tom moody

sex.science.dump

pathetic geometry

wanna see my surfaces?

narwhal rider

congrats omario (i guess - are you spiritual yet?)

how to be awesome [reconstructed 9/24/10]

schoenberg and nancarrow cats

ya dun goofed

dystopian sf novel with lovecraftian overtones in GIF form by crunkus (am in awe of this beautiful GIF)

dreaming about u

Thumbnails from my current dump.fm page. Most of these are my enlargements, layerings, and other retunings of GIFs posted by others last night.

You wouldn't recognize me but I'm in this MC 900 Ft Jesus video on YouTube (blurry face in crowd wearing x-ray specs).

It was filmed at State Bar when I was living in Dallas. I remember being offended by the MTV cameraman's low rise leather pants but he didn't do such a bad job--the blurry psychedelic swirl effects hide much of the cheesiness. "I'm Going Straight to Heaven" appeared on the first MC9FJ album so DJ Zero is still spinning the wheels of steel--his cutup textures and dynamic swoops added a lot to the early sound. The label didn't quite know how to promote these uncategorizable artists but something must have worked since the first two records are still in print.

Also of interest is the self-produced vinyl version of "Too Bad," released before major label signing and reworked slightly for the first LP. A very creepy song where the listener takes the POV of a stalker/killer. MC 900 Ft Jesus (aka Mark Griffin) told me he was inspired by a guy he saw out on the street ranting through a busted, distorted microphone, which is why these early raps sound like this. By the time of "The City Sleeps," Griffin was using his natural voice.

With MC9FJ, the New Bohemians, and others, Dallas was briefly poised to be a big "music city" in 1989 or so (label talent scouts were sniffing around) but then Kurt Cobain happened and the nation turned its eyes to plaid shirts and the Pacific north woods.

screen capture of my dump.fm fav palette - various artists

digital remake of hand drawing by Clint Fulkerson found via Data Is Nature

Fulkerson writes, about his original drawing (not depicted here except as altered):

I create my artwork through the slow application of decisive marks. As I draw, I follow a loose formula based on what I’ve already drawn, filling areas of the picture plane gradually, without making initial layout sketches. This makes the final product somewhat unexpected and emergent.

This is also called doodling. Data is Nature writes, however:

In this sense the drawing could be seen to be a system in action whereby local agents (drawing marks) define successive marks to create global structures of complexity that are often unaware of their ongoing mutating configurations. This emergent behaviour has been noted in morphological systems and biological colonies...

True, but humans are not bacteria, so the thumbnail from Data Is Nature was flipped horizontally and vertically, pasted into the "nucleus" of the original drawing and Voila, double reverse recursion! As Jasper Johns said, "take something, do something to it, do something else to it," a simple wisdom that seems to escape many artists in the "generative" ghetto. Sorry to be rude and unauthorized but there is so much unfinished work on the web.

A person enters the literary world as a novice, and slowly studies the works of great writers and scholars. Readers immerse themselves in deep, alternative worlds and hope to gain some lasting wisdom. Respect is paid to the writers who transmit that wisdom.

[It was such immersion that led me to conclude that the US needed to invade Iraq.]

A citizen of the Internet has a very different experience. The Internet smashes hierarchy and is not marked by deference. Maybe it would be different if it had been invented in Victorian England, but Internet culture is set in contemporary America. Internet culture is egalitarian. The young are more accomplished than the old. The new media is supposedly savvier than the old media. The dominant activity is free-wheeling, disrespectful, antiauthority disputation.

[Such as led many "bloggers" to decide invading Iraq was wrong.]

gifs found on dump.fm

After the previous post on Henry Darger a friend wondered if "outsiders" can exist anymore, with the Net leveling and connecting. Sure, "outsider" now equals "someone not on the Net." But seriously, the term outsider sounds cruel and judgmental and snobby but all it means is "one who makes art heedless of a context larger than one's own computer (or studio, or computer/studio)." We can like an outsider's work as much as an insider's but it's always fair to ask "where is this coming from?"

Using that "metric" it's actually harder to identify an insider than an outsider. The same friend thought the two net art camps discussed in an earlier post possibly ignored some of the other subdivisions. Well, yes, and to heck with all of them. A type of artist exists, let's call him Patrick, who cannot describe any new artwork or art movement without giving a long summation beginning with Manet, working through Cubism, minimalism, Pop, several shades of conceptualism, and then increasingly fine gradations of "net art" to the present example and where it fits in that continuum. This is perhaps taking insider-dom to extremes.

To be an outsider you just make your work and let the historians take care of it. To be an insider all you really need to understand is what you're doing (Camp Two) and how it differs from stuff you hate (Camp One), plus some vague background knowledge of how it all fits in the history of art, which you don't need to recite every time. I had a discussion with a Camp One/Camp Two analyzer about how much depth you even need to go into explaining the camp you dislike. You don't want to dignify it with too much scholarly exegesis. As they say in politics, "if your opponent is drowning, throw him an anvil." But if you acknowledge another camp at all, and care about it, you are an insider.

Ted Goranson writes scathingly about In the Realms of the Unreal, a film about the outsider artist Henry Darger. Didn't see the film; sounds like yet another botched attempt to explain visual art and artists.

But gosh this filmmaker makes so many bad choices. Although the story has no explicit sexual flavor, it is quite close to perverse. My own view is that the world and the girls as [Darger] imagined them were tokens of otherworldliness so abstract and pure that they need to be admired for the clean purity. Having Dakota Fanning narrate as one of the Vivian Girls, and with practiced childishness, tips the balance from abstract to absolutely dangerous. A big mistake. The fellow that narrates Darger's inner voice is profoundly wrong too. A narrator could work. Animating the drawings could work. But gosh, either you need to fully buy into the world and enter it as Darger would, or you have to set a platform in between him and us that has some solidity. We have to know who and where we are. This filmmaker does not do that, skipping from place to place with no anchor, no coherence. If the man is about anything, it is coherence.

Goranson also questions the documentary's lack of objectivity:

It would have been good to know that some of the "witnesses" here basically stole the man's legacy and became wealthy as a result. Their recall is colored by some pretty crass motives.

Don't know about "stole" and "wealthy" (a little research is needed here) but this is a fair question to raise. Posthumous spin is part of an artist's story and you can't get any distance on that if you handle your sources with kid gloves, no pun intended.

left: Fernand Leger, "Composition Murale," 1950, Gouache on paper, 24.49 x 17.55 in.
right: GIF found by frankhats (from a Nigerian oil and gas products website)