14

Apr

a hundred-pound suit of bees

bees

beeeeeeeeees

a hundred-pound suit of bees

bees

beeeeeeeeees

11

Apr

porpentine and preservation (with image, tweets) · anarchivist

porpentine:

someone recorded a convo i had with an archivist abt my game

10

Apr

robdelaney:

dstroym:

Every few hours yesterday I made up one of these “Facts” images and posted it to FB. Not only did no one call me out but I received numerous compliments and one guy even took credit for an image.

lol the one with Chicago and the stuff about Kansas. Also “5 degrees rounder”- wat? And all the typos… These are hilarious.

So fucking funny.

06

Apr

grinderman2:

Everyone needs to see this video of David Byrne trying to explain that Annie Clark (St. Vincent) is his friend but being completely confused by friendship as a concept

02

Apr

These are from an exhibit at the Knoxville Art Museum, which I had the pleasure of visiting during some downtime after a conference.  The first three photos, a drawing and two installations, are of pieces by Jessica Wohl, and the fourth, a lithograph of hair extensions, is by Althea Murphy-Price.

Wohl, it seems, likes to take domestic, suburban, and feminine iconography and make it grotesque.  This is most in-your-face in the second and third photos — the room’s inhabitants have vanished, leaving behind a pair of sepulchral wigs, and on the walls we see what might have been family photos with everything but the eyes and mouths erased.  The white bed, to me, looks like something out of a hospital, adding a layer of eerieness.  The hair has been both decontextualized to represent heads, and grotesquely multiplied to form the rug (a curtain isn’t pictured).  Murphy-Price’s work also has a lot of decontextualized hair — most of what was in this exhibit was lithographs of fake hair made into various styles.  This one I found particularly wispy.

The top picture, a drawing called Monster House, spoke to me the most, and I find it incredibly hard to say why.  There’s nothing overtly ominous about the drawing (especially in comparison with others in the set, which featured houses without windows).  What makes the house a monster, and what are we supposed to take away from it?  A few ideas:

  1. it’s drawing from a familiar American cultural symbol, the suburban prefab house, which is a really basic code for normalcy/conformity, cf. Weeds, cf. Edward Scissorhands.
  2. Here, though, the ornamentation on the house has been multiplied into the grotesque.  There are too many windows and turrets to make architectural or cultural sense.
  3. The windows, all taken from the same basic pattern, reveal nothing about the inside of the house.  We’re left to wonder, as many suburban neighbors have, what’s going on inside.
  4. The grotesquery is accentuated with a distorted perspective.  I’m not an artist so I’ll just cf. the low-hanging fruits on this one.
  5. Finally, the house is removed from all context — the drawing extends just as far as the surrounding bushes (another example of multiplied ornamentation) without even showing the driveway.

So we’ve taken a symbol of American normalcy, isolated it from its typically homogeneous and social surroundings, obscured its interior, and multiplied its exterior beyond recognition.  The house is portrayed not as a home but as a possibly empty shell.

Bottom line: this museum is free and has some great stuff in it — I highly recommend it if you’re ever in Knoxville.

01

Apr

25

Mar

From this illuminating exposé.

24

Mar

From Stasheff’s “Homotopy Associativity of H-Spaces, I.” These little dudes are called “associahedra” — they’re used to define multiplications on shapes that work in a more flabby, shapey way than usual.  (The last one is K_5, though it’s not labelled.)

23

Mar

From Ferdinand de Saussure’s Course in General Linguistics. And the guy claimed not to know what love is.

From Ferdinand de Saussure’s Course in General Linguistics. And the guy claimed not to know what love is.