Saturday, September 5, 2009

Well, well.

I sat to respond to comments about “Ter-rain” and no sooner had I typed in the first sentence, I realized that I would need anther cup of coffee and prefer a format allowing for more than seven or eight words a line, slow motion nystagmus a bit tedious with the length of what was sure to follow further parasympathetic stimulation.

If I may digress/free-associate: I was once in an argument with a gentleman who loved to quote Wittgenstein, this before I began to put pen to paper for more than words, and he a painter of extreme self-confidence and adequate skill, a barker of sorts. He maintained that poetry had no visual aspect on a page. I could not understand his blindness to an e. e. cummings and my careful consideration of how to read a break, the purposeful negative space that allows one to know both the light and the dark.
Perhaps it was just a matter of my eyes nudging me away from words, for soon thereafter I moved to the brush.

Back on track. By preference and need, I am a Lacanian.

One of the disadvantages to the choices I made in my education was that while I was steeped in theories of Being, I avoided the fundamentals the academy punditry provided those who went through undergraduate art studies. To make up for this lack, I killed many a tree. When a photographer moved into the building and began to throw away wrinkled screens eight and ten feet wide and long, I was in heaven. By the time I decided an MFA might be a wise move, I had accumulated thousands of drawings, many that were nothing more than simple Xs, Os and lines arranged on large sheets of newsprint. I had taught myself what works. I could walk the walk. The talk, not so much.
Not surprisingly, I suppose, my nickname in grad school was “The Intellectual Barbarian,” a bit too drawn out for my taste, yet it is unseemly for one to create one’s own nick outside of online gaming.

Okay, that may be enough of that for a while.

“Line breads and the triangular mass ease the semetery.” TM, you have some idea how much I love this line, and the one word left uncorrected.

“I would buy some myself, but there is no room around my gray metal shelving decor!” Crash, I believe we all know the importance of this aesthetic choice. In fact, a friend who has just bought a house has offered to by two very early pieces. I am mustering the courage to approach a couple galleries in Portland.

As for your question about size, it depends. Some are cropped out and would have to remain small. Others without cropping can withstand 35” x 25”. The stitchings slightly larger.

MOJO, kind words here and elsewhere are greatly appreciated.

And again, TM: “I shouldn't do this on anothers blog…” I shouldn’t worry. As a tattoo, I would. Such considerations as you have outlined are effective if they are one’s intention.

“A painted wall.” Referencing certain styles of painting. The flatter the better.

“He needs depth: broken lines and masses to lead the eye back, from top to bottom or versa.” As I return to considering the landscape, yes.

Must eat something.


Crash said...

Believe it or not, I do understand and agree with most of what TenMile said. I think, though, for your field burn series, the flat, textured, carpet look is what I like about it. It would really create a mood in the right room in the right home or even office.

Memphis MOJO said...

I hope TM didn't take offense at a comment I left on a different post. All I meant was that what he said was over my head. I just look at something and try and decide if I like it or not. He goes deeper and more analytical, obviously.

Forrest Gump said...

"my nickname in grad school was “The Intellectual Barbarian,”"

I love this.

Any thoughts on blogging a little more philosophy? I'd never heard of Lacan until reading that post.


bastinptc said...

FG - Highly unlikely. My days as a student of philosophy are long passed. It informs my thinking from time to time, and that's about it. However, what I can do is post a short story I wrote with some philosophical thought as its underpinning. Give me a day or two.

Anonymous said...

Lacan, a Fraudian[sic] wasn't he?

At any rate, tell me, if you will entertain the question that kept me enterntained for an hour. What is the essence of poker?

To make it fair, I will repeat the answer I give: two pair beats a pair but three of a kind beats two pair.

Which is to say, the ranking of hands is the essence of poker. It informs my strategies. But others give other answers. Such as betting being the essence of poker. And the standard more academic answer, poker is a wagering game with cards.
I don't remember if i ever asked you the question.


Anonymous said...


i am reminded of a PA session with PK and he was asking some weird questions. I forget what. And I asked him why he was asking those weird questions. He said, "Because I've been told that you are the Poker Academy Philosopher." I responded, "No, Bastin is the Poker Academy philosopher."

PK shot back, "Bastin is the poker Academy Zen master."

Which I found hilarious on at least two levels.



bastinptc said...

Aki - No, you have never asked, although I am well-familiar with your definition. Informed strategies are always nice. I would let it go with that as I remain so results oriented, but not in the way that one might first think. I am flawed because I spend too much time on the "Why.".

As for the session with PspaceK, I would not care to characterize your chat for that would fall flat without tone. I have spoken to you, and that affords me so much more. And me? On PA I am the generally affable guy who had a good run for a while, and without the benefit of trickery.

Words are an informed strategy: blindfold, gauntlet, web, and choir, among other things. What they are not, however, ever, are blue skies of understanding. Perhaps it is this last part that gives poker, like writing, like Lacanian theory, its appeal.

Anonymous said...

It's appalling appeal?