|
we are going to read out the paper
everything we produce we are already appropriating
you know something about the person who wrote it
the poet is the intentional and the scientist the perceptual
why so many people are interested in the life of an author
passionate desire to know about jane austins life
the intentional is more abstract than the physical
scientist can not be purely objective
the nature of the piece is that you can prove the fact
wanting to now facts to validate them
What about authur c clarke
we have read the paper out loud
"Meta_Guest says, ""ok, i've got it here"
there is no fourth point do you have it
some who painted a illuminated manuscript did not matter are we going back to that
Meta_Guest says, "yes..the fourth point is that the author function does not refer to a real individual..."
making the author the celebrity to sell the product
"Meta_Guest says, "no, not at all....foucault is about how the 'author is created in discourse...or the author function is created in discourse"
Meta_Guest says, "In what is an author Foucault aims to distinguish between the modern and postmodern view of the author/artist...to shift from the modernist notions of individuality, intentionally and genius"
we construct the author through discourse, like the celebrity intellectual"
"Meta_Guest says, "In postmodernism, the focus is on how the 'author function is produced and reproduced"
more written about the brontes writing
"Meta_Guest says, "yes, but the actual person is not important it is the construction...the author's name is a proper name
Meta_Guest says, "yes, or Shakespeare or Foucault for that matter "
if we dont have the tools to look around then they dont exist"
we have got better at illustrating things
now we discuss reality
"Meta_Guest says, "To go back to Foucault's discussion of the author function..There is nothing outside of discourse."
paint does stuff that you now and that is not about discourse
Meta_Guest says, "I'm sending down a quote for you - Foucault says - referring only to itself, but without being restricted to the confines of its exteriority, writing (or art) is identified with its own unfolded exteriority" What do you think of that?"
if the belief has changed the world still is going on
"Meta_Guest says, "But (taking a Foucauldian position) we can only know the world through our discursive frames"
I will read it out soon
no lapse in things being recorded
what do you mean by exteriority
where do you go past foucult deconstructing everything
we build in terms of a culturalisations of our spaces
Meta_Guest says, "I'm going to type in the whole paragraph to put that statement in context p102 of What is an Author ---First of ally, we can say that today's writing has freed itself from the dimension of expression. Referring only to itself, but without being restricted to the confines of its inferiority, writing is identified with it s own unfolded exteriority. This means that it is an interplay of signs arranged less according to its signified content than according to the very nature of the signifier. Writing unfolds like a game (jeu) that invariably goes beyond its own rules and transgresses its limits. In writing, the point is not to manifest or exalt the act of writing, nor is it to pin a subject within language" it is, rather, a question of creating a space into which the writing subject constantly disappears."
Meta_Guest says, "Yes that notion of culturalization is important - exteriority is concerned with the fact that the signifier has social meanings - there is not interior meaning ie. intentionality, origination, individuality - author is a site through which on which institutional discourses operate...it is a position quite opposite to Donalds I think. he doesn't go much for the social"
Meta_Guest says, "Not institutions - institutional discourses"
there is a fragmentation of single viewpoint
you have to work with language
the net is a metaphor for language not an institution
Meta_Guest says, "institutional discourses meaning legal discourses, science discourses, art historical discourses, medical discourses etc...it is those that create the discourse
Meta_Guest says, "yes it is all about language
how can you mess with the signifier of the computer
you can replace establishment with morals or values
it has a value because you work on it
it is built around pure construction
it translate in to myth
my worry is the return to the dark ages
what did the American empire give to the world
the role of television
consumer capitalism
disney does not work in europe
clash with reality
it is this idea of a vacuum
blur the edges between the disciplines
the ideology of choice
nine up at the same time
why have they done this
do we want that
touch serious concerns
you have boundaries which ever one still attends
values is a difficult one
we perceive there is a problem
cooperating with a mulit national company
take a position that has amnesia to these thing rather look at the way things are
we are all part of the mining deal
to have contradictions in a model is important
you are actually in it
the concept of value
there is a lot of bad public art
value for money
best practice
8.4.98 / 22.4.98
|
