Monday, 4 December 2006

Peas (2/3)

Selves in The Leap are dense hubs of crossroading processes, especially agricultural-industrial processes. Whatever else we may be (cyborgs), one of the things we are is a segment of the life of milk. Sophie you know about this stuff please explain it to me.

“even if you wanted to you couldn't have got out of this”

Watch how 2:00 is connected w/ 3:00, & consider whether that Frankenstein’s tapeworm could be taken not farther but further, whether the video poem does take it further. “In the end, maybe it is all about the [k•o‖udҖ•nthdinoisenoise]” could be read as amputation . . . yeah whatever . . . or as an attempt to put together an object which lies across or among different types of space. How will I exit my tower? Well maybe I’ll knot sheets. They lack 60 feet, I’ll add curtains, 40 feet, knot on the corridor, my golden hair, the tower . . .

The ability to conceive of such objects (or perhaps they are movements: the switch flung into white hands vibes of this) would obviously be useful in thinking about the status and distribution of the human in milk and other material networks. Does the human interrupt these networks? “In a field I am the absence of field” (Mark Strand). But when it comes to this dimension of Justin & Keith’s stuff – the depiction & exploitation (& maybe maybe the domestication & humanisation) – of the systemic, of inhuman scales, then I guess I am less interested in humans as clotted gates into ontological networks (though really, ontological in a kind of Heidegger-inflected sense) than into straightforward old networks of domination. If we are clowns why do we own slaves?

The reins tuck behind their ears as everyone knows. Who holds them, the trail goes cold at the segment built of Poirot’s own eyes. I’d like to do something about it but my hands are tied.

Emotion recalled in tranquillity.

No comments: