• [3413]

    November Dennis Johnson de Heem. affinity to eastern sung landscape painting where somewhere somebody deep in landscape. had it been western one would ask why but no. let that monk or whhtever stay does not trouble panorama cf. much western music one recognize signature voice/sound be the thing

    what about background music/field music etc. do not sense presence of distant presence of somebody that does not interrupt the scenery still there

    distant friend not missing because company on same conditions as author


    13. Self
    Both praise and blame cause concern,
    For they bring people hope and fear.
    The object of hope and fear is the self -
    For, without self, to whom may fortune and disaster occur?

    Who distinguishes himself from the world may be given the world,
    But who regards himself as the world may accept the world

    see spoon [2411]
    Lao Tze : Dao De Jing [Tao Te Ching]
    Based on the translations of Robert G. Henricks, Lin Yutang, D.C. Lau, Ch'u Ta-Kao, Gia-Fu Feng & Jane English, Richard Wilhelm and Aleister Crowley.



  • [3411]

    Caravaggio. seek rest in painting

  • [3412]

    Piano sound sudden intonation at exact spot in space + fading coloring range of open strings and all around sounding chamber sing the air until lost for ears to hear cf. deaf ears (November by Dennis Johnson performed by Jeroen van Veen)

  • [2041]

    Newspaper report of court case, showing graphicallly sequence of events lead to automobile accident, triggered, said Wittgenstein, his picture theory of language. Later, back in Cambridge, economist friend Piero Sraffa delivered one of those characteristically Italian chin brush gestures delivered in face of imprudent fellow driver, asking Wittgenstein what  logical picture of that would be? Disarming riposte steering philosopher away from picture concept to navigating traffic-of-language instead

    Both early and late, traffic in focus i.e. basically: to account for sequence of events. Difference is between sequence and gesture of language. In other words: author steered away from language to paralanguage

    From steps of sequence to degrees of saturation


    Pronounced peace of individuality of column in tectonic terms: of carrying and carried. As in carriage of somebody standing like an argument no longer need be argued for cf. tight-rope walker does not argue for balance cf. human proportions reflected in architecture cf. Lao Tze, reflecting on ‘ritual’, section 38 of Dao De Jing (Tao Te Ching):

    Harmony does not care for harmony, and so is naturally attained.

    Greek understanding of harmony is not naturally attained but result from efforts of balancing conflicting intents extrapolation of which is compromise



    Watteau theatre built from one-by-one discrete street observations, scattered and in passage until captured on same see-through surface of the picture bring them together. Cartier-Bresson followed suit


    Consult in disarray of mid-life vague voice of fate as focal point of protagonist and persecutor surrounded by eye of mind of their audience


    Degas found his models backstage, his point of view that of stagehand avoided picture surface to coincide with invisible fourth wall of theatre cf. Manet, who in line with Le Nain and Watteau, let surface of picture co-occur with invisible fourth wall to support a view no deeper than distance to backdrop

    ‘Invisible fourth wall’ outdated concept in digital setting of pixeled era where implications of touching surface of canvas or other support superseded by targeting something in depth as in aiming/gaming where shooting instead of touch (brushwork) indeed prefigured by Duchamp who used toy-gun for The Nine Holes initiating the work and workings of The Large Glass

    Duchamp also provided for permeation of the screen of glass through The Draft Pistons (in The Milky Way or Top Inscription) modelled on thin gauze billowing curtained open attic window, imprint from childhood memory

    Beckett’s Endgame inspired by chess aficionado Duchamp. Notice Duchamp understanding of the chessboard as allowing for all kinds of ‘draft events’ blow through mind of beholder cf. Beckett film Film done back at time when films were screened by light projector

    Plot of Film: protagonist try put end to realm of depiction wherever happens, since seriously disturbed by fact that pictures look back from all around like from imprisonment of caged birds to feel sorry for example. Did not Beckett consider himself somebody look out through bars of own words? at best hope making those stripped scenes of waiting worthy of not feel sorry for cf. episode Buster Keaton cover with towel bird in cage

    There are eyes all around. If those eyes look back from pictures, turn them face the wall or put them away still projections tend to return/emerge unstoppably from all corners of mind persistently watching the world. As for instance that white shadow with a nail holding it to the wall left on wall after picture been removed (picture reminder). What imagination amounts to. Tricky indeed, since the Film goer in process of watching very screening of same film as something to be avoided

    Jan Malmsjö, in Beckett’s Krapp's Last Tape (November 24, 2017) Dramatiska teatern, Stockholm. Opening scene: complete obscurity then faintly breathing light rising/falling on Krapp, head bent down over table etc. In place of curtain, a screen of gauze so fine invisible adds but slight measure of diffused low light onto Krapp’s figure sitting behind it or/and as if projected on sparse mesh of stretched veil from behind. Hard to tell. Anyway, suddenly, with a thud, for a start/opening, curtain obviously loaded, falls to floor cf. bring down curtain at end of play. Scene stripped of protection/projection cf. relation between Krapp's taped and un-taped sound of his voice from thirty years earlier cf. draft events (Duchamp) between past and present

    Beckett much concerned with position and locality tied up with stage production, and feeding passage of voice or view, from a reel of film or tape of modern pre-digital media. And mix them, observant of Zustand of theatre on the one hand and inevitability of coming-to-an-end of film/tape. If not a loop

    Very thinness of film/tape, transparent foil cf. invisible fourth wall of theatre both thin and thick cf. Duchamp concept of ‘infra-mince’ (infra-thin) direct attention to permeability as key concept of imagination

    And, in Beckett’s Not I, speaker reduced to mouth pouring words until end of film/tape (TV production). Language as throat condition long as it lasts

    Does not articulation always depend on something so thin as to let imagery-of-imagination pass through? Does this not suggest an ever-growing mycelium of attempts rather than some set-of-rules served by signs and symbols, or by some prothesis (Deus ex machina) when nature fails? Where Duchamp introduce process of breathing (process of osmosis) as model of articulation

    Lonely tree sets the scene in En attendant Godot. Stay same locality throughout. Words take us nowhere. Stage as waiting-space but then different from waiting-room, rather ‘collects space’ like does a tree reaching out and around with its arms. Even if poor still gesture-of-embrace where little else to expect

    Waiting-space of waiting-room not to be filled out by browsing yesterday magazines, more like lingering as of d’après, pay attention to episodes of subtle articulation one would otherwise not even register cf. Heidegger (From J. Glenn Gray’s translation of Martin Heidegger’s Was heißt Denken? Vorlesung Wintersemester 1951/52 part one fourth lecture)

    We come and stand facing a tree, before it, and the tree faces, meets us. Which one is meeting here? The tree, or we? Or both? Or neither? We come and stand—just as we are and not merely with our head or our consciousness—facing the tree in bloom, and the tree faces, meets us as the tree it is. Or did the tree anticipate us and come before us? Did the tree come first to stand and face us, so that we might come forward and face-to-face with the tree?



  • [1953]

    Why Waiting for Godot played by prisoners in prison, why Shakespeare play-within-play, why box in box. Because words within walls. Wittgenstein A Lecture on Ethics:

    all men who ever tried to write or talk Ethics or Religion was to run against the boundaries of language. This running against the walls of our cage is perfectly, absolutely hopeless.

    Confer same author’s building-site example of language-game (PI 21) does it not have a certain Beckett feel to it?

    Imagine a language-game in which A asks and B reports the number of slabs or blocks in a pile, or the colours and shapes of the building-stones that are stacked in such-and-such a place. —Such a report might run: "Five slabs".  Now what is the difference between the report or statement "Five slabs" and the order "Five slabs!"? —Well, it is the part which uttering these words plays in the language-game.

    No walls but constructive language every word counts as part of operation: of making better place for doing something together, including ‘waiting’ cf. Shakespeare explore mirror-maze of mostly retaliative language

    Say Beckett home on stage is nowhere house of words, chosen and placed with care like those pieces of fruit in a Juan Sánchez Cotán still life against total dark of outside cf. homeless Shakespeare: words happen as excitations in field of energy relative to some momentary framework of a situation

    Imagine Beckett’s book Company as play for stage confined from all sides by invisible walls of no light at all. Would this be a boxed-in compartment? or open space. First sentence:

    A VOICE comes to one in the dark. Imagine.


    Diderot question whether actor felt or feigned cooks down to whether words and moves are prompted or deliberate. Reach down to state of insecurity of indecision (degrees of freedom of a system) produce forced silence and paralysis-of-embarrassment or the opposite: eruptive, faked or masked behavior, aspects of same unbalance, obvious to both actor and audience

    Eigenstate of uncertainty characterizes new theatre as when basically home turn strange place

    Confer Greek theatre, heavy on orientation: logic of location where reluctantly compelled to retrace one’s steps back to source of deep cut translate to language of sentence

    New theatre is heading nowhere, no path to follow no solution. Why new theatre comes close to pictorial rendition: no narrative but a telling state as in framed silence or faked company, on some screen of projection (Le Nain)

    Confer track and field, ballcourt rink et cetera, setting distinct limits to space of performance, even including penalty box, as well as, sometimes, divided stands of divided supporter clubs to pump up heat of event

    Wall and floor tend to differentiate sports from arts since leverage of action largely depend on negotiating weight and friction hence track and field, while imagination less so, hence screen or wall for perception to penetrate and explore. But all sorts of mixtures of course, squash sport for instance, engage both wall and floor in the game cf. Pollock, painted on floor but presented on wall. Duchamp’s chessboard on wall or floor no difference since mental space set weight at bay: for maze of mirror and window to be brought to the fore. Homestead Warhol for one of course