Fwhoie-co

I wonder how Foucault would qualify the author-function of his own "works." Does he consider his body of work to demonstrate an initiation of multiple discourses? How close does Foucault stand to the "second self" of the "I" in "What is an Author?" Foucault was so prolific with his writings that it's hard not to think that he wasn't struggling against death by making sure his name appeared alongside all his writings before he died. I'm curious that the only direct reference he makes to himself, as an author (or would he have called it as a "functioning author") is when he discusses his intentions for The Order of Things. Reading Foucault after reading Barthes' "The Death of the Author," I start to think that it's irrelevant for Foucault to try to explain his intentions. In my reading of his essay, I think of other things. I think of a bald head, a pair ofglasses, the pendulum at Griffith's Observatory. I wonder of Michel ever thought of Leon and the rotation of the earth. I think of how my expectations that Foucault would reference himself more directly in a piece entitled "What is an Author?" are completely unmet.

Too Much Cold Medicine or It's Raining Text!

I decided that I really wanted to post some ideas to you guys, particularly because I am out sick (like a dog) and so I won't get to participate in Caroline's project and bat around thoughts, you know, corporeally.

I love playing with words. I love mad-libs. I love magnetic poetry. I've often wondered about how to make a piece of work that involves some of the exciting elements of those games. The joy and accessibility of the play, the productivity of the constraint, the leveling of the playing field, the interactivity, the group dynamic. So, in web-surfing text art et al, I came across this piece by Camille Utterback called Text Rain and I think it is fun and worth discussing, and gets at some of these questions. To encourage you to link on through to the piece and then open the quicktime documentation (I highly recommend the larger file, the small file is all pixel-y) the piece is an interactive projection field where falling letters respond to bodies, umbrellas, and other objects placed in their paths and bounce around the objects. You can see in the documentation the way that the audience engages in the piece, playing with the rules of the letters, trying to contain or disperse it, trying to make sense or destroy sense. There is a poem that the letters are culled from, about bodies and text so the website says, and it begs the question of where the author is. Is it the author of the poem? Or in this case, does it have something to do with bodies in particular? What about when there is no poem, just letters? What would the interceding bodies be then? What about absent bodies (like mine? :)

Ok, and also, speaking of mad-libs and art, can we maybe do this mad-libs-ifesto as a class? Cause I think it is AMAZING!

Don't get this cold. It BLOWS.

Also, what about writing in all caps? Why is that so what it is? Ok, too much cold medicine, obviously. Do not compare this post to the last one! It is crazy. Have a good class, guys, and I'lll be back with you next week. More bloggers please!

Context: The Culprit

Posting Date: TUESDAY : 24th

Title: Context: The Culprit

Ok, I had this revelation, last night at 12:30 am (the only time I had to allow my brain to wonder)

This goes back to our conversation yesterday: 

“Why are writers not allowed to play with visual arts, as visual artist are allowed to play with writing?”

I caught myself being stuck in somewhat of a tunnel vision during class: I could only think of academic “writing” during our discussion, hence my comment “writing has never been artistic or creative, and more factual”. Of course writing has been creative! And of all people I should know as a graphic designer:  from Iranian arts of calligraphy, to illuminated manuscripts, expressive typography, Futurists, and Dada etc.

So, after admitting my mistake, I asked myself why/how? 
And I came face to face with the culprit: Context
At least I believe so. 

Of course politics, cultural trends and other aspects we discussed are have influence on what different groups considered proper – or otherwise –  when it comes. However, when one discusses writing in an academic environment, we are dealing with a specific lineage. When discussed in the realm of creative/arts, we see a different history behind us. etc.

Acknowledging the overwhelming importance of context and the relative control that we –as communicators– have,  can initiate a path decipher the elements that are causing the original question to arise, as well as giving us the choice to gamble with our work in arenas of our individual choice – since that specific arena will bring with it the context which the work will be critiqued within.

I had to get this off my head, before I went crazy talking to myself. I hope  it makes some sense.