Meandering Rolling between Differences

Reading the preface of Gide/Valéry ‘s correspondence, I kept this idea : these guys, so different, had almost nothing in common. Their friendship lasted 50 years for no reason other than itself. An intimacy where they judge each other, enrich each other, confess the deepest, on a kind of rare air summit.

Manon Lescaut is a French novel which came a Puccini opera (“Manon Lescaut”) and a Massenet opera (“Manon”). Every classical music lover knows that there’s a pleasure in comparing versions of the same opera (I wrote an article about this : What does Manon Lescaut want?). But here, you can also have fun noticing the differences in the librettos – inventing a 3D game of differences of differences…

A model (a car, a boat model) is “the same, littler”, but not exactly, right? Like a map for a territory. A model is a lie. It’s the same for representation, “this is not a pipe”, says Magritte under his painting of a pipe. Indeed it’s not. Same with words? This differences-dance between real and representation or telling is a rolling dance…

A map misses something (the wind, the changing light, events). But it’s an analogy. “This for that”. A line for the road. A dot for the house. A cross for the church. Different.

Displacing effectiveness or for effectiveness. A model is tinier. When you focus on analogies, you notice the differences. It can become a code. An icon. A symbol. The christian cross has no Jesus on it. A drawing of a knot shows something, but doesn’t secure anything. And when you tell a story, you miss 99% of it and you change the rhythm.

Noticing differences between two things, ideas, persons : a source of happy tension, thoughts, your brain stands up : enrichment.

 

You have your A? Find your B thing!

 

Thanks for reading!

826077231868110097_40270600.jpg

 

Advertisements

A possible Machine-Manifesto for afrenchtoolbox

Here’s to the ones who dream
Foolish as they may seem
Here’s to the hearts that ache
Here’s to the mess we make

She told me
“A bit of madness is key
To give us new colors to see

 

I could use a deleuzian concept for this blog : Machine… a word Gilles Deleuze used for S/Z of Roland Barthes, too. Those who know, will know.

My blog is a Machine, an entity which swallows things, ideas, concepts, memories, sights, life, quotes, website. Anything can enter my blog and will potentially come out a few paragraphs later like a little candypoo.

The machine itself is a bit quirky :

  • It’s changing all the time
  • It’s casual (because I’m an amateur, and… “I’ve seen things…”)
  • It’s multi-faceted
  • It contains plenty of little engines

 

Many little engines are indeed running in operation here.

  • Recycler (I use old letters, emails, diary, even my own blog)
  • Thief (I steal concepts from many books or articles, and I built up two bookshelves of “books with seeds” for this purpose).
  • Many mouths (sociology, music, art, psychology, parenting, etc).
  • Antennas. To guess.
  • Combiner that links ideas that should never be linked.
  • Microscope that searches tools, structures, patterns, skeletons.
  • Translation : I’m French and I write in English on purpose. Like a “necessary displacement”, an important decenterization. I needed it.
  • Collecting : I like to gather ideas like seashells, which will in the end draw something, globally.
  • Blender mixing concepts or domains to see what spillspurts out.
  • Frenchiness : I don’t work that much, I’m casual and I like to define my own rules. I’m disobedient. And certainly not steady. And I judge. Ohlalaaaaa.
  • A bunch of tools : a map drawer, a mirror, a fences jumper, a rules eroder, a veiled referencer.
  • Hydra : A child having fun. A storyteller. A thinker. A lover. A father. A bookseller.
  • Inchoater (“don’t finish, please, and let it opened”).
  • Grid : most of the time unappropriate, to see what it can see.
  • Energy. It’s been provided – at the beginning – by the golden knowledge that a splendid high-level of conversation can exist. It stayed in the machine, like a burning core. This core radioactivate a wave : SHARE.

 

This machine held me alive for a long time! Today it’s a part of me. A daily one. I’m this machine. I like to blog!

Most of the time, everything I put in it helps me to know who I am, what I want, what I’ve been through, what I wish, what makes me smiles.

This article was the meta-article of the month, yeyyyy.

Is your blog a machine too? What is YOUR machine made of? Do you need to decenter too? Why?

 

Have a great day!

 

Here’s to the mess we make

1339279204319285412_1204809845.jpg

Instagram : bodylanguage

 

Pecking ways & means of apprehend a work of art

#French #Blogging in #English : un Songe

Finder Keeper Sharer, “What is my blog about?”

 

 

Everybody’s talking about “golden voices”. But don’t you hear, when Emma Stone speaks at the beginning of the clip, that her voice is made of silver?? There’s a veil. It’s silver. Period.

Examining a problem with Valéry

In found this very little structure in Paul Valéry’s notebooks. I cut, bolded and translated my way. As it’s a “tool”, Mr Valéry won’t be angry (and well, he died in 1945). Where would we apply this screwdriver? How do I say “I will can”, in English? I’ll be able to? Hmm?

 

The spirit won’t be in a hurry to imagine what is necessary to considerate a problem.

it will examine, not caring about time & duration of the process.

Aware of the remarkable contrast between 1/ promptness, impatience and worries of the “heart” and 2/ this slowness, made of criticism and hope.

This lateness, this delay – which can can unlimited – has an effect : to transform the problem.

The transformed problem will be able to transform the questioner…

 

C360_2011-11-08 17-45-09.Share.jpg

 Also :

“To overcome one’s talents.

My skills unplease me.

My easy bores me. 

My difficult drives me”.

 

Event VS Structure

“Event VS Structure” – This is a title, right?

A philosophical problem I pick like a screwdriver, to examine it.

  1. A Structure, it can be a rule, a law, a “it’s the way things are”, a habit, a skeleton under things, an axle, a map, a followed road.
  2. An Event is what suddenly happens, it’s life, it’s a surprise, an accident, a happiness, a present, a mishap, a disturbance, a movement, a change.

 

This article is an invitation. The game will be : choose your structure, and invent an event :

Where do they touch? Is it good, bad? What happens? Can an event change a structure, or entertain it? Destroy it? What then? Is a new structure needed? Is there a thirst for other events? What is a suite of events? Can a structure hide another one? What triggered the event? Another structure? Can a structure contain an inner “events invention”? Do you have to protect the structure against events? Are there Metastructures? Do a structure USE events to grow, to increase knowledge, to breathe life in? What is a mutation? What is a call for event?

Structure : Battle? Symphony? Plan? Marriage? Company? Life? Body?

Suddenly, an Event. Mutation, change, disease, sudden victory, cut, inspiration, meeting another structure, thoughts, failure, ending, bend, ideas…

Does an event have a structure?

 

What do you choose to study?

 

Thanks for reading!

 

(anapaula380)11263642_1579985992255706_178525723_n.jpg

Instagram : anapaula

 

Hegel’s “Unhappy Consciousness” as a pattern for us all

ONE

People like to talk. They talk about things, or events. They talk about their life. That’s OK.

Only some people like to talk about concepts. If I meet someone who, instead of asking what I had for lunch, asks : “You’re French, do you think you have your own way to be skeptical? How?” – then sits and weaves a good two hours conversation with me about it, I want to keep this friend around me. No : I want to marry her!

TWO

What I do here is totally far-fetched, inappropriate and probably useless for almost all of us. What’s the point? I really don’t know. Maybe I’ll discover it while I write it?

THREE

“Unhappy Consciousness” is a concept from Hegel (Phenomenology of Spirit) – it’s very complicated, so… forget it. I just performed surgery on it to extract the pattern, the structure, the tool which is in it, then I wringunwrap it, just to see.

Hegel says “the Unhappy Consciousness is the consciousness of self as a dual-natured, merely contradictory being” : it can happen when you are in state A, you wish to reach a better state B, but there’s a moment you realize that you’re very far from it.

There’s a big gap (or a rift) between the reachable and the unreachable, the changeable and the unchangeable, and you understand it.

Euphoria meets the swamp of skepticism… You’re stuck. You met contradictions. Powerlessness. Stuck as a stuck.

Unhappy consciousness wishes relief from its misery, but it’s a surrender process which doesn’t work : thus a “perpetually self-engendered disorder”.

You have to let go. You need to take comfort. You have to find how. And you don’t.

This happens in Master-Slave couples, when the slave really tries to be exactly what his master wants him to be. Or more tricky : vice-versa. And it’s of course impossible.

FOUR :

What are other examples? How do you do – since you can not get out of it? What is it not as simple as “acceptance”? Do we have to wait? To find other paths? To admit we were wrong? Is it a selftrap? A spirit vicious circle turning like a hamster in its wheel between euphoria and despair?

FIVE :

Hegel seems to say that there’s a solution, though. It’s not in reason. It’s not in letting go. It’s not in surrender. All the logical solutions, at one point, fail and will fail.

It’s where I like it : Solutions are in the oblique.

It’s to forget some frames. To dare. To be crazy. Killing some rules. Finding the good sense of “idiocy”, the opening doors power of the fool’s wisdom. Stop the “desire to act in a comprehensible fashion”.

How to do that?

I don’t know!! Listen to strange advices? Take the wrong roads? Build on other territories of spirit? Kill your Gods and your certainties? Smell the winds? Jump where you never jumped? What is the Revolution you need?

Where do you apply that? In your couple? In your creativity? Religion? Politics? Where are you stuck in a far-fetched way? Can you feel the energy charging inside the stuckystuck situation?

 

Let Hegel play with our mind now. Amen :

“its enjoyment becomes a feeling of its own unhappiness”

 

Thanks for reading!

1310367807732597319_259996796.jpg

1492202461263185165_259996796.jpg

1363299956089230976_259996796.jpg

Instagram : itspeteski

Elbowing the Audience by killing the Suspension of Disbelief

“Opera is when a guy gets stabbed in the back and,
instead of bleeding, he sings.”
R. Benchley

 

ONE

If you go see a theater play, you have to make a deal with yourself, even if you even don’t realize you do it  :

“I accept to believe that these people on the scene are real”

If you don’t, you’ll watch actors making as if, that’s weird, right?

This is not new, of course : Coleridge (an English philosopher) called it Suspension of disbelief :

“a willingness to suspend one’s critical faculties and believe the unbelievable; sacrifice of realism and logic for the sake of enjoyment.”

You watch Braveheart on TV. You need your good “willing suspension of disbelief”, and if you don’t, you will laugh all along : you’ll see Mel Gibson (Australian actor) running in a skirt, pretending to fight for Scotland, hahaha.

And in a magic act, “an audience is not expected to actually believe that a woman is cut in half or transforms into a gorilla in order to enjoy the performance.”. Now imagine the work you have to do to accept an opera! 🙂

OK, you got the concept.

TWO

Creators and critics are aware of that. Nathalie Sarraute, a French writer, wrote a book (The Age of Suspicion), where she says that the novels’ readers less and less believe in the author “I know all” invention, and therefore that the writers tend to depersonalize the characters. Readers are more and more also critics, they analyze their pleasure, and you have to be smart and inventive to catch’em back.

In fact, this phenomenon appeared in many Arts.

  • In theater, directors began to play with the old “suspension of disbelief” trick : keeping the lights on in the room, allowing characters to call out to the audience.
  • In novels, the “omniscient narrator” began to speak to the reader (about his doubts, or the way the story was told).
  • In movies, characters suddenly watched the spectator, talking to him (Cf Pierrot le Fou, Godard).

THREE

I found this idea in interviews of movies directors like Billy Wilder, Alfred Hitchcock and Brian de Palma. Their idea is the same, I would formulate it like that :

“I KNOW for sure that I want to make movies for an audience who is AWARE that it’s a movie. I don’t want to put them in a classical “dream mode”, but I want to play with the audience with the fact a movie is like a clock, a fake funny mechanism MADE FOR HIM, therefore I constantly ELBOW THE AUDIENCE with nods, tricks, implausible twists and turns. They have fun not because they believe it, they have fun because they know I’m here with the scriptwriter working for their entertaining intelligence – so there!”.

So what is played here is not “sacrifice of realism and logic for the sake of enjoyment” any more, like in the normal Suspension of Disbelief. It’s a weaving between entertainment AND logic and realism. Inside the audience, the spectator AND the critic are dancing tango, with a smile. Intelligence is summoned, not only the dreaming capacities…

TOOL :

Where would you use this? Advertising? Poetry? Marketing? What would be a private joke to an audience? What is to elbow you spectators, and how to? Why? If you succeed, what happens?

You can also read : Strangeization.

Thanks for reading!

 

1127563067526986335_1204809845.jpg

Instagram : __bodylanguage__