catalog

Well-known member
i've a nice little poster i made and exhibited in islington mill which is dean blunt explaining the point really well i'll try and find it
 

catalog

Well-known member
XNVRXWk.jpeg
 

version

Well-known member
we had a spate of talking about this a while ago, can't remember which thread, but yeah, the new, by definition, is unknown.
 

version

Well-known member
I suppose you get writers trying to depict our present moment, with up to the minute cultural analyses of the latest technology and so on, but like Faulkner said, “the past isn’t dead, it’s not even past.” I just like to throw this in reverse, this fetish for the contemporary, and show how it is completely infused with all of these frames or ghost, if you like, of its own past. And the future itself is a kind of fiction produced of that odd couple. These time twists, and…flexes…it’s something that Joyce understands so well. I think literature at its best as a privileged access to this omnipresence of pasts, presents, and futures that are all up in the air. Nothing is less contemporary than contemporary art or fiction. Than art that has something to say about the now. I think the whole point of the now is that it’s precisely what we can’t articulate.
 

catalog

Well-known member
have you got a particularly good memory do you think? or just average? is it something you've ever tohught about?
 

version

Well-known member
I have thought about it, but it's difficult to gauge. I could have an average memory and just be the only person who can be bothered to actually go looking for stuff.
 

constant escape

winter withered, warm
i think stan is actually wrong and needs to know and this should help him see the light
That the actual new is unforeseeable? Cause we can only draw from what we know, and thus only have old tools to describe the new? Prognosis only has the old at is disposal when approximating the new?
 
Top