GRADUATION RESEARCH MESS

Alexis Shotwell Against Purity; Living ethically in compromised times

The cows are eating a piece of grass going through a vortex
They are facing forward, seemingly either unaware or uncaring. There doesnt seem to be other grass to eat. The rest of the grass is warped, but we dont know if its accesible or not.

We are tied to things we are against bc global capitalism
We are born into this world impure

The problem isn't our complicity in this compromised and impure world. The
problem is that we fail to recognize impurity as an acceptable, and perhaps even preferable state,or at least an inevitable one

: "there is no primordial state we might wish to get back to, no Eden we have desecrated, no pretoxic body we might uncover through enough chia seeds and kombucha. There is not a preracial state we could access, erasing histories of slavery, forced labor on railroads, colonialism, genocide, and their concomitant responsibilities and requirements. There is no food we can eat, clothing we can buy, or energy we can use without deepening our ties to complex webs of suffering" (4). So, instead, Shotwell asks, "what happens if we start from there?"
Shotwell suggests that naturalism, which prioritizes noticing rather than classifying the environment and other beings in it, is one route to replacing problematic purist narratives

Purity is impossible when it comes to the ethics of eating, energy consumption, or climate change. We are all embodied and therefore reliant on others for the survival of our embodied selves. Shotwell considers the "conundrum eating invokes" (108) and how privilege enables some of us to appear free to make more ethical choices (such as buying "green" products).
For Shotwell, we have choices to make about the future, and we ought to
have reasons that motivate these choices, but purity is not one of them (because it is a myth).

The charioteer stands upright in a vehicle drawn by two magical horses/sphynxes, one black, one white, representing the opposing forces in human nature. There are no reins. the horses are commanded by the sheer will of the charioteer, the invisible reins of the mind.

The canopy is covered with start symbolising our cosmic origins. On the shoulders of the charioteer are two half moons, which link him to the power of the moon and indicate his mastery over fluctuations of emotional energy. The chariot moves away from a walled city which is now quite distant.

The body is a chariot, the horses are the senses, the reins are the mind, and the charioteer is the intellect. The master of the chariot is the Self

I need to be even more of an observer, and try not to place labels on things

PAGE 68

https://www.ted.com/talks/ramesh_raskar_imaging_at_a_trillion_frames_per_second

https://www.amazon.com/Mind-Beyond-Matter-Mandela-Effect-ebook/dp/B07D69WXSG/ref=tmm_kin_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=&sr=

As a final point, removing the sweet spot entirely is not simple, as the audience to some degree must remain more or less within the limits of a cluster of loudspeakers, which perhaps makes the cluster a new, wider sweet spot. But if the sweet spot describes the room, it should also be possible to add microphones (and afterwards speakers) outside of the cluster, so we would recreate the outer walls acoustically, or even the outer world. In the end, the limit becomes physical and technical — or should we say the limit becomes our chosen stage.


Besides, what would be the point in mapping the entire world one-to-one anyway?

https://www.inverse.com/culture/quantum-physics-art

A writer and drag queen explains the connections between surrealism and subatomic particles.

Classical superposition states what we all know to be true: two things can interact with each other, like a duck swimming over water. Crucially, in the seen world these objects do not become each other. If you look at a picture of a duck on water, you could assign the water the label “0” and the duck “1,” confident that you could identify each.

On the quantum level, subatomic particles can become entangled, meaning that exist on any number of levels at the same time. The duck is on the water, but the duck has also become the water, and the water has become the duck, and also the duck is off in the park nowhere near the water, and also the water doesn’t exist, all at the same time. You can assign the labels “0” and “1” again, but you’ll also have to assign 0.1, 0.001, and every other number in between.

ART + QUANTUM

https://www.kcl.ac.uk/news/seeing-the-unthinkable-kings-artists-project-combines-quantum-physics-and-art-to-explore-the-invisible

https://insighbart.com/quantizing-art-movement-manifesto/

https://we-make-money-not-art.com/entangle-contemporary-art-and-physics/

https://qns.science/paul/

https://www.chessvariants.com/page/MSyin-yang-principle-and-chess-continuation-of-optimal-design

This process gives all the right information, but it also requires a lot of measurements and spits out plentiful "disallowed" states that don't follow the laws of physics to boot.

MEGAPIXEL IMAGES 4 VIDEO

https://www.in2white.com/#

https://pf.bigpixel.cn/en-US/pano/772196334345129984.html

https://www.jeffrey-martin.com/gigapixel-photography