Never has one man done so much for so cheap.

Monday, January 14, 2008


Subcutaneous gloss enhancement natural glow healthy skin execute your purchasing decision

what is the knowledge what is the purpose

new time process directive knowledge of power is not necessarily the knowledge that is power nor is power inherently knowledge

the power of ignorance can be very strong indeed to wit popular support of American foreign policy from oh, say, the Spanish-American war to the present.

who are we and what the hell are we doing

the right hand knows not what the left hand is doing even when one hand washes the other

Cold Dissociative

Expansion transknowledge overflow design rupture a glimpse at the code behind the clay exterior soft and malleable with the pale pink-amber glow of a heart that is sun furnace Body and Sol behind skintight thick flesh

Palpability. Tangibility. Daaamn right.

and can you touch it can you hold it in your hand what does it speak to you what does it say it's sunshine it's so fine it's the word love in a language that lacks the faculties to understand it, knowing only how to sell it, or the want of it, the primordial subhuman subrational Want, all-conquering, all-powerful, universally satisfying like a brand new iPod.

You know it, I know it, the American people -are- it, it is them, they are that, that is ours, I am you, you are us, we are me, together.

Truth and Satisfaction need not be mutually exclusive. Find me the rare ground where they overlap and I'll build a house there. Cheap enough if nobody's looking to buy, and who would when they don't even know it exists, if it exists. The name of the town is Chimera, the only constant is change, there is no rest for the wicked, and there is no alternative to wickedness. All have sinned and fall short of the glory of God. And in the lattitude afforded by universal truth, you can say what you want and be who you are and not necessarily make things any more difficult for yourself save for the attitudes and inclinations of your adjacent social tangents.

You don't know it, but you can choose your own vectors. Look at the people and objects around you and study their speed and direction. An agile solid can move out of the way. A liquid is wide-ranging but still selective, however beholden to a material instability. Vapors are omnipresent and here we go from the righteous solid to the stone solid gas.

Texture, then, is the metaphor. Is the reflection of our gloss a conscious echo of the world around us or an impenetrable chameleon shell? the mirror candy placebo? when we see only what we want to see, will it be more than just ourselves?

Can't get it right, probably more thought than is necessary, too far away from touching another human being to know and it is damn hell of impossible to spoon yourself.

Woman [universal], where are you in my landscape?

Tuesday, January 01, 2008

Each choice is a fiction

The documentary is always a sort of creative adaptation of reality, regardless of whether the camera acts as "a fly on the wall" or a voice-over commentary intervenes and interprets the pictures for the viewer. In Filmmaskinen (1979) Jørgen Leth phrases it a bit differently:

Each choice is a fiction. That's how it is in my consciousness, anyway. Innocence is irretrievably lost (Leth, 1979, p. 123; our translation).

Further down the same page in Filmmaskinen, Jørgen Leth also writes: "Like a membrane, style (a series of choices) is pulled down over the authentic material." But the main issue must be how thick this membrane is – whether reality, so to speak, suffocates. And that depends on the degree of intervention, how the cinematic technique is used, and how the material is edited.

All documentaries are somewhere in between inventing and capturing reality, between the subjective and the objective, and although the distance between the two poles is short, you should reflect on where your film is placed between these poles. To what extent is your film obliged to depict reality? Are you inventing your own representations of real life in order to make reality more distinct? Are you placing authentic people in situations that they wouldn't otherwise have been in (as is the case with Nanook in Robert Flaherty's classic documentary Nanook of the North (1920-22))? Are you writing their lines and instructing them on playing themselves (as in Jon Bang Carlsen's It's Now or Never (1996))? Are you arranging tableaux or events which the characters take part in? Asking yourselves questions of this sort is essential in order to elucidate which form of modality you prefer in your film.