" There's no way to talk about some of the stuff you think you can. "
i can show you a way. it's non-binary logic. there are many paradigms, not exactly two.
" you abscribe... "
yeah, i am willing to consider that people's motivations are not what they say. often when people tell me what i say is not about the pixel what they mean is shut up about this, and go away. meaning, motivation, energy, is something we can only talk about if we are willing.
but art is meaning. it matters whether the artist thinks the thing they're doing is pixel. it matters if we believe the things we say, truly.
we're forgetting that the greek philosopher pixelocrates teaches: all things are pixel. pixels are atoms, small parts, replacable. ordered sets of pixels, ordered sets of ideas. i can prove anything, why not prove something good for art? instead of shitting in a sine arc.
zak doesnt give a shit about pixels. this isn't psychonanalysis. this is art criticism, which has psychology as some part of its focus.
so yeah. if i have to go somewhere else i will. but i'd ratehr do it here. I'd rather not blog in a vaccuum. i'd rather map teh message onto the audience. i'll fight a ghost.
any idea can be expressed in the form "pixel"/"not pixel". but some things are both pixel and not-pixel. good or bad or neutral or null. what i'm describing is the technology we will need to use to talk about the pixel if we are to make it relevant, really truly relevant. we are to meet the enemy. and we are to build that third space, the neutral space. switzerland. where the filthy neutrals live.
this is why we need math: none of us have been taught how to math. this is why we need literature: none of us are literate. not even me! because these are things we do not examine. i need to be able to talk about it. i need a space and and audience for it. and this space, this audience, is supposed to care about this message, if not me.
we do need psychology, and reverse psychology, and neutral psychology. or we fall in the trap of not giving a shit.
the thing is zak, even if not as a knight, i need him as a victim. he's the guy who has lived this, he's the guy who can say, this is wrong, because he's the guy who knows. even if he dont give a shit about pixels he gives a shit about bad art criticism on forums. also he is the nearest thing to a pixel art that isnt one: a hacker, and anarchopunk, a game designer, and a commercial artist at that. there is a common cause here. even if im the only one who sees it.
see, we should even regret the word 'bad' which is from 'baeddel' for a feminine boy. it's problematic. ableist even. i still use it but i feel bad when i use it.
this is demographics not truth. anyone can learn to pixel. it's the easiers part of waht we do. getting paid for it is hard, we're gonna have to reconsider whether work is worth money, how we can build an economy where it is worth money. how to treat those of us who aren't or choose not to be because the system is corrupt.
there can be no debate about whether lovecraft has read borges. he has. why not debate about whether helm has? if you havent read him you still might. if you have read him, you still might. it's healthy to ask whether helm-not-borges or borges-helm is more right. im going to point to dudes who, combined with helm, are more right than helm. rightness is transitive.
what im talking about is not the death of the artist but the survival of the artist. and the third thing inbetween, which is depression. lots of us are depressed. you are from greece. lots of people there are depressed. there's no money in it.
safe spaces for artists who arent making money but might wish to, someday.
helm thinks form is pixel. socrates-helm would think that meaning is pixel also. neither-helm would tell us to go away. both-helm... i don't know. who's that guy? i guess both helm is socrates helm, the forth helm is meaning-not-form helm. someone more like me. a post-structuralist helm.
good-helm, bad-helm, both-helm, null-helm.
good, ie form, is a traditionally-male-view. bad, ie feelings, is a traditionally-female one. if we only consider form, and not the feelings of the artists we talk to, we creep them all away.
listen, i got autism, but i can explain myself to you, because i care about the message and i've taught myself how to teach. helm, you're not a ghost. you're still alive. why not learn the new meme?