| |
| |
2003.06.24 10:50
in Kline's Shadow
(I think) Kiss My Abstract is right about Warhol's Shadows bearing a relationship to Franz Kline's work, moreover, a relationship that should have been noted since Shadows came into being. Shadows of what I wonder, of Kline?
Warhol I know fairly well, however, Kline is now a whole new interest, (like Held is a new interest,) and I thank KMA for that.
As to Kline Shadow Test, let's just say I enjoy the combination of Kline and Warhol's sort of art via genetic engineering. [Remember pure cloning is nothing less than extreme reenactment. Imagine that, a future that is precisely something that actually once was. I quess it is true that reenactment likewise engenders an inversion.]
2003.06.24 15:20
Götterdämmerung?
In reality, I rarely wear shoes—mostly just bare feet or socks, then sneakers or sandels, boots if I'm shoveling snow, and shoes only when I “have” to. Since it's still new, my interest in Kline may be more klein than I realize. I hold Held in the back of my mind, because of the spatial geometrics, because the back of my mind is lots of spatial geometrics too.
Remember, mnemonics is a technique of improving the efficiency of the memory, and not memory in and of itself. Memory is mental reenactment, thus mnemonics is a technique of improving the efficiency of mental reenactment. Mnemonics is very much an ‘architecture’ of reenactment.
Cloning too is reenactment, albeit extreme/pure reenactment—how exactly does one describe the degree of separation manifest via cloning? —not a zero degree, but not exactly one degree either—is it then virtual and real sameness all in two (or more)?
Is cloning also radical repetition? It certainly is a radical form of reproduction.
I don't see any true 1=1 equation between Kline and Warhol, but I now see Warhol's Shadows within a shadow cast earlier by Kline.
|
