Revision 27raw-print  2008-01-07 00:53dimitricomment  
Revision 26raw-print  2008-01-07 00:53dimitricomment  
Revision 25raw-print  2008-01-06 15:57739 
Revision 24raw-print  (edit) 2008-01-05 12:14Glandmastercomment  
Revision 23raw-print  2008-01-05 11:03HappyBubbleGirl 
Revision 22raw-print  2007-06-01 10:49Glandmastercomment  
 

Difference
(minor diff, author diff)
Added Changed Deleted

  • Prior major revision
  • Current Revision



    I am adressing you in the name of all potential contributors of this wiki-collective-deoxy-'project' (as this working name tells it). So to say this 'site' is 'under TRANSPARENT processual construction'. the beginning is constructed by His Majesty Vita, The Prince of Passion, as I/Asenav named him , right now. main introduction in this new 'movement', as he named it (for now) tells the basics. then some contributions follow, which are rather chronologicaly than hyperspace-wise sorted. the last 'reports' from the chatter's discussions regarding the core of L H this way or another are posted/edited by me/Asenav, but please understand this as 'collecting the material' (selected by 'random' occasions by me) for the further designs. my idea of this project is this being manifetsed on a CD-rom, or maybe even DVD, with all meta-linguistic 'contributions' of YOU, the potential L H. *smiles* some 'product' ready for art-market maybe.
    So indeed, I myself thought of this placement of this 'laudatio' for the potential Linguistic Hedonist, to be adressed. placement of it here, on the 'talk' of this wiki. this 'talk' is in general totaly interresting, I thought, because that's the back-stage of ...the 'transparent under-construction' of the wiki-LH. but I posted that most important call for participation again, I think that sentence reffers directly to mckenna, which follows by Vita. and this thought is also derived from it. so I think it's 'inviting'. encouraging cooperation/involvement. which is the point. for now. no hurry. or is it? in each case, some people got interrested in L H meme so I posted a short intro for those purposes, adressing primary the involvement-possibility first. 'to make them interrested', and not declaring it all analysed and written down to some hierarchy of priorities. directions. because it's not formed itself. it is geting formed by the process of participations.
    :I moved the text from the LH page as the talk page was kinda empty after I banished the deleted page discussion to its own home. The talk pages are not hidden or second class in any way - they are designed for you to discuss the page at hand, that can be the form of peeps asking for clarification or as on the [http://deoxy.org/wiki/Praxis_Talk Praxis talk] pages a way for the contributors to work together away from the main pages but still out in the open. We felt that openly organising ourselves was as important a way of attracting new contributors as having well designed main pages. I felt the text you put at the top of the page was a great way to start a talk page but not a way to start the main article. As I said to you in chatter putting your names everywhere and leaving copyleft notices (even if in jest) says this is my page do not touch. I can see your point when you say you wanted the initial feel of the page to say 'join in this isnt a set idea' - perhaps the page could be laid out better to communicate this idea? Check the [http://deoxy.org/wiki/action=history&id=Praxis history] for the Praxis page - it took me a while to get to the point as you can see!
    in art-theory the discussion about the value and ethical pureness of avantguards was questioned immensly, espetially in the 70s and 80s: the involvement of russian constructivism at communistic terror and a passive attitude and naivitee of french dadaism and surrealism towards comming ww1 and ww2, italian futurism, colaborating with Mussolini. but easthetically questioned, you answered perfectly your question already. heh. if I rephrase it, from my point of view (which is a view of a progressive art-theory, I'd say, 'progressive'=not denieing a priori each historical achievement on account of a new proposal..so I stand for anti-nihilism): 'the 'old' avantguard artists are truly 'old masters' precisely because they showed their idea of beauty in a way that shattered preconceptions in art (also) with strategy of randomness.' (the problem of randomness, for example, was one of the most cruical topics in dadaism, described and classified by a german experimental filmmaker and theorist Hans Richter):
    ...nice you've mentioned the randomness...'noise'.Glandy. the things they blamed dada for as being not artistic (like randomness-beauty of the patterns, put together by a random act...) are the most valuable tendencies. opposed to precise cannonised patterns (='preconceptions') of the earlier historical art-periods. but...that's a huge topic. thou I am a natural born worshipper of avantguards. first in that time artists got aware of ideological necessity and (not material existential) joy to work in a collective, to EXPERIMENT in a collective. (since art-collectives, in classical bourgeoise-manner, existed already before, like middle-age scriptoriums for example...but those collectives were based on hierarchy and social status and money-pragmatism, and not on creative experimenal impulses primary, as in avantguards). and the 'creational collectivism' of avantgards is the connection...to deoxy. dadaists would addopt immidiatelly deoxy-ideology and technological transparency of it, for average internet-user. some most utilitaristic ideals, combined with spiritual elitism and 'entlightened'/not-brainwashed ideologists...there is more. but that's why we are here. I suppose.

    • Home · Recent · Index · View · Talk? · δεοχψ