Quotes

[Ahimsa]

“I call architecture frozen music.”

— Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

[Acéphale]

Our hands full or not: The same abundance.
Our eyes open or shut: The same light.

-- Yves Bonnefoy

[interest1]

I'm quoting a wall. (•̪●)>

[Faust]

"Chip was struck by the broad similarities between black-market Lithuania and free-market America. In both countries, wealth was concentrated in the hands of a few; any meaningful distinction between private and public sectors had disappeared; captains of commerce lived in a ceaseless anxiety that drove them to expand their empires ruthlessly; ordinary citizens lived in ceaseless fear of being fired and ceaseless confusion about which powerful private interest owned which formerly public institution on any given day; and the economy was fueled largely by the elite's insatiable demand for luxury. The main difference between America and Lithuania, as far as Chip could see, was that in America the wealthy few subdued the unwealthy many by means of mind-numbing and soul-killing entertainments and gadgetry and pharmaceuticals, whereas in Lithuania the powerful few subdued the unpowerful many by threatening violence."

Jonathan Franzen, The Corrections

[Fuuma]

"I challenge any art lover to love a canvas as much as a fetishist loves a shoe."
— Georges Bataille, "L’esprit moderne et le jeu des transpositions," Documents, 1930.

Pleasure only starts once the worm has got into the fruit, to become delightful happiness must be tainted with poison.

[trentk]

Walter Benjamin on street style photographers? (In the 30's nonetheless)

"The flaneur plays the role of scout in the marketplace. As such, he is also the explorer of the crowd. Within the man who abandons hinlself to it, the crowd inspires a sort of drunkenness, one accompanied by very specific illusions: the man flatters himself that, on seeing a passerby swept along by the crowd, he has accurately classified him, seen straight through to the innermost recesses of his soul-all on the basis of his external appearance. Physiologies of the time abound in evidence of tins singular conception. Balzac's work provides excellent examples. The typical characters seen in passersby make such an impression on the senses that one cannot be surprised at the resultant curiosity to go beyond them and capture the special singularity of each person. But the nightmare that corresponds to the illusory perspicacity of the aforementioned physiognomist consists in seeing those distinctive traits-traits peculiar to the person-revealed to be nothing more than the elements of a new type; so that in the final analysis a person of the greatest individuality would turn out to be the exemplar of a type. This points to an agonizing phantasmagoria at the heart of flanerie. Baudelaire develops it with great vigor in "Les Sept Vieillards:' a poem that deals with the seven-fold apparition of a repulsive-looking old man. This individual, presented as always the same in his multiplicity, testifies to the anguish of the city dweller who is unable to break the magic circle of the type even though he cultivates the most eccentric peculiarities. Baudelaire describes this procession as "infernal" in appearance. But the newness for which he was on the lookout all his life consists in nothing other than this phantasmagoria of what is "always the same'"

[Faust]

Street photographer as the contemporary flaneur is an interesting concept! However, I doubt Sarty knows who Benjamin is. Maybe the Facehunter does, since the Frenchies still read philosophy. Gringos don't.

So, here is the question. Does philosophizing about people who have no philosophical intentions validates their activities somehow or is it another exercises in blowing hot air?

[galia]

Why validate? The purpose is analysis

[laika]

^ha! perfectly and succinctly said.

if only i could get my students to make this distinction....

[Faust]

Why validate? The purpose is analysis

Validate was the wrong word, I guess. What I meant was, does the philosopher look too hard at something that simply isn't there? I mean, really, Sarty as flauner?

[Fuuma]

Validate was the wrong word, I guess. What I meant was, does the philosopher look too hard at something that simply isn't there? I mean, really, Sarty as flauner?

You are positing that being the subject of critical analysis makes one inherently more worthy or maybe that engaging in certain type of activities (art, philosophy) make one inherently more worthy. Lots of bad artists out there and I don't see how it ennobles them.

[Faust]

You are positing that being the subject of critical analysis makes one inherently more worthy or maybe that engaging in certain type of activities (art, philosophy) make one inherently more worthy. Lots of bad artists out there and I don't see how it ennobles them.

No, I am positing that one person imagining what another one is doing, while he's doing nothing of the sort might lead to incorrect analysis. For example, Sarty taking pictures of people in front of fashion shows so he can be a famous blogger and make money does not make him a flaneur.

[laika]

^i think you're taking the figure of the flaneur too literally.
it's less a historic person than an analytical concept, I believe. it exists because of, and through analysis.

I don't know that the flaneur concept suits (ha ha) sarty's activities, but it's a problem of fit, not over analysis.

[PoubelleMaBelle]

ultimately i don't think you can see it as incorrect analysis. intent of opinion doesn't matter if it's not perceived / understood. & so who cares if it's 'incorrect' as long as it's interesting & well-reasoned. cf. doxa...
-----

[Fuuma]

Everything is permitted but nothing is possible.