The arms, nodes would animate out kinda like a machine or a flow chart, but more like arms on a machine animation and typography style
See if I can find a clip of the inventor movie to show. I feel like ithoughts is the best thing to build this other then being able to show videos. But maybe still it makes most sense to build the script here in ithoughts and then see what my needs are before designing my solution digitally . But there is the whole questions and my anxiety around it, of how our tools shape our articulations and utterances, and I want to make sure I am developing this in a diological way, that is that the art emerging is from a conversation between my experiences and the imaginable possibilities for imagingning thinking and feeling them, and the assumptions and capabilities of the tools which I have to do that. It is identifying these points of greatest effect that I have measured down. It is our ability to play back against the worlds synthesis that is taking place, like the earth rotating, without our notice or content, so it at the points of say our tools and our development of them that we become and allow ourselves to be most human
gets to know one’s body, its limitations and possibilities, its social
distortions and possibilities of rehabilitation.
as a language that is living and present, not as a fi nished product
displaying images from the past:
simultaneously with the acting of the actors;
‘speaking’ through images made with the actors’ bodies;
in the dramatic action and act.
spectator-actor creates ‘spectacles’ according to his need to discuss
certain themes or rehearse certain actions.
Link: note/9FEF4163-09E1-4B36-92BB-745A1E1B32F9
The unfinished character of human beings and the transformational character of reality necessitate that education be an ongoing activity.
The Logic and Love of Language
Our Major Questions the Archive Is Built in conversation with
…
I AM ME.
Then this would transform (either D3 or greensock) into a bunch of different shapes (from the sqaure-so this is the first time we see the ‘canvas’ come alive) that represent me or are useful for the dynamic storytelling
AND I HAVE ADD
So language, as such, and our tools and methods of expressing them, have never been enough for me. Not with all this empathy all this need to enact “eugene Debbs words “ Your Honor, years ago I recognized my kinship with all living beings, and I made up my mind that I was not one bit better than the meanest on earth. I said then, and I say now, that while there is a lower class, I am in it, and while there is a criminal element I am of it, and while there is a soul in prison, I am not free.
“
And not with so many wounds to lick,
the empty places,
where all our family that could have been,
itches beneath our skin,
all holocaust to speak
and people to tell i love them
and telling other people I love (the them from last sentence-make script),
you jnwo when we got in trouble
or they were arrested for murder
and to much brother to tell everyone he was mine
too much adoption in other people’s mouth
sounded too much like an stericks
thats not how we use the word adoption in our family
ours is less asterisks and more exponent
more the small continuation of a former family next to David
he’s got an extra middle name then me
i don’t think its lost on my parents
we speak adoption all open and his birth siblings are all at my bar mitzvah and we
love weird and wide in my family and I want everyone to know it, so i need a more open language a more complete or complex or constellation like (maybe animate) way to say I miss you, through all this glass, i love you through all this life…
Which is usually amazingly, but on those days when it's not, I can be (and then flashing acts of different things
I've always felt a need to communicate, with people, our feelings.
Instead of the callouts like there are here, I would like each of these things to be able to have " that can be clicked visible or not. Which I guess I could do by using the parent kid nodes for this and have the kids of the node be the constellation, but then I would need to use the relationship generic lines for everything else. I think I need two types of visible abilities separate. Starting to build into a JavaScript?
The term consctentizagdo refers to learning to perceive social, political and
economic contradictions, and to take action against the oppressive elements of
reality. See chapter 3.—Translator s note.
the importance of defining family
Bakhtin
How do I want to introduce this, like how did it come into my life or become important in my life? And or how do i want to introduce it to the show
Extras
In his book (published under the name of V. N. Voloshinov) Marxism and the Philosophy of Language Bakhtin proceeds from basic
dualism: on one hand there are natural phenomena, objects of technique and consumer
articles, on the other there is a world of signs.
Communication and culture[edit]
****“Bakhtin’s life work can be understood as a critique of the monologization of the human experience that he perceived in the dominant linguistic, literary, philosophical, and political theories of his time."[54] True to his roots of social constructionism and post-modernism Bakhtin “was critical of efforts to reduce the unfinalizable, open, and multivocal process of meaning-making in determinate, closed, totalizing ways."[54] According to Bakhtin, the meaning found in any dialogue is unique to the sender and recipient based upon their personal understanding of the world as influenced by the socio-cultural background. “Bakhtin’s dialogism opens up space for communication scholars to conceive of difference in new ways” meaning they must take the background of a subject into consideration when conducting research into their understanding of any text as “a dialogic perspective argues that difference (of all kinds) is basic to the human experience."[54] Kim argues that “his ideas of art as a vehicle oriented towards interaction with its audience in order to express or communicate any sort of intention is reminiscent of Clifford Geertz’s theories on culture."[53] Culture and communication become inextricably linked to one another as one’s understanding, according to Bakhtin, of a given utterance, text, or message, is contingent upon their culture background and experience.
In relationship to our major questions, which again are:
What is our relationship to reality
Our Major Questions the Archive Is Built in conversation with
Dialogism extras
Wiki Def
The term “dialogism” is most commonly used to denote the quality of an instance of discourse that explicitly acknowledges that it is defined by its relationship to other instances, both past, to which it responds, and future, whose response it anticipates. The positive connotations of dialogism are often reinforced by a contrast with “monologism,” denoting the refusal of discourse to acknowledge its relational constitution and its misrecognition of itself as independent and unquestionably authoritative
“Weltanschauung, a point of view, an opinion are always expressed in words.”11 Or: “A human act is a potential text and can be understood (as human act, not physical functioning) only in the dialogic context of its time (as a replica, a meaningful position, a system of motives).”12 Human as subject is “a voice” that confronts other voices. Bakhtin borrowed the concept of language as Weltanschauung (with important changes, of course) from Wilhelm von Humboldt. For Bakhtin the language is the totality of world, the culture, … and could not in any case be construed as something that is added to the alleged actual reality.
But on the other hand, we have to consider the typical expressions and intonations connected to particular types or groups of utterances (speech genres), which make them social, not individual. It is apparent that the utterance is dialogic, i.e. it is actually a dialogue of different voices confronting one another. It is not important whether an utterance is monologic or polyphonic – it is fundamentally dialogic. An utterance is a point of view, a Weltanschauung, that doesn’t come out of nothing, but is always a response to other utterances by reusing them.
Bahktin “the word is always half someone elses”
Humpty Dumpty on Language
Priority: 2
'When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, 'it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.'
'The question is,' said Alice, 'whether you can make words mean so many different things.'
'The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, 'which is to be master — that's all.'
The word and the wor(l)d
Language and reality shape each other, which is really crazy if you think about it.
Figure out animation or something for this heavy
Maybe a poetic piece here to introduce with Bakhtin around Word(l)s—do I have any old writing around this that might work?
Utterances and Words
There are three factors determining an utterance.
First, there is the content with its objects and meaning
the whole quote is actually
“First, there is the content with its objects and meaning
(a theme being objective factor and an authorial concept a subjective factor).”
But i want to put the part in parenthesis somewhere else. Like on the back filmcard style? Or more tooltip?
And I’m also realizing that for this, and other times that I and other people use parenthesis we are using it to try and add a particular dimension of meaning, which I think is best understood as “contextual relationship clarification,” that is, putting the ideas we are articulating into conversation with one another, and other ideas, dialogically in fact, in a way that makes more clear our meaning of the ideas, which really exist(x2) in relationship to the world, and our meaning of it can’t be articulated in linear fashion where only spacing can be used to articulate or scribe what is really a multi dimensional constellation of meaning, and so we pathetically and with the least of hopes, bind our pleas for understanding between the embracing brackets of parenthesis and and smile back at each other hoping our meaning may be gathered like a welcome secret by someone other then us and the cannon of dead authors we are scribing to.
The second factor constitutive for an utterance is the expressiveness, the emotional-axiological relation of the speaker towards the content that could never be neutral while, of course, always being appropriated form other socially specific utterances.
Humpty Dumpty on Language
Priority: 2
'When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, 'it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.'
'The question is,' said Alice, 'whether you can make words mean so many different things.'
'The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, 'which is to be master — that's all.'
The third factor determining an utterance concerns the relationship of the speaker with the other and his utterances, the existing and the anticipated ones. An utterance transgresses its borders into past linguistic (semiotic, ideologic) formulations as their understanding, but also into the future ones by speaking to them; it tries to anticipate them in a particular form and considering a particular addressee (who is not just an empty form of the structuralist ideal reader). An utterance always attempts to reject the objections already while still
anticipating them. The dialogical “context” of an utterance (always an ideology, but not necessarily verbal discourse)] transgresses its boundaries (the interchange of speakers) both towards the inside and outside.
Signs and Symbols
Dialogics
To be heard” is itself a dialogic relationship. The word wants to be heard, understood, it wants to be an answer and again to reply a question and so on ad infinitum.31 Let’s add that the basic form of dialogic relationship is also agreement. There is neither a first nor a last word and there are no limits to the dialogic context (it extends into boundless past and boundless future). Even past meanings, that is, those born in the dialogue of past centuries, can never be stabile (finalized, ended once and for all) – they will always change (be renewed) in the process of subsequent, future development of the dialogue. […] There’s nothing absolutely dead: every meaning will have its homecoming festival.32 From what has been said, we can conclude that every utterance – or a word, which can be compared to an utterance as a whole33 – is an active element in an endless dialogue and, as such, a complex web of voices. The dialogism determines words intrinsically and their relationships to other words. Linguistic concepts, such as grammar, could never reach real relationships in a language. These are only heuristic tools useful for the analysis of dead (Classical) languages (where they were also developed) and for synchronic aspects of language.
All human “acts” (pustupok), all gestures, … are for Bakhtin “utterances” (vyskazyvanie). This is the central notion of Bakhtin’s philosophy of language. An utterance is an act, a social event of discursive relations (in its broadest sense).
“Directed toward its object, a word enters a dialogically agitated and tense environment of alien words, evaluations and accents, is woven into their complex interrelationships, merges with some, recoils from others, intersects with yet a third group: and all this may in an essential manner shape the word, may leave a trace in all its semantic layers, may complicate its expression and influence its entire stylistic profile. / The living utterance, having taken meaning and shape at a particular historical moment in a socially specific environment, cannot fail to brush up against thousands of living dialogic threads, woven by socio-ideological consciousness around the given object of the utterance; it cannot fail to become an active participant in social dialogue. Indeed, the utterance arises out of this dialogue as a continuation of it and as a rejoinder to it—it does not approach the
object from the sidelines” (Baxtin [1934/35] 1981: 276–77; translation modified).
Bakhtin explains the generation of meaning through the "primacy of context over text" (heteroglossia), the hybrid nature of language (polyglossia) and the relation between utterances (intertextuality).[ Heteroglossia is "the base condition governing the operation of meaning in any utterance."[ To make an utterance means to "appropriate the words of others and populate them with one's own intention."21 Bakhtin's deep insights on dialogicality represent a substantive shift from views on the nature of language and knowledge by major thinkers such as Ferdinand de Saussure and Immanuel Kant.[illustrate this splitting]
Caroline’s story vis a vi biologics and the word being half someone elses
*This dude is so complex to read, that even in all my neediness and love of obscura european philosophy in the line of Hegel and Marx, most of what I actually read and understand and process and take in to the world, is what other people have written about his ideas. Which seems appropriate given his inclination towards writing books under different names and playing in the mystic realm of authorship, as well as his ideas about words being shared, “the word is always half someone else’s,”so in that way we can all still feel close to the source and for the purpose of understanding ideas as discrete enough to consider and share, we shall have our conversation around ideas and language that we’ll attribute to the figure of Mikael Bakhtin. So let’s meet our Mysterious Russian School Teacher/Philosopher par excellence. (enter super hero bio here)
Real Name: Mikhail Mikhailovich Bakhtin
Temporal-Corporeal Reality: 1895 –1975
POWERS: To understand human processes of meaning making, and create language and models for understanding the interplay between humans, language, and reality. He is known today for his interest in a wide variety of subjects, ideas, vocabularies, and periods, as well as …his use of authorial disguises
ABILITIES: was a Russian philosopher, literary critic, semiotician[and scholar who worked on literary theory, ethics, and the philosophy of language. Group
Affiliations/WHO ARE YOUR PEOPLE:
ORIGIN/STORY: Bakhtin's works and ideas gained popularity after his death, and he endured difficult conditions for much of his professional life, a time in which information was often seen as dangerous and therefore often hidden. It is only after Bakhtin’s archives became public that scholars realized that much of what they thought they knew about the details of Bakhtin’s life was false or skewed largely by Bakhtin himself, including through his power of authorial disguise.
Bahktin and the 1000 black girl stories.
Link: pi.tedcdn.com/r/pe.tedcdn.com/images/ted/d8e551a456c32dfd2ba43b2c29135c246e7c5e74_2880x1620.jpg
its so good to have choreography improvisation scared the living daylights out of m-
me me me
Diologics?
Phases
1 The phrase
the thing
2 The thing as if I’m teaching it saying each move as i do it
why are they laughing were on the verge of the war…(go back and get exact words). Maybe do something with the audio and take it through more phases? Or put the sound and video and words and different parts (re)Constructed
Dialectics?
This is how the wor(l)ds work
Who is he what’s deal? (asks Annie) Introduce the way Ella Baker introduces people and then run a constructor function to introduce each person who is then introduced by different scripts that produce who the persons people are
Marx- Historical Materialism
I think I am taking this out in order to de-marx the forward facing cannon
Thesis on Freurbach
Feuerbach, consequently, does not see that the “religious sentiment” is itself a social product, and that the abstract individual whom he analyses belongs to a particular form of society.
Might be a good place to spin some arguments about how people talk about race, and how people talk…in a racist manner… —switch out religious sentiment with race, and maybe a bunch of things. Maybe this is a good moment to use some javascript to
Praxis
There is no
true word that is not at the same time a praxis.
Bahktin
Benjamin and Borges
Borges sets out to hunt down this metaphor through the centuries.
His sources are innumerable and unexpected. Borges has read everything, and especially what nobody reads any more: the Cabalists, the Alexandrine Greeks, medieval philosophers. His erudition is not profound -- he asks of it only flashes of lightning and ideas -- but it is vast. For example, Pascal wrote: "Nature is an infinite sphere whose center is everywhere, whose circumference is nowhere." Borges sets out to hunt down this metaphor through the centuries. He finds in Giordano Bruno (1584): "We can assert with certainty that the universe is all center, or that the center of the universe is everywhere and its circumference nowhere." But Giordano Bruno had been able to read in a twelfth-century French theologian, Alain de Lille, a formulation borrowed from the Corpus Hermeticum (third century): "God is an intelligible sphere whose center is everywhere and whose circumference is nowhere." Such researches, carried out among the Chinese as among the Arabs or the Egyptians, delight Borges, and lead
him to the subjects of his stories.
More about particular threads of (his)story that he is fascinated with
Among these fables or ideas, certain ones particularly fascinate him: that of Endless Recurrence, or the circular repetition of all the history of the world, a theme dear to Nietzsche; that of the dream within a dream; that of centuries that seem minutes and seconds that seem years ("The Secret Miracle"); that of the hallucinatory nature of the world. He likes to quote Novalis: "The greatest of sorcerers would be the one who would cast a spell on himself to the degree of taking his own phantasmagoria for autonomous apparitions. Might that not be our case?" Borges answers that indeed it is our case: it is we who have dreamed the universe. We can see in what it consists, the deliberately constructed interplay of the mirrors and mazes of this thought, difficult but always acute and laden with secrets. In all these stories we find roads that fork, corridors that lead nowhere, except to other corridors, and so on as far as the eye can see. For Borges this is an image of human thought, which endlessly makes its way through concatenations of causes and effects without ever exhausting infinity, and marvels over what is perhaps only inhuman chance. And why wander in these labyrinths? Once more, for aesthetic reasons; because this present infinity, these "vertiginous symmetries," have their tragic beauty. The form is more important than the content.
These kind of quotes, like the ones from Borges, could be used with that origami canvas trick and it might be and look really dope
Borges connection to Bakhtin, as he, like the movement.Surrealists, wasn’t satisfied with the boundaries of this earths (colonial) pieces of reality from which to make himself and his ideas known. So Borges would create new worlds and attempt to imagine new ways and possibilities of being, which by his very doing, makes them part of the reality from which we can imagine and articulate our existence. Borges built his own archive, “
Finding the forever truths-or Walter Benjamin’s Angel of History and Sankofa skim the eternal archives
The holocaust
Find a way to link this to each other time the holocaust has occurred or directly to and in between times and people and places
Subcomandante Marcos
What else has the motto shown up around as long as not all of us are free none of us are
MLK? Community or Chaos?
And I see these ideas, these fundamental truths, unfolding everywhere, like sunflower seeds sequencing the fibonacci pattern (animate that like from this node, animated poetry).
Suurealism
The important balance to Bhakti and Historical Materialism, the making of the means of our meaning making, the exploration of what could exist, and the bringing to life of those things to alter the very conditions that make up reality, and therefor (historical materialism connection to how history is made) new tools for us to intervene and to act as agents in shaping that world
And the importance of visual meptahors in all this.
Where are Friere and hooks and all that tuff? Get it
An activity?
A Poem?
Our Major Questions the Archive Is Built in conversation with
…
I AM ME.
Then this would transform (either D3 or greensock) into a bunch of different shapes (from the sqaure-so this is the first time we see the ‘canvas’ come alive) that represent me or are useful for the dynamic storytelling
AND I HAVE ADD
So language, as such, and our tools and methods of expressing them, have never been enough for me. Not with all this empathy all this need to enact “eugene Debbs words “ Your Honor, years ago I recognized my kinship with all living beings, and I made up my mind that I was not one bit better than the meanest on earth. I said then, and I say now, that while there is a lower class, I am in it, and while there is a criminal element I am of it, and while there is a soul in prison, I am not free.
“
And not with so many wounds to lick,
the empty places,
where all our family that could have been,
itches beneath our skin,
all holocaust to speak
and people to tell i love them
and telling other people I love (the them from last sentence-make script),
you jnwo when we got in trouble
or they were arrested for murder
and to much brother to tell everyone he was mine
too much adoption in other people’s mouth
sounded too much like an stericks
thats not how we use the word adoption in our family
ours is less asterisks and more exponent
more the small continuation of a former family next to David
he’s got an extra middle name then me
i don’t think its lost on my parents
we speak adoption all open and his birth siblings are all at my bar mitzvah and we
love weird and wide in my family and I want everyone to know it, so i need a more open language a more complete or complex or constellation like (maybe animate) way to say I miss you, through all this glass, i love you through all this life…
Which is usually amazingly, but on those days when it's not, I can be (and then flashing acts of different things
I've always felt a need to communicate, with people, our feelings.
Instead of the callouts like there are here, I would like each of these things to be able to have " that can be clicked visible or not. Which I guess I could do by using the parent kid nodes for this and have the kids of the node be the constellation, but then I would need to use the relationship generic lines for everything else. I think I need two types of visible abilities separate. Starting to build into a JavaScript?
The term consctentizagdo refers to learning to perceive social, political and
economic contradictions, and to take action against the oppressive elements of
reality. See chapter 3.—Translator s note.
the importance of defining family
Bakhtin
How do I want to introduce this, like how did it come into my life or become important in my life? And or how do i want to introduce it to the show
Extras
In his book (published under the name of V. N. Voloshinov) Marxism and the Philosophy of Language Bakhtin proceeds from basic
dualism: on one hand there are natural phenomena, objects of technique and consumer
articles, on the other there is a world of signs.
Communication and culture[edit]
****“Bakhtin’s life work can be understood as a critique of the monologization of the human experience that he perceived in the dominant linguistic, literary, philosophical, and political theories of his time."[54] True to his roots of social constructionism and post-modernism Bakhtin “was critical of efforts to reduce the unfinalizable, open, and multivocal process of meaning-making in determinate, closed, totalizing ways."[54] According to Bakhtin, the meaning found in any dialogue is unique to the sender and recipient based upon their personal understanding of the world as influenced by the socio-cultural background. “Bakhtin’s dialogism opens up space for communication scholars to conceive of difference in new ways” meaning they must take the background of a subject into consideration when conducting research into their understanding of any text as “a dialogic perspective argues that difference (of all kinds) is basic to the human experience."[54] Kim argues that “his ideas of art as a vehicle oriented towards interaction with its audience in order to express or communicate any sort of intention is reminiscent of Clifford Geertz’s theories on culture."[53] Culture and communication become inextricably linked to one another as one’s understanding, according to Bakhtin, of a given utterance, text, or message, is contingent upon their culture background and experience.
In relationship to our major questions, which again are:
What is our relationship to reality
Our Major Questions the Archive Is Built in conversation with
Dialogism extras
Wiki Def
The term “dialogism” is most commonly used to denote the quality of an instance of discourse that explicitly acknowledges that it is defined by its relationship to other instances, both past, to which it responds, and future, whose response it anticipates. The positive connotations of dialogism are often reinforced by a contrast with “monologism,” denoting the refusal of discourse to acknowledge its relational constitution and its misrecognition of itself as independent and unquestionably authoritative
“Weltanschauung, a point of view, an opinion are always expressed in words.”11 Or: “A human act is a potential text and can be understood (as human act, not physical functioning) only in the dialogic context of its time (as a replica, a meaningful position, a system of motives).”12 Human as subject is “a voice” that confronts other voices. Bakhtin borrowed the concept of language as Weltanschauung (with important changes, of course) from Wilhelm von Humboldt. For Bakhtin the language is the totality of world, the culture, … and could not in any case be construed as something that is added to the alleged actual reality.
But on the other hand, we have to consider the typical expressions and intonations connected to particular types or groups of utterances (speech genres), which make them social, not individual. It is apparent that the utterance is dialogic, i.e. it is actually a dialogue of different voices confronting one another. It is not important whether an utterance is monologic or polyphonic – it is fundamentally dialogic. An utterance is a point of view, a Weltanschauung, that doesn’t come out of nothing, but is always a response to other utterances by reusing them.
Bahktin “the word is always half someone elses”
Humpty Dumpty on Language
Priority: 2
'When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, 'it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.'
'The question is,' said Alice, 'whether you can make words mean so many different things.'
'The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, 'which is to be master — that's all.'
The word and the wor(l)d
Language and reality shape each other, which is really crazy if you think about it.
Figure out animation or something for this heavy
Maybe a poetic piece here to introduce with Bakhtin around Word(l)s—do I have any old writing around this that might work?
Utterances and Words
There are three factors determining an utterance.
First, there is the content with its objects and meaning
the whole quote is actually
“First, there is the content with its objects and meaning
(a theme being objective factor and an authorial concept a subjective factor).”
But i want to put the part in parenthesis somewhere else. Like on the back filmcard style? Or more tooltip?
And I’m also realizing that for this, and other times that I and other people use parenthesis we are using it to try and add a particular dimension of meaning, which I think is best understood as “contextual relationship clarification,” that is, putting the ideas we are articulating into conversation with one another, and other ideas, dialogically in fact, in a way that makes more clear our meaning of the ideas, which really exist(x2) in relationship to the world, and our meaning of it can’t be articulated in linear fashion where only spacing can be used to articulate or scribe what is really a multi dimensional constellation of meaning, and so we pathetically and with the least of hopes, bind our pleas for understanding between the embracing brackets of parenthesis and and smile back at each other hoping our meaning may be gathered like a welcome secret by someone other then us and the cannon of dead authors we are scribing to.
The second factor constitutive for an utterance is the expressiveness, the emotional-axiological relation of the speaker towards the content that could never be neutral while, of course, always being appropriated form other socially specific utterances.
Humpty Dumpty on Language
Priority: 2
'When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, 'it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.'
'The question is,' said Alice, 'whether you can make words mean so many different things.'
'The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, 'which is to be master — that's all.'
The third factor determining an utterance concerns the relationship of the speaker with the other and his utterances, the existing and the anticipated ones. An utterance transgresses its borders into past linguistic (semiotic, ideologic) formulations as their understanding, but also into the future ones by speaking to them; it tries to anticipate them in a particular form and considering a particular addressee (who is not just an empty form of the structuralist ideal reader). An utterance always attempts to reject the objections already while still
anticipating them. The dialogical “context” of an utterance (always an ideology, but not necessarily verbal discourse)] transgresses its boundaries (the interchange of speakers) both towards the inside and outside.
Signs and Symbols
Dialogics
To be heard” is itself a dialogic relationship. The word wants to be heard, understood, it wants to be an answer and again to reply a question and so on ad infinitum.31 Let’s add that the basic form of dialogic relationship is also agreement. There is neither a first nor a last word and there are no limits to the dialogic context (it extends into boundless past and boundless future). Even past meanings, that is, those born in the dialogue of past centuries, can never be stabile (finalized, ended once and for all) – they will always change (be renewed) in the process of subsequent, future development of the dialogue. […] There’s nothing absolutely dead: every meaning will have its homecoming festival.32 From what has been said, we can conclude that every utterance – or a word, which can be compared to an utterance as a whole33 – is an active element in an endless dialogue and, as such, a complex web of voices. The dialogism determines words intrinsically and their relationships to other words. Linguistic concepts, such as grammar, could never reach real relationships in a language. These are only heuristic tools useful for the analysis of dead (Classical) languages (where they were also developed) and for synchronic aspects of language.
All human “acts” (pustupok), all gestures, … are for Bakhtin “utterances” (vyskazyvanie). This is the central notion of Bakhtin’s philosophy of language. An utterance is an act, a social event of discursive relations (in its broadest sense).
“Directed toward its object, a word enters a dialogically agitated and tense environment of alien words, evaluations and accents, is woven into their complex interrelationships, merges with some, recoils from others, intersects with yet a third group: and all this may in an essential manner shape the word, may leave a trace in all its semantic layers, may complicate its expression and influence its entire stylistic profile. / The living utterance, having taken meaning and shape at a particular historical moment in a socially specific environment, cannot fail to brush up against thousands of living dialogic threads, woven by socio-ideological consciousness around the given object of the utterance; it cannot fail to become an active participant in social dialogue. Indeed, the utterance arises out of this dialogue as a continuation of it and as a rejoinder to it—it does not approach the
object from the sidelines” (Baxtin [1934/35] 1981: 276–77; translation modified).
Bakhtin explains the generation of meaning through the "primacy of context over text" (heteroglossia), the hybrid nature of language (polyglossia) and the relation between utterances (intertextuality).[ Heteroglossia is "the base condition governing the operation of meaning in any utterance."[ To make an utterance means to "appropriate the words of others and populate them with one's own intention."21 Bakhtin's deep insights on dialogicality represent a substantive shift from views on the nature of language and knowledge by major thinkers such as Ferdinand de Saussure and Immanuel Kant.[illustrate this splitting]
Caroline’s story vis a vi biologics and the word being half someone elses
*This dude is so complex to read, that even in all my neediness and love of obscura european philosophy in the line of Hegel and Marx, most of what I actually read and understand and process and take in to the world, is what other people have written about his ideas. Which seems appropriate given his inclination towards writing books under different names and playing in the mystic realm of authorship, as well as his ideas about words being shared, “the word is always half someone else’s,”so in that way we can all still feel close to the source and for the purpose of understanding ideas as discrete enough to consider and share, we shall have our conversation around ideas and language that we’ll attribute to the figure of Mikael Bakhtin. So let’s meet our Mysterious Russian School Teacher/Philosopher par excellence. (enter super hero bio here)
Real Name: Mikhail Mikhailovich Bakhtin
Temporal-Corporeal Reality: 1895 –1975
POWERS: To understand human processes of meaning making, and create language and models for understanding the interplay between humans, language, and reality. He is known today for his interest in a wide variety of subjects, ideas, vocabularies, and periods, as well as …his use of authorial disguises
ABILITIES: was a Russian philosopher, literary critic, semiotician[and scholar who worked on literary theory, ethics, and the philosophy of language. Group
Affiliations/WHO ARE YOUR PEOPLE:
ORIGIN/STORY: Bakhtin's works and ideas gained popularity after his death, and he endured difficult conditions for much of his professional life, a time in which information was often seen as dangerous and therefore often hidden. It is only after Bakhtin’s archives became public that scholars realized that much of what they thought they knew about the details of Bakhtin’s life was false or skewed largely by Bakhtin himself, including through his power of authorial disguise.
Bahktin and the 1000 black girl stories.
Link: pi.tedcdn.com/r/pe.tedcdn.com/images/ted/d8e551a456c32dfd2ba43b2c29135c246e7c5e74_2880x1620.jpg
its so good to have choreography improvisation scared the living daylights out of m-
me me me
Diologics?
Phases
1 The phrase
the thing
2 The thing as if I’m teaching it saying each move as i do it
why are they laughing were on the verge of the war…(go back and get exact words). Maybe do something with the audio and take it through more phases? Or put the sound and video and words and different parts (re)Constructed
Dialectics?
This is how the wor(l)ds work
Who is he what’s deal? (asks Annie) Introduce the way Ella Baker introduces people and then run a constructor function to introduce each person who is then introduced by different scripts that produce who the persons people are
Marx- Historical Materialism
I think I am taking this out in order to de-marx the forward facing cannon
Thesis on Freurbach
Feuerbach, consequently, does not see that the “religious sentiment” is itself a social product, and that the abstract individual whom he analyses belongs to a particular form of society.
Might be a good place to spin some arguments about how people talk about race, and how people talk…in a racist manner… —switch out religious sentiment with race, and maybe a bunch of things. Maybe this is a good moment to use some javascript to
Praxis
There is no
true word that is not at the same time a praxis.
Bahktin
Benjamin and Borges
Borges sets out to hunt down this metaphor through the centuries.
His sources are innumerable and unexpected. Borges has read everything, and especially what nobody reads any more: the Cabalists, the Alexandrine Greeks, medieval philosophers. His erudition is not profound -- he asks of it only flashes of lightning and ideas -- but it is vast. For example, Pascal wrote: "Nature is an infinite sphere whose center is everywhere, whose circumference is nowhere." Borges sets out to hunt down this metaphor through the centuries. He finds in Giordano Bruno (1584): "We can assert with certainty that the universe is all center, or that the center of the universe is everywhere and its circumference nowhere." But Giordano Bruno had been able to read in a twelfth-century French theologian, Alain de Lille, a formulation borrowed from the Corpus Hermeticum (third century): "God is an intelligible sphere whose center is everywhere and whose circumference is nowhere." Such researches, carried out among the Chinese as among the Arabs or the Egyptians, delight Borges, and lead
him to the subjects of his stories.
More about particular threads of (his)story that he is fascinated with
Among these fables or ideas, certain ones particularly fascinate him: that of Endless Recurrence, or the circular repetition of all the history of the world, a theme dear to Nietzsche; that of the dream within a dream; that of centuries that seem minutes and seconds that seem years ("The Secret Miracle"); that of the hallucinatory nature of the world. He likes to quote Novalis: "The greatest of sorcerers would be the one who would cast a spell on himself to the degree of taking his own phantasmagoria for autonomous apparitions. Might that not be our case?" Borges answers that indeed it is our case: it is we who have dreamed the universe. We can see in what it consists, the deliberately constructed interplay of the mirrors and mazes of this thought, difficult but always acute and laden with secrets. In all these stories we find roads that fork, corridors that lead nowhere, except to other corridors, and so on as far as the eye can see. For Borges this is an image of human thought, which endlessly makes its way through concatenations of causes and effects without ever exhausting infinity, and marvels over what is perhaps only inhuman chance. And why wander in these labyrinths? Once more, for aesthetic reasons; because this present infinity, these "vertiginous symmetries," have their tragic beauty. The form is more important than the content.
These kind of quotes, like the ones from Borges, could be used with that origami canvas trick and it might be and look really dope
Borges connection to Bakhtin, as he, like the movement.Surrealists, wasn’t satisfied with the boundaries of this earths (colonial) pieces of reality from which to make himself and his ideas known. So Borges would create new worlds and attempt to imagine new ways and possibilities of being, which by his very doing, makes them part of the reality from which we can imagine and articulate our existence. Borges built his own archive, “
Finding the forever truths-or Walter Benjamin’s Angel of History and Sankofa skim the eternal archives
The holocaust
Find a way to link this to each other time the holocaust has occurred or directly to and in between times and people and places
Subcomandante Marcos
What else has the motto shown up around as long as not all of us are free none of us are
MLK? Community or Chaos?
And I see these ideas, these fundamental truths, unfolding everywhere, like sunflower seeds sequencing the fibonacci pattern (animate that like from this node, animated poetry).
Suurealism
The important balance to Bhakti and Historical Materialism, the making of the means of our meaning making, the exploration of what could exist, and the bringing to life of those things to alter the very conditions that make up reality, and therefor (historical materialism connection to how history is made) new tools for us to intervene and to act as agents in shaping that world
And the importance of visual meptahors in all this.
Where are Friere and hooks and all that tuff? Get it