|
|
IMBJR wrote:
>
>
> Just because you expect it, does not mean it was not a stuggle.
>
You think you create a struggle for me? Your posture is hardly new,
quite understandable, but no longer very credible to me. Expression,
creative or otherwise, does not exist outside of a discourse to derive
meaning from, and a receiver to be subject to that meaning. If you deny
that necessity then my question to you remains, what are you showing
your work to us for? My own answer is that you do not want to accept
its dependency on an audience and that all audiences are local. And
therefore you are not being totally honest with yourself.
I submit to you that learning to accept this sometimes dreary fact is
what is the struggle.
But you hide behind your passive-aggressive "posting policy" and your
secretly encoded signature.
> Mmm, obviously something up there. After all, I'm not doing any
> charging.
>
I've asked the question before, that's all.
>
> As for the nick name "nonsense" that you yawn at, please give me an
> example of where else you have seen that technique used to derive a
> word.
>
My daughter comes home with various schoolyard games that involve
assigning numbers to letters, applying some calculation then reassigning
letters to the result. Other simple encryption technics might involve
laying out some schema then reparsing it in some other way. But what
makes me yawn is the general posture of secreting away content with a
private method of encoding, hinting at the notion of entropy, and all
with the conceit that no one else gets it. It's neither bad nor good,
valid nor invalid, but you find it often enough in the artworld. Sorry
if I let my scorn show. But you claim not to care how people respond.
Post a reply to this message
|
|