The Art Aesthetic

I wonder if anyone reads past the first few lines of a blogpost?

In class today, talking to a group of students about what I take pictures of, what they mean, and why.

I want to tell everyone that I don't think the pretty pictures are the pretty pictures. They're boring, to me. Anyone can find angles, make on thing in focus in front of a blurry background.

A computer.

It's the flaws and mistakes that make us human, and I believe what make art interesting.

But flaws for a purpose.

Blurs and excessive contrast, overexposure, discoloration.

Interesting.

The Lunch Post

Prepare yourself for Andri Conspiracy:

I find myself, in contemplation over sociological patterns, reverting back to Darwin's model of evolution. Not so much that how we are today is on the path to the "most fittest" or whatever, just that there is a path at all. Stephen Hawking said that evolution need not be mistaken for anything but coincidence, but I disagree.

The thing I find myself questioning is human nature concerning our desire to eat. Sure there's the simple hunger that drives us to see everything as food if we're in dire enough circumstances. Yet even for those of us who have never known true hunger, who take the slight emptiness of a stomach as a full meal is being digested as hunger, food is one of the most basic and easily attainable pleasures. We may be able to move on to culture or intellectual stimulation as a pleasure source, which I believe to be the true luxury of living in a first world country, but there's something so satisfying about food. Something so satisfying that often we use it to replace our other emptinesses. You know, sadness, heartache, depression. Not getting enough Christmas presents.

This is why we eat, and this is why we have fat Americans. Very, very fat Americans. Fat Americans that get made fun of on the international circuit because we seem to have so little self control that we can't even control our animalistic hunger for burgers and fries. (Yich, by the way. Well, except for Wendy's fries. They're going "natural" so it's okay, right?)

Which brings me to the question--if there were---if if if, big if, I know--some guiding path that influenced human behavior (not a sentient guide, just a simple line graph or something. make that your visual metaphor), why have humans gotten to the point where something that was so necessary for us at the beginning of our evolutionary path, now kills us, now brings us to the point where it's a luxury to not partake in this basic survival instinct. I wonder sometimes if the African children--or Chinese, or Malaysian, it's not just Africa folks--know about couture culture that celebrates self-starvation.

So I guess that's where my rumination starts: something is killing us now which was once necessary for survival. Now, it's survival to ignore our animal instincts. Why? That's all I'm asking? Why do we enjoy eating so much if it's only going to kill us?

One answer, in the mind of Andri Conspiracy, is that "nature" created this in us so that by the time we were powerful enough to dominate the earth through agricultural, and eventually industrial, prowess, we would be so foodly affluent that we had no option but to die from it. Earth is protecting herself by installing a self-destruct button within the human program.

So that's conspiracy number one.

Which led me to create a guiding metaphor out of it. What if we consider this success-to-poison trajectory as a common theme among other human instincts. For example, monetary wealth.

Of course, this one goes beyond the animal instinct to stuff every berry into our mouths to quiet a grumbling stomach. It's I guess a more "evolutionary" developed instinct, to want to accumulate wealth. Cite social standing, or stability, or esteem, I don't care. People want it.

At first it was good, right? It took us away from feudalism and espoused the initially beneficial capitalistic instinct in the local blacksmith. "I'm working hard, so I should benefit directly from my own product." Good stuff. Brought us better markets, better demands, better governments, and generally considered better society.

However our modern day shows us something quite different. At least from my perspective, which is a perspective that tends to function in generalities and overarching trends (a fault of my own, I know. But I'm publishing on Blogger so forgive me for not giving a damn), extreme wealth has corrupted the system. The capitalism-democracy equation that brought us out of the dark ages is now something, ironically, closer to feudalism. The rich are getting richer, and they're holding the puppet strings over congress so that true democracy cannot be carried out, but something closer to a masked plutocracy--a plutocracy intent on enriching itself at the cost of the other 97%.

We've come full circle back to a system that oppresses more than it frees. One explanation could be that our selfishness has finally corrupted even the most well-intentioned of social structures.

The "nature" scheme could be, on the other hand, that wealth in such excess, which is good at first, has come to it's self-destruct button so that government (and by proxy, society) will collapse at the hands of the super affluent. Which will bring down the super affluent, hopefully.

And then anarchy! But isn't anarchy really just the garden of eden? Once we reach a certain point of social development, this eden cannot exist. Instead of existing in a state of anarchical eden free living happiness, we must be in a constant state of fluctuation. Oppression, freedom, becoming oppression, breaking back down to a nothing which is so nothing then it can be nothing but freedom. Visual metaphor: the compression, expansion, compression theory of how the universe is "shaped," if time is considered one dimension.

Simpler: water gives life, but water also drowns.

Don't mistake all this for my consideration of what is fact. Conspiracy, for me, is just food for thought.

Also, poison.

Harumph.

About Face

"Sorry about the absence of posts" begins so many blogs. Why do we not blog? I don't know. The absence of post does not mean the absence of thought, or of thought formulated into what it will be written on paper. The trouble seems to be in the sitting down and the sending of the fingers across keyboards, and pressing all those spacebars. Etcetera.

For me, writing has always kind of felt like a pause. When I'm running around, doing my own thing, I kind of keep a running monologue in my head of things I'm feeling/seeing/experiencing. This feels active, and the wheels turn quite pleasingly in the brain. When the time comes to sit down and transcribe what all has happened, though, some of it gets lost between the presses of a key, or lost in trying to find the right word. Writing, to me, just doesn't feel like what writing should feel like, and what just plain thinking does feel like. Nevermind trying to sit before the blank page and write something out of thin air. Maybe with a pen or pencil you could drum up some interesting thoughts, but I'm a firm believer (or nonbeliever?) in the impossibility of true creative writing on a computer. Then again, my boss says that too often people get caught up in the trappings of the writing, when in fact the problem is their un-inspiration. I don't think she's right, but I don't think she's wrong either.

I think I get trapped because I want to get trapped. When the thoughts live with me, up in my brain, running back and forth like electricity, they keep me company and provide me with some of the best companionship (and some of the worst, so there is a balance of course) there is to have. When I write, though, I have to stop living life, and just try to remember everything it is I've been living to write it down. That's the first thing, the pause. I don't like to pursue activities which stop me from experiencing "life" actively. It's the same reason I have my hangups about photography--you have to constantly be on the lookout for the right frame, the right angle to show things. Stops us from being "in" the picture, literally and figuratively. (I swear to God the metaphors must stop!) The second thing--yes we're back to that--the second thing is that once thoughts are written down, they have the troubling tendency of losing the lustre of lightning thoughts and becoming just a series of black curves and lines connected together. They're not living beings anymore, these thoughts, but killed, flattened out, and pressed between leaves of a book. The butterfly's colors may be beautiful, but unless it's allowed to flutter in the wind the true essence of the butterfly will be lost.

I swear to God. Metaphors. That's something facebook has made me hate, in others and myself, which is the too-easy tendency to turn even the most mundane experiences into the grandest of fucking metaphors. Metaphors are too easy. Almost cliche. Yet why am I still drawn to them? Not sure I'm comfortable following this question all the way to its conclusion.

Which is why I should introduce the concluding thought which has caused you to sit through this long introduction. 

I'm picking up some physics and math classes at school.

And since this blorg has been a good place for me to deliberate over these kind of life changes, I figured it would be only right that I should document the change. I had a conversation with some Christians the other night that ended up being incredibly productive. One of the subjects was, duh'f course, the meaning of life. For me, I've isolated it down to two possibilities. One, to have meaningful connections with the people around us--friends, family, coworkers, etc. Two, to improve the world through the talents/interests (or are the two equivalent?) that many translate into a career. Maybe the two are completely separate, or not so separate, but these are what I want to pursue. There's another candidate for the answer to the meaning-of-life question, which would be to experience all we an experience, but that gets us into a whole other ballgame so perhaps I'll save that for later. For now, I'll just say that the whole connecting and helping the world thing is by its very nature going to gain us some experiences.

Soooooooooooooooooooo for this reason I think I'm going to give physics another go. I gave up on it too easily. Not for grades or difficulty or anything, but because I saw some research astronomers were doing and said "yeah, fuck that." Fucking clicking on black dots on a white screen all day. Also because I refused to become an engineer like my father. Well, folks, the time has come where I reconsider and perhaps reroute.

And I think this is best. I want to do everything, honestly. I want to write, I want to think, I want to love, I want to do math equations. For my life, who knows? Maybe this will be the most compatible combination.

Update

Blogging is out, print is in.

This summer I'm giving myself an intensive project to write (and not edit) a book form of my choosing. Knowing me it'll be primarily autobiographical-oriented nonfiction, (s)treetises, poems with apologies, and fiction centered around how they came to be in my head (and unfortunately not so on paper).

If this falls through then I've thus disappointed the "world." If it happens then I'll send you a copy.

Gee whiz fiz bang pop! A book!

New Blog Soon

Get excited.

It's about love. The sequel to my birth.

I put my pants on to go the bathroom

and I shouldn't have to.

Let's write a poem

Let's call it something inspirational
or unique
or mythological
or traditional

Let's make it about
the insufferability of modern existence
simple contentment
love
things that are outrageous

Let's put it in meter
like Shakespeare and them
or invent our own
and call it something new

Let's abandon all rules
like we know what they are
like they repress us
and craft our own

Let's create a whole world
of meaning of words
of desolate love
and tragedy-comedy

Let's finish the thing
stuff it in a drawer
then pull it back out
and sign it like that