  ideal of a world of representations
>available only to the mind in which all  other sensory data is made
>subordinant?
 
My notion too. Reading Suzi Gablik's _Reenchantment_ book makes me realize
to what degree the somatic point is being missed, both by Gablik and by
others whom she sets herself against. Remembering soma does not involve
either forwardness or return. It's a sideways motion, not leaving anything
behind or returning to anything. It's even at home with a certain kind of
what gets called "nihilism" (or more properly "kynikism" say those of us who
lie down with dogs and get up with fleas). My foot fell asleep.

>Beyond this , or perhaps because of it,  Joseph I find your  formulation
>which pits  painterly thought and digital  aesthetics  against one another
>somewhat strange.  I would have thought that what I  represent ( if I
>represent  anything) is a painterly ( sensuous) aesthetic  at least in this
>case versus Digital thought.  
>
It was my impression that Joseph was actually casting you in the role of the
memorious painter--not at all strange.
>
>
>
Klefstad

ps. Deleuze invocation was just missing his wonderful generosity of mind.
Could we keep that bless'd civility, even overt kindness, before us?



     --- from list avant-garde-AT-lists.village.virginia.edu ---