PHILOSOPHICAL PAINTING

1
A journey in language


In order to capture any pre-conceptual appearence of language, no form of discursive language can be used for this will already imply the presupposition of (conceptual) knowledge and submission to logics.
Even an indirect metaphoric or aphoristic strategy, will already imply the use of concepts, interpretation and abstraction.
Thus avoiding any logico - positive 'saying about' this non-discursive subject, there only seems the possibility of exploring the empirical characteristics of this ´proto-language', in its most preliminary form. This form must be -apprehanding the graphical aspect of language as an anchoring place of meaning- pictorial in principle. The preliminary phase could than be figuratively (non-symbolic) displayed as a scheme, presenting a process of (perceptible) marks or graphs, visually developing into pré-semantics, wherein both Aesthetics and Language, phenomenally and in reciprocal inference, will coincide in a proto-sentence -semi graph/semi sign- asserting - existence as/resultimg in - a primordial concept.

In order to enroll this process, an aesthetico-semantic neutral field is assumedly projected; gradually generated by the basic empirical components of both language & aesthetics: marks. noise, physical expressions etc., representing 'empirical sentences' ; clusters of physical and expressional characteristics , ever used in non-discursive communication. This generative process could than be schematically laid out as a depictive syllogism e.g.:


The graphs/marks in the field (1-2) occur in their sensible reality or non-discursive aesthetics: not transferring sense to another sign/phoné in order to be comprehended. They are diachronically laid out, only apprehended as a being (aesthetically) created and experienced phenomenon, representing a genealogy of the semantic sign inferring its mere existence in a semi- or proto-sentence (3). From (1) to (3) there's a continuum from a sensuous individual experience of 'Making' via intersubjective recognition of creation into the epistemic consensual concept of existence; shifting the physical left side of the phrase into the conceptual right side executes use into meaning. Experiencing language as part of reality through realizing it in sentential form.
(The order of creation is interchangeable: if I created the first occurence than the Other made the recognition and confirmation by repetition-as-difference (2); if the other Made the first trace than I confirmed it; in either way abstaining from any 'subject' inference .)
2

The existential quantor stands for pre-predicative ontological assertion: If: ' ' than there's at least some-thing. Through perception of the process in the semi-sentence; the turning of the graph into sign, the concept of existence is realized via perception of hand-made phenomenons, transcended into concept. What we call existence is thus Why we call it existence; a coincidence of perception and conception.

The scheme can thus be taken as to present a plastic proto- linguistic process: commencing at zero marked by absence, through an intentionally made graphic phenomenon (1) confirmed by communicative physical copying and constituting semaforic conditions (2) inferred into semantic facticity (3). In this syllogism the argumentation is subpropositional; wherein the unit of the argument is not a proposition, not even a word but a non-linguistic empirical sign: a mark, noise or another physical expression. In this scheme, a simple stroke, physically conjuncted into a proto-semantic sign (1), marking the location and re-location (2) of an aesthetic (mutual) experience transferred through pre-predicative re-( )flection into an existential concept: ( X ). To be able to express in language that the created mark/engraving exists, implies necessarily that the (my / our) mark / engraving exists empirically; and if of graphs can be asserted that they exist than there exists something that bears my engravings. The mere repetition of the same-in-difference: , , verbal or physical, transfers (my / our) creation into ontological awareness and thus concept without self-referentiality and without discursive foundation A possible construing of the semi-sentential formula (3) could thus run: "The re-marking / crossing of a location/position of an earlier aesthetical perception necessarily implies re-cognition and confirmation by, or access to, a proposition asserting existence.


Eventually this proto-sentence will lead up to a collective thematized cognition as ' language' by syntactico-semantic conventions.
Language is thus progressively constituted through mnemo-aesthetical articulation. In this way , the complementary conditions of possibility for artforms and language are laid out/exemplified, not as a (foundational) descriptive structure, but as a perceptual judgment. During these diachronic dynamics of non-alphabetic process the metamorphosis from phenomenon to concept is constituted.

This picto-generative description concludes on assumption that there exist inferential relations between phenomenons and concepts which are not reducible to sentences which use words signifying those concepts, but rather refer to a pandorian toolbox; to a continuing process of pragmatic semantics of graphic chaos and linguistic trial & error, on which systematic philosophical thinking runs aground.
For systematic philosophy is already entangled in its hierarchy of ordinate and subordinate concepts which form a conventional totality of which the finished discursive form (Theory) is (pre-)supposed eventually to represent/contain the content adequately.
To overcome this epistemic stalemate, the alternate way through which thinking can conform its descriptions to the apparent non-systematic 'forms of life' about which it claims to possess the ultimate referential word, most proximate result can be obtained through the application of non-systematic 'forms of aesthetics'; for art-forms offer the possibility of an indirect strategy to approach fundamental questions while avoiding circular thinking.

Obviously, the form of art most akin to philosophy is the 'art of language' as writing is the only instrument for philosophy to make itself visible. Within this art of writing it is in particular the aphorism as most adequate tactic vehicle circumscribing philosophical questions for it shelters the versatile metaphor.
In contrast to a hermetic systematic structure, the aphorism has an undetermined non-lineair structure which doesn't aim at communicatibe functions or concise conceptual meaning but is open to change and to individual interpretation. The propositions are each mosaicly stitched as metaphoric patchwork; however not conceptually predetermined such that in their interspaces more signs can be inserted while coherence will remain. through omitting or alternating others.

Their internal coherence is based on paratactic and auditive harmony between the figuring words, prevailing conceptual qualities, wherein conventional meaning only functions as a mere 2-D reading guidance, while the extent of graphic signs is strictly limited to the absolute minimum. In its appearence, the aphorism is somewhat comparable with facial expression: any change of detail will change the whole of expression Within this literary context it seems possible to infuse philosophical systematic problems (onto-metaphysico-epistemico-) such that conceptual circularity is avoided.
Instead of aiming to resolve questions, the analogy of philosophy and literature or thinking and art is laid out as we wander peripatheticly our alphabethico-nodologic way.
----------------------------------
In particular the 'serial aphorism', (a concatenation of near-similar linguistic material in literary progress) is used as an instrument to exhibit language as being analogue to our ever changing 'forms of life'; displaying its contingent structure in factual motion and evolution. Always & already displaying that residue of uncertain anthropological beauty called the 'etc.': the abbreviated prolongation of verbalized mankind.
---------------------------------
The endless re-appearing of the anthropocentric theme in artforms only shows being haunted by Cartesian solipsism: through anthropologic confirmation existence is sought.
-------------------------------------------
Assuming that the truth of a proposition doesn't depend on reality but on a network of other sentences, it suggests that -in analogy- the meaning of art neither refers to reality but rather to a network of other artworks. Thus whether a proposition about an artwork is true depends on sentences describing other artworks:
(Literature and philosophy both seem to consist of deep descriptions of language, not of the world, while plastic artforms seem to be concerned with deep, non- foundational descriptions of the world.)
------------------------------ Reading paleographic traces we can interpret our sign-forgotten-being as contaminated reality. Palaeographics relates to language as the sign relates to the aphorism: whatever meaning means: at least its graphics are perceptible; the sign is already at least some-thing.
--------------------------------- In precipitating philosophical thought we don't need any philosophical language; we only dislocate its metaphysical isolated signs by transferring them to another time & location. Eventually to be recollected as bundles of narrow orphanous slashes; accidental Palaeolithic engravements preserved in spite of historic meaning. Our paleolithic graphs don't refer to anything but our incarved absence. Yet we do perceive the rupestral degree of art deeply written inside them; the first stroke we meet in the obscure & solipsistic spaces beyond the concave Comma: I .
------------------------------
Whatever I am , I can trace back in my language until some idiom permits me to say: I am the sum -----------------------------
Regressing to the point of divergence between art and language I am reading the site of the sign into my existence: I am my monolithic trace: the I exists at least as naive stroke: the semantic ontograph of pre-narration; the longing of history for Being beyond meaning.. I recognise my parasitic pictorial predicates, recomposed into aphorisms beyond meaning.
(Any philosophy of the sign is based on the presupposition of the meaning bearing sign : "sign".)
--------------------------
Asserting that art is the only phenomenon that goes without definition doesn't result in a form of art, it can be conserved in the philosophical archives as an objective observation. However as the exterior of the philosophical building only consist of conceptual language, a non-contextual proposition like e.g. "Art has no definition" considered as absolute verbal object, can be predicated as 'Art'; for the concept of 'art' and its chronic absence of a definition dissolves in contradiction within quotes.
----------------------------
Reflected upon, the concepts of history and existence seem related in such a sense that any historical sentence presupposes necessarily some implicit consciousness of (past) existence. While one can only
formulate the concept of existence if it inheres some kind of collective time-consciousness. I can assert that I exist because I recollect my own thoughts confirmed by using a common past tense,
('cogito ergo sum' : an internal temporal asymmetry within an a-historical theory.)
--------------------------
Trying to express the literary value of philosophical thought , we seem to be disabled in deciphering genetically coded palaeographics, using up our time by engraving petrifying signs into our fictions. In an attempt to actualise ancient inheritance, we keep writing; still resisting the collection of decayed phrases, unified in ancestral choirs, slowly reading out loud our viscous litanies in increasingly calcifying voices
--------------------------------
Proliferation of language by writing doesn't seem to replace sensation nor seems reality to be substituted by Signs, even not in their abbreviation. Answers & questions about reality are already emerging in the abbreviations of their words. Through tangibly writing Art we're experiencing language in an empirical way./While asserting linguistico-kinethical existence seems no more a mystical exegesis of a plain poetical experience than a touch of reality./
----------------------------
.
Comment révéler l'existence de l'art si on ne trouve pas une définition pour s'en abriter. En évitant ses concepts descriptifs, l´art s´écrit son propre histoire; toujours ouverte à être interprétée. S'il y en a de l'art il y en a du langage Molding form into content we're integrating the process of desintegration by following the currents of verbal forms until laid out in endless chains of glassified graphics. After inserting the cleaving Comma at ungrammatical places we only perceive weird patterns amongst lost sentences. Writing art inside out leaves us staring into unspeakable cavaties of the unfinished word.
(In describing history we need a modern language while describing modern art we need a language already containing ancient artworks.)
----------------------------------
The ultimate scientific proposition doesn't necessarily coincide with the very last sentence of language since science develops as ramified as its very language; it is Language that eventually changes the Final Dot into the Ambulant Comma. (If everything is explained, language is not.)
-------------------------------------
Expressing human death through human language doesn't equal misconception of the being of time in language, like the comprehension of man's absence in the web of language doesn't equal the expression of his presence beyond the Comma.
------------------------------
After constructing the above aphorism, there loomed some kind of semantic discomfort; a vexing unintelligibility between the parts left and right of ' comprehension', more precisely before and after the comma after 'language'. However, accidentally misreading 'expression' as 'trespassing' the latter appeared to be an adequate expression to make all the fuzzy fragments coincide; while necessarily going with it -as an inherent force- the substitution of 'through' by 'by' and the omission of 'human':"Trespassing human death by human language etc..." However if 'through' is substituted by 'in` :"Expressing human death in human language etc..." , it seems to substitute the tautological meaning of 'human language' by a kind of solipsism; as if our life is exclusively confined by language as a state of seclusive lingual destitution, just preserving 'god' as verbal placebo. (A possible substitution of 'death' by 'life':" Trespassing human life by language etc..." doesn't seem to cause any semantic alteration here, only a disablement of delicate aesthetics.) Thus: Trespassing human death by language doesn't equal misconception of the being of time in language, like the comprehension of man's absence in the web of language doesn't equal the expression of his presence beyond the Comma.

- ------------------------------

We only seem to be able to define the enigma of translation, the transfer of philosophical intuition into language, the art level in writing or in art, etc. etc., but through experiencing difference. Like reading any aesthetic difference in artworks just seems experiencing an idiosyncratic capacity of perception through application of some comparation mechanism. Therein, 'difference' is not a concept but an

--------------------------------
Beauty is the retrograde annexation of the physical liberty of history; word after word we 're exorcising god from its name by anathema, entreatingly exiling it from language and eventually ostracising it to the confinement of 'epigenesis', purposely misspelled inside graphic granite. 'Beauty'; a suspension of sense, a carrying backwards of meaning until its words germinate in ignorance, not in question. (Physical detriment of the artwork by time manifests the destruction of time by art not of art -------- -
Trying to deny names as phases, we keep hearing the rambling voices and sounds within verbal faces of nouns, roaming blank spaces curved along the volcanic sites within a word. Historic shapes aberr non-referred blackened slopes in search of any tellural translations. To decease within language we don't need any technology: we just withhold the universal respiration within one or two of our crucial

--------------------------------------
Translation of mechanical graphics into manual graphics exposes the force of denying any diachronic certainty: language in situ/language in progress. By translating Translation retrogressively, we erect a detrimental cenotaph on human sediments. (And yet, feeling the etiolated stems of meaning moving & multiplying under our barren feet /Writing" language is my confinement", shows at least a beautiful remnant of certainty. Could one force this phrase into a dislocated adjective by molding it into a solecism like: "a remnant beauty" ? (The Unsayable is not unsayable but only indicates a suspension of some mutilative, synchro-lineair

---------------------------
Beauty, translation, detriment, art, history, certainty, meaning: being spliced into language, some phrases seem to behave more like auto-execution themselves amidst the turbulence of their constituents than a static aposteriori description of their internal dynamics (At least this leaves us out, for we don't need to touch it traductively, as hermetic meanings only release their sense when

---------------------------
On our way towards art, we're exposing language-as-art, matching meta-language with Art, while language is not ours, as language is not. (At first sight our language only seems able to paint our portrait as a dumb imprint in the narcissistic dust of our past. However, painting language itself as subject, it seems to show us some way of reflecting ourselves obliquely, like painters depicting

------------------------------
Being at comma-sliced distance, we observe the near-liquid velocity of language, slowly seeking bifurcating ways for the viscous speed of its inconsistent sentences, propelled by the erratic magma of history. (Collecting and lining up neatly bleached propositions representing history, they suddenly can

---------------------------------
After abandoning profound & sensible experiments in language, we leave the one reacting sentence behind: "This is all this sentence can achieve in this world." (In the laboratory of life we're

----------------------------
In Hegel's phenomenology we inherited a perpetual processing of language within language for language: veiled ventriloquial voices are still proceeding from any of the self-speaking tomes. (Time, -------------------------------
Like synchronised obliquely striding pedestrians following the path of neuro-verbal mystery, we do avoid style in our slow voyage towards any most minute lingual detail; a contingent flow into strings of illiterate things over bygone worlds. To spatialize the internal form of language, we have had the concave Comma to travel, slicing its way through atrocious verbal matter, explaining our most apauling nightmares as misspelled alphabets.(While upon the convex Measuring Comma we're reflected beyond recognition.)

- - ------------------------------

Measuring out human physicality onto nature, it shows our liquid confession of lingual inequality. Like Narcissus, being unable to touch upon a language that denotes any difference in meaning, is self-condemned by touching his parallel reflection in language; causing his very absence in language. While writing, we keep ahead of history's consuming propositions: while measuring language, we're

------------------------------
Through Art we're measuring language while in language we're measuring time such that the proposition "time is linear" forms a tautology: a confusion of demonstration and actual verbal measurement of time (Here we let ourselves be seduced by writing the sentence: "Through art we're measuring death.")

- ------------------------------

"In agony we're measuring death, not the abstinence of its terminal terminology" "À travers l'agonie on mésure sa vie, pas l'oublie de ses termes temporels."/ En se déplaçant lelong les deux corps phraseaux ci-dessus, on remarque l'incommensurabilité: des lamellae humanoides de différence, schismatiquement érigées par la Virgule Itinérante. The possible insight that these transferred phrases are asymmetrical complementary doesn't provide any intelligibility, just some aesthetic apprehension, like the experience which seems to reflect some cosmic structure within a minimal acoustic phenomenon as that of an enharmonic interval within a ------------------------------------

Through agony we're measuring death, not the abstinence of its transient terminology. In re-reading these two phrases we become increasingly aware that if the right-hand side is omitted but the comma after 'death' is sustained, it attracks a traumatising effect on the left side, in their appearance and concretisation, for this comma , a persistent sublimation of the final point, suggests or rather asserts, better: dictates us to experience life as a Being before or after the Comma, during the physical time of reading, until completed by the right side phrase which displays or rather suggests to conceive death as Verbal Experience before and after the Comma. (Trapped inside an After verbal incision by the ambulant comma we commence the perpetual itinerary inside the sentential veins of history, realising that we don't need any subject but the obfuscation of language itself. ( 'Travelling within the hyphen: a prime human right for unlimited access to any culture-maculated syllable/ Work after work we're seeking for clear strokes, denoting art as the abbreviation of history, claiming our lingual right to enter the Museum of Decay & Detriment, eager to exhibit our damaged language as disarticulation of history.)

------------------------------------

If only we could paint in plain language the horrid history of human culture; still raging inside the placid disguise of natural language; tacitly turned into our well-furnished tensed propositions; passively stored until exhumed by legal art and plastified into moulds of modernity. (Through yesterday's use of the word 'history', history already anchors its linguistic presumption in sanctioned existence, a given instance of sheer liberty donated by contemporain tolerance.

----------------------------

The True Archive, in its strive to purify the infinite set of hybrid lingual fragments asserting -in different truth values-, the existence of some outside world, admitting data according to external ethical rules in attempt to constitute a neutral status, already always inhales the external virus of uncertainty; the Contagious Comma hiding inside stored layers of truth-values containing clensed stratified pasts. Yet always keeping alert to augur from its intestinal patterns the ethical neutral state of affairs. However its internal ethical rule is not stated through truth selection but through the perpetual hunt for completion of its content, ambiguously haunted by the virtual very last datum which will eventually subject it to the Archive of archives Although stored untrue data should be collected as objects for the Meta-museum of Non-Veritalia; a detrimental collection of lingual despair,

------------------------------
While constructing the above aphorism the pre-finished form of the the phrase: However its internal ethical rule is not stated through truth selection but through the perpetual hunt for completion of its content, ambiguously haunted by the virtul very last datum which will eventually subject it to the Archive of archives. misread as: However its internal ethical rule is nor stated through truth selection but through the perpetual hunt for completion, ambiguously sought by the virtual very lest datum which will eventually subject it to the Archive of archives. Now, from this version the phrase 'of its content' was already deleted, from the previous version, in order to reach the verbal emergence of that near-adequately intuitive intention from the beyond, yet, except for the location of the word 'ambiguous ' which in this latest version seemed to radiate a kind of ambiguity itself now. Thus intending to shift it, the phrase was rewritten unto: However its internal ethical rule is not stated through truth selection but through the perpetual hunt for completion ...............................at this point, with 'ambiguous' in mind, this deleted phrase 'of its content' somehow re-appeared semi-consciously, but persistently: causing and conducting an effect of some bipolar undercurrent between the already written word 'hunt' and the not yet written word 'virtual' , connotatively sparking off the word 'haunted'. Now, during the factual writing down of the word 'ambiguous', it engendered a flash of neural branching, reciprocally connecting a form expression (hunt) with an expression of content (virtual) such that here, language itself demonstrated through an auto-creation the final proposition as composed in the above aphorism. (Re-reading it again, language already seems to pull itself completely out of our reach confirming its autonomy herewith, for in spite of after this laborious analysis it now seems better to reformulate the whole phrase as: "The internal ethical rule of the True Archive is not stated through truth selection as it is indifferent towards the form of its content, but through the perpetual hunt for completion of its collections, ambiguously haunted by the virtual very last datum which will eventually subject it to the Archive of archives. We better don't let language get out of sight, for if we don't write it, it is writing us into daylight. until: "day's lie dies")

- --------------------------------------- --

Trying to conform language to one's ideas, there's always this concealed yet forceful presence of nature, manifesting itself as a strange local obstacle of resistance during our writing While we're passing through a world of transient forms, language itself is funnelled through our ethereal forms of life leaving us behind almost as unchanged as it came upon us. (As our disabled phrases always seem

- ------------------------------------------

How could one convince language -impassibly lying amongst unknown objects - to rename our ever decaying worlds over and over. How could one convince it to send one or two of its ambivalent comma's beyond the hollowed edge of our coherence, just to refine the liquid sculptures of non-veritaliae. (Being is that which is spoken beyond the Comma; in borrowed words.)

- - - ----------------------------------------

"Death". Through this sign we try to localise life by illuminating its natural obfuscation by luxurious theological predicates. In our theographics we presuppose our gods at least to speak a common language, for in our language we keep hearing the absence of any divine respiration. "Death": a limited linguistic expiration, in eternal search of its meaning "God" : not a concept but a contagious halotiosis, denoting a restless unity; a perpetuum mobile precipitated into predicates of human error and guilt; split by its Internal Comma into concepts of time & meaning voluptuously benedicting our destitute verbs. (There seems some kind of forced linguistic material hammered into in this grammar which makes us wonder if this resistance is due to richness or poverty of language.)

- - ------------------------------ - Like any construction made just to support itself, sustaining any other function as a mere accidens, the aphorism is constructed just to support its own appearance, offering shelter to any abandoned meaning hiding from literature.

- - --------------------------- -

History, imprisoned within the lifeless mystery of silent signs and undenoted objects cannot speak for itself. (Here, if in this phrase "never " is substituted by "not", one is already speaking predictively and out of turn; better to have soundless history judge for itself if "never" ever can be used. If and only if we could write signs that keep ahead of history abdicating from the Catalogue of contagious meaning, for. when erring in language and touching upon another we better desist to waken it up by ----------------------------
-Finally leaving our horizontal sentences behind the Ultimate Comma: for our visible silence to rule history from afar. or said otherwise: Finally leaving our exhausted & expired sentences behind the Ultimate Comma: for our sterile lingual images to conduct history after us.

- --------------------------------------

If Creation is a mere erroneous accidence, history can be read as a mere textual adjustment of time. like any creature disabled by time adjust itself by stumbling towards a final breath of perfection. (When delivering a word by accident, we breathlessly wait for a sign of life; however, writing aphorisms too symmetrical can result in sudden lingual death: while some deficiency along their appearance can effectuate resuscitation.)

--------------------------------

Process and product of human life eventually coincide in the rituals of the oracular obsequies, formulating in slow tautologies the precious knots holding the web of language..(Don't ask for meaning if there are any echoes of opacity; within our well-formed, nonsensical language, our timeless worlds are already framed-in by pulsating words. opening up a universe of commaless insight)

- -------------------------------------

If Universe were composed through the Word, language was causatively created through accusative echoes of divine Verbosity. (I do not need any language to name the progressively disfigured silhouettes of my approaching limits)

- - - --------------------------------------

certain sentences are randomly conjunct like e.g.: ---By distressing language we're trying to localise the void called 'meaning'. ---The phrase: "to think is to fear not to" seems more a tautology than generating any meaning. ---If my death is hiding in my language, it is always ready to pronounce predictions. They can induce a literary process, generating new phrases capturing hovering thoughts, ready for meaning to reach some tranquil places; observe:- -

......................... By distressing language we're trying to localise a void called 'meaning' , for the phrase - to think is to fear not to- seems more a philosophical tautology of synonymy. Yet if the predicate -is true- is added, one can intuitively affirm. We better let the phrase the void called meaning for whatever it means for if this void is called 'death' it is hiding in my language; always ready to pronounce predictions.

............................ By distressing language we're trying to localise a void called 'meaning' , for if the phrase:" to think is to fear not to" seems more a philosophical tautology of synonymy. If the predicate -is true-is added, one can intuitively affirm. we better let the phrase the void called meaning for whatever it means for if this void is called -death- it is hiding in my language always ready to pronounce horrifying yet inaudible predictions -

- - .............................
By distressing language we're trying to localise a void called 'meaning. If to the phrase:" to think is to fear not to" the predicate -is true- is added, one can intuitively affirm, although it seems more a philosophical tautology of synonymy. Now we better let the phrase: "a void called meaning" for whatever it means for if this void is called -death- , it could stay dormant in my language until ready to display slow but meaningless predictions.

- - ...........................
By distressing language we're trying to localise a void called 'meaning' . If to the phrase: "to think is to fear not to" the predicate -is true- is added, intuitively one can consent, although it seems more a philosophical tautology of synonymy. Now we better let the phrase: "a void called meaning" for whatever it means for if its reference is called 'death' , it could stay dormant in my language until ready to pronounce slow ontological predictions -

.............................. -By distressing language we're trying to localise a void called 'meaning'. If to the phrase: "to think is to fear not to" the predicate -is true- is added, intuitively one can consent, although -trying to analyse it- it seems more a philosophical tautology of synonimity than an epistemic phrase. So we better let the phrase: "a void called meaning" for whatever it stands for, for if it denotes 'death' ,this could stay dormant in my language until ready to predict imminent yet slow-consuming ontological

-------------------------
Writing as process means thinking without disturbing language in order to localise blank spaces wherein echoes of memory are hiding in submerged signs. In our mysterious persistent persuing of mystical meanings we're projecting human needs onto unplastified language. Writing in process only generates a sheer endless organic concatenation of living language; developing the dynamics of differences into some pregnant space where some literary stroke eventually takes over to preserve it. - ---

-------------------

Literary processing of sentences or phrases can only be explained through demonstration -- Observe a random collection of lingual fragments: ---It takes us a lifetime to read and to pronounce our misspelled private prophecies . ---Finally receiving the sentence of the wounded we're supposed to be homebound ---To preserve language is to prevent its words from verbal death. processed into:- It takes us a lifetime to perceive and to unravel our misspelled prophecies For finally receiving the sentence of the wounded we're supposed to be homebound; preventing our language an early death by silencing its new born words

- -----------------------------------

It takes us a lifetime to perceive and to unravel our misspelled prophecies For finally receiving the sentence of the fatally wounded we're supposed to be homebound; preventing our language an early death by silencing our still-born words ( In the theatre of death the very last word always emerges from the wings exactly in time. - ---

---------------------------------

It takes us a lifetime to unread and unravel our self-spelled prophecies For finally deciphering the final sentence we're surprised to find ourselves homebound; preventing language an early death by silencing our still-born words ( In the theatre of absence the very last word always emerges from the

----------------------------------------

"I am language"- How could one reveal oneself more clearly; as the 'I' is laid down in pure handmade crystalline language, displayed in slow winding lines designing its private cenotaph to be sculptured in language made of philosophical rigidity. (Here in this phrase the need for a question-mark is slowly dissolved like the shift of meaning-shades in any cultural difference denoting the same referent.)

- - ----------------------------------------

As the phrase: repetition of the same " looks more" like a bifurcating spiral than a line or a circle , defining art will "look more" like an arbitrary scaffolding around some chaotic substance than denoting any aesthetic object or circular idea.
(In our aphorisms we're looking at new performance of old words, not looking for new meanings; as some understanding only arrives long after us/How did we retain a human residue for so long by naming it by & after itself: "language"/ "I am language" : a philosophical residue of solipsistic textualism )
--------------------------------------
Strolling along the non-human. sentence "whatever lies outside language cannot be thought or given content" we eventually arrive in the soundless space of the three dimensional sentence. (When aesthetics takes over our language, defying rational limits, meaning always keeps ahead of us and we're left amidst unexpected patterns.)
--------------------------------------
"Form patterns like "death" don't seem to be reflected in the echoes of the literary sentence"
If in this sentence "in" is substituted by "by" or "through" the sentence itself seems to halt carrying any literary connotations :
Consider : Form patterns like .: "death" don't seem to be reflected through the echoes of the literary sentence or: Form patterns like "death" don't seem to be reflected by the echoes of the literary sentence.
(Here we could call upon a pattern like 'GOD' as a lingual placebo for healing our danified literary sentences.)
Patterns like "death" don't seem to be reflected by the echoes of the literary sentence. or: Patterns like "death" don't seem affected by the echoes of the literally spaced sentence. or: Internal patterns within forms like "death" don't seem afflicted by my short echoes within the literary sentence.
-----------------------------
If the concepts of 'death' and ' history' are tautological related how could we obtain any knowledge about them or see any difference; for if our words are no longer echoed by our days we still reassure and convince ourselves to find our way out of any abandoned and hermetically sealed sentence. ( The scientific definition of our common death is already sonorily formulated within the spaces of our daily language.)
-----------------------------
Réflexons sur la relation entre les concepts de 'mort' et de 'temps'.
Observons par exemple une phrase comme: ' la mort vient toujours à l'heure'. A la première vue, cette phrase paraît d'être une tautologie car sans vie physique, aucun temps individuel pourrait subsister. Alors une telle phrase n'ajoute rien à la connaissance. Quoique, la conscience de la mort nous oblige de participer, soit en usant le langage comun pour s'expliquer soit la abusante à créer l'art. Sans langue pas de mort, sans mort pas de langue. Diviser sa langue c'est diviser sa mort; partager sa mort c'est partager son art; c'est participer à sa langue. ( Étant mis en dehors son langage notre temps ne se fait plus entendre.)
----------------------------
The concept of art must be as undetermined and open ended as language for no theory can apriori exclude any sign nor object to partake in the history of its definition.
The aesthetic space of modern art is only limited by the archive of its language, not by its definitions. (Rejected by language we're able to see the instable structure of history. So there's no need to transfer my language into history for history already releases its own viscous verbal liquid most slowly into our cohesive passive past)
------------------------------
The expression 'Divine Vocation' is the condition of possibility of empirical vocation. Herein it is our divine language -not some divine entity- which calls upon us, for as any possible deity is created by common language; the language used by our ordinary gods only creates more divine language, not vocation. (Like the ingredients of the curse only consist of language and belief)

- - --------------------------
Whenever we try to describe beauty we also seem to abbreviate its possible aesthetic space; while trying to capture the beauty of brevity -or extremity in life- we're surprisedly confined by the uneasy brevity of our language itself. (By an aesthetical vehicle we attempt to substitute literary truth by the burden of beauty.)
---------------------------------
In conceiving the phrase 'trying to capture the beauty of brevity by language' there looms a connotive suggestion in 'beauty' that remains independent of language; that is, 'beauty' made more 'phenomenal' by language. While in the phrase 'trying to capture the beauty of brevity in language' we seem to be drawn closer to conceive it as an symbiotic relation between 'beauty' and 'language'. However in the phrase 'trying to capture the beauty of brevity as language' form and content seem to culminate into an elegant coincidence of linguistic brevity.
----------------------------------
(The axiom of the linguistic turn of philosophy -- 'there's nothing outside language'-- has generated important linguistic forms, developing itself as limited as its own truth-bound premises permitted. Remaining as close to its linguistic statements as ever before in its history; leaving us, in spite of itself, ideas precipitated into petrified phrases & sentences narrating an utmost compact aesthetical innovation; to be diagnostized by literary theorists.)
------------------------------------
The basic tendency of philosophical language consist of a fundamental inclination towards aestheticism; pouring old words into amazing sentential mushrooms. (Intuition disguised in discursivity.) As the external relation between philosophy and literature depends on the way it is conceived, their reciprogal internal difference consist of the space of thought; while their common border depends on the linguistic context. When literature is erring in limitless demarcation of its aesthetic confinements, philosophy is condemned to err within the discursive limits of language; slowly trying to substitute linguistic scarves carefully by verbal incunabulae. Literature doesn't try to escape the labyrinth of language; it positively abuses it in avoiding the limits of rationality by displaying the hidden contingencies.
(Speaking in borrowed tongues; dragging one sentence after the other, aleatoric verbal constructs can be of more significance to the receptor than to the emittor.)
------------------------------------
The force common to both language and art is demonstrated through reception of any creation in their respective realm. A statement about the world has necessarily to be judged by the world in the world. (Linguistic creations conceived as logico-nonsensical however could contain the precipitation of some deep non-discursive desire, though as yet not necessarily devoid of intelligent direction)
-------------------------------------
Consider these randomly gathered phrases:
trying to satisfy a desire for mystical depths
to straiten linguistically the inclination toward mystical depth
any virtual depth in language itself cannot be thought through discursive language
any mystical desire seems always connected to language
a desire to go through or beyond language is already mystical, exposing itself beyond - discursive reach
Language remains contradictory a medium, leading us towards unknown aims beyond language experience
............................
Now, trying to incentive some coherent sense through aesthetic intuition:
any mystical desire seems always connected to language trying to satisfy a desire for mystical depths only seems some lingual incapacity. When trying
to straiten it linguistically the inclination seems to bend itself more toward mystical depths
any virtual depth in language itself cannot be seekingly thought through discursive language desire to go through, beyond or below language is already mystical, exposing itself beyond discursive reach. The desire seems more mystical than any virtual mystical object
Language seems only a medium towards a certain aim beyond linguistic experience
or coincide this extra-linguistic desire and its linguistic vehicle in the yet discursive expression 'mystical' Does the concept' mystical' exist because of the very lingual expression ' mystical' the expression 'mystical' is already most mystical.
------------------------------------
Any mystical desire seems always connected to language trying to satisfy a desire for mystical depths only seems some lingual incapacity. When trying to straiten it linguistically the inclination seems to bend itself more toward mystical depths any virtual depth in language itself cannot be seekingly thought through discursive language desire to go through, beyond or below language is already mystical, exposing itself beyond discursive reach. The desire itself seems more mystical than any virtual mystical object.
Language seems only a medium towards a certain aim beyond linguistic experience
or does this extra-linguistic desire and its linguistic vehicle coincide in the yet discursive expression 'mystical' Does the concept' mystical' exist because of the very lingual expression ' mystical' the expression 'mystical' itself seems already most mystical. Is there any linguistic connection between the concepts of 'mystical' and 'aesthetical' they are at least existential lingual-bound.
-------------------------------------
Any mystical desire seems always connected to language or even hiding in it. In trying to satisfy a desire for mystical depths only some lingual incapacity seems manifest. However trying to sort out our inclination linguistically, seems to spiral itself down toward unnamed virtual depths. In language itself this cannot be seekingly thought through discursive reasoning for any desire to go through, beyond or below language is already mystical, subsuming itself beyond analytical reach. The desire itself seems more mystical than any virtual extra-linguistic objective.
----------------------------------
Is language only a medium towards an uncertain purpose beyond linguistic experience or does this extra-linguistic desire and its verbal vehicle coincide in the yet discursive expression 'mystical'. (This discursivity is founded on the consensus that the expression only denotes a contradictive "concise vagueness".) Does the concept ' mystical' exist because of the very lingual expression ' mystical' that is, is language itself the cause of mystical need, for the expression 'mystical' itself seems already most mysterious. (If there's any connection between the concepts of 'mystical' and 'aesthetical' they seem at least existentially bound in their appearance as being-in-language.)
------------------------------------
In the still of time we're descending steep staircases into the catacombs of language. Strolling about dead-end itineraries and sloping levels, chaotic narrowing and broadening cavities while touching upon piles of remains. When subterranean galleries give way to low-ceiled labyrinths, we're still sheltered from the fractures of daylight language; eagerly ready to uncover the object of this mystical desire.
-------------------------------
In the still of time we're descending steep staircases into the depths of language. Strolling about its catacombs of dead-end itineraries and sloping levels, chaotic narrowing and broadening cavities, we're touching upon chimerical remains. When subterranean galleries give way to low-celled labyrinths, we're still sheltered from the inflictions of day-lit language; eagerly ready to uncover the object of unsurpassable mystical desire.
-------------------------------
Roaming for a lifetime on the idle surface of language, we eventually descend -in the still of time- its steep winding staircases into occult & unnameable depths. Strolling about catacombs of dead-end itineraries and sloping levels, chaotic narrowing and obscure broadening cavities, we're touching upon piles of chimerical remains. When low-ceiled labyrinths give way to sublingual galleries, we're still sheltered from inflictious day-lit language; still eagerly ready to uncover the object of inexpressible mystical desire.
------------------------------------
Roaming for a lifetime on the idle surface of language, we eventually descend -in the still of time- its steep winding spirals into occult & unnameable depths. Strolling about catacombs of dead-end itineraries and sloping levels, chaotic narrowing and obscure broadening cavities, we're touching upon piles of chimerical remains. When low-ceiled labyrinths give way to sublingual galleries, we're still sheltered from inflictious day-lit language; still eagerly ready to uncover the object of any unrepressible mystical desire.
-----------------------------------
Roaming for a lifetime on the idle surface of language, we eventually are bound to descend -in the steep still of time- its winding spirals into unnameable itinerary voids of repetition. Strolling about catacombs of dead-end sentences, chaotic narrowing and broadening bifurcating phrases, we're still touching upon remnant verbal remains. When low-ceiled labyrinths give way to acoustic, sublingual galleries, we still remain sheltered from inflictious day-lit language; yet eagerly ready to uncover the chimerical object of any unrepressible mystical desire.
-----------------------------------
"It takes us exactly a lifetime to get adjusted to our fluid age, eventually coinciding with ourselves."
At first sight the part of this phrase before the comma seems to be a blind tautology, close to platitude. However, the second part seems to denote a predictive quality referring back at the first part as being an ethical description of some spatio-temporal experience. Now, closely observing the diaphanous character of the first phrase one can perceive an internal silhouette-like event, consisting of two 'physical' objects - simultaneously set into motion at the beginning (at: 'It'; left side of the phrase) moving in unequal speed to the right side (towards: 'age') one above the other while the lower one -being ahead in between 'It' and 'age', is surpassed by the top-one exactly at the complementary moment of Comma, succumbing in reciprocal dissolution as literary fragment in the second part. (The meta-physical materiality of language/ incidence of life into language.)
-------------------------------------
The concept of 'ethics' only consists of the colloquium between geophysical and human language, not of adaptation differences between human languages. ('Ethics'/'Aesthetics': most fragile ethereal transient concepts.)
----------------------------
-

Consider:
"If 'immediate experience' didn't exist, coherent thought would be impossible."
In this coherent thought the existence of 'immediate experience' arrives via presupposition into circular lingual evidence.
------------------------------
Some aesthetic phrase-like fragments e.g. "the breaking beauty of falling water", only displays the beauty of broken language, not of falling water.
---------------------------
Poetry-in-progress/genealogical poetry tries to handle incoherent sentences strategically in order to make them leak some sense if any, as posssible precious knots in the web of incoherent language:
Inventing a new language doesn't necessarily result in a new language. Abusing language until it exhibits the obscure oval of its unfinished sentence Balancing on the brink of meaning as we write our way through verbal obstacles
....
Inventing new language doesn't necessarily result in a new language. Abusing language until it exhibits the obscure oval of the Unfinished sentence. Balancing on the brink of meaning as we write our way through verbal waist.
....
Inventing new language doesn't necessarily result in new language. Abusing language until it exhibits the obscure oval of the Endless sentence. Balancing on the brink of tomorrow as we write our way through verbal waist.
....
(Here, except for some slight modifications we seem to be unable to weave these alien sentential objects together into any coherent thought or better: unable to brush the aesthetic rests of our voluptuously consumed language together for an ethical dustbin; leaving our verbal waist behind as we go our graphical way; making 'freedom' visible by painting: 'there's no meaning in this'.)

- -----------------------------
Questioning the conditions of possibility of the creation of art-forms is not a philosophical questioning but a sociological one. As the mere existence of art is independent from the concept of art which is based on socio-linguistic concepts. The internal/virtual art-degree of a creation is constituted by individual incentive related to an aesthetico-epochal context, while the external or publico-consensical reception only functions to possibly establish its socio-aesthetic value in applicating the predicate of art.
-------------------------------
"Description of a fantasy".
Although this phrase isn't an internal reflexive tautology, (a description is not necessarily a fantasy) yet the concept of 'fantasy' seems to be internally adherent to 'description' as a particular fantasy only comes into existence through language. When I make a mental fantasy I am already reading the created images as descriptions without language, -while in communication trespassing into language-, transforming them as a description of description. Thus the expression 'description of a fantasy' refers to a description of a meta-description.
("Description of fallacy" e.g. only spins a lingual web of difference between an action to obtain an ideal result and the factual result of the action. This could be defined as negative description.)
---------------------------------
Instead of misusing a precious product like language to enlist the collective human experience of the world, there's still time to scrutinise the language through which this world has been defined. The mediaforms of a culture is more readable than its results defined by its intentional limited paradigmata.
---------------------------------
Preserved art objects characterised by a cultural epoch and abstracted from their technical content only function as symbol or representation of their contemporaneous socio-aesthetic reception.
Art as predicative form of the world absolutizes the internal dimensions of creative works; defining art necessarily results in an abbreviation of history.
----------------------------------
"Literature and philosophy both seem to consist of deep descriptions of language, not of the world, while the plastic artforms seem to contain deep, however non-foundational descriptions of the world." This phrase itself presupposes the existence of something extra-lingual that is, it describes concepts without partaking in them.
------------------------------

LANGUAGE-PAINTING


Language-painting attempts to re-design the anthropomorphic shapes of language, so much
inflated by the imagination of Art and abused as virginal bride by the maculated fingers ofphilosophy;
it is the way in which language is approached descriptively. If language exists than it will manifest
itself in our long run for history; its art only transposes its degrees of silence: the long fall of hope into semantic error. (Par l'imparfait du verbe humain, sa langue se rend visible.)

--------------------------
Obsessed by that which language possesses, language-painting tries to alienate possession from
possessor by a strategy of weird logic. In using the tropes of inclination and mutilation, discursive
language is halted for its time being.

--------------------------

Language painting disposes slips of language in order to attain an internal similarity between before and beyond , which cannot be reached by geometrical prescription; its justification should be seen as the alien interior of language.

--------------------------

The enigma of language is not to be seen; it is to be made. Only handmade language can be seen. Through our definitions we fissure the ghost of language by the fear for (dis)solving time.
Life is as deep as our glass-blown sentences are.

(The depth of the precious letter is not reflected in the animal's eye.)

--------------------------

By exiling language, we strive to write all by ourselves, not wasting any more of her time. We write language in language in order to see the language of language.

--------------------------
Like the tautological nature of god is shown in any of his descriptions, any well-defined definition of art is art. (Dieu est devenu du verbe autant je décris mon parapluie; there is no need to mean in order to make use; car je me syntaxe un monde tandis que les critères ersthetiques pourvoient l'art d´une ontologie.)
------------------------------
If only we could calculate without syntax the ballistic trajectory of our single words. Now we`re
stammering as one word passes another, for in the fireworks of sense one cannot tell one word from another.
( Here, my language finally ran out of order.)

---------------------------
-----------------------------------

"(definition of definition)": we returned this parenthesised letter to its divine
sender and had it accompanied by the hermetical sentence: (this is all there´s
left to be seen.)
-----------------------------------

writing ever
reaches
even

No/writing ever/reaches/even any/near-conclusive end/
it moves randomly in accordance with its ever splicing worlds:
a motion to disburden artworks of their very last sentence.
In suspension of any absorbing definition we're outstretching art
on the long way from sign to meaning: translating the defect of
art, word after word, into the defect in art. By any single verbal
stroke we seek art to be structured. Through writing our detrimental
signs into art, we`re in search of its errant definite articles.
(which always leave us with that strange remainder:
the unwanted difference in reflection: the synthetic motion in art.)
----------------------------

While writing we keep the universe from infinitely expanding or diminishing
although we wouldn't notice any such cosmological respiration as
our language would still consist of the same gravitational and random beauty.
------------------------------
Lining up senseless signs through voiceless writing we're trying to overcome
the historicity of language. Through innovative writing we only asserting that if halted,
our writing is continuing by itself, as some anthropomorphic shade,
cultivating mycelioid meaning upon history. We believe our
signs to be as physical in nature as our mind needs them to be ; their
meaning as divers as nature is; in fibrilose imprint we're bound to undergo
the fictive features of our effigies. (The spirit of language is woven
from disbelief, uncovering the fugitive dwelling of an accidental god
within in our decomposing descriptions, exposing the rupestral traces of mythical man.)
-----------------------------------
- At any tomorrow we could finish the linguistic concatenation called 'poetry' or the poetry called 'life'. Writing poetry means omitting and sculpturing ordinary language that moves along and is analogue to our daily life.
("This word is a poem". Approaching language this way it becomes increasingly difficult
to tend the extending herd of limping signs, lingering behind us as we go our way.)
--------------------------------
By opening up language at intimate places, we cannot avoid to commit poetry
Consider:
"Buying a plot to be laid after dying"

(Buying some words for a cenotaph
not to exchange, but
to defer their obsolete right
to a comma,
for an eventual rest
after breathing.)
---------------------------

/My language consists of no more than the weight of its graphics/
Here we have had language to judge about preponderance of form:
My language
consists of no
more
than the
weight of
its graphics


My language
consists of no
more
than the
lifetime of
its graphics

Mankind neither begins with things immersed in history nor with history immersed in things but with the first measurable weight of his ontographics.
--------------------
Mechanisms of genealogical poetry:
I laid myself
down into
the dark furrows
of language;
spread out in many traces
I
erected myself
as peacefull nightmare
surrounded by the past tense
wherein only the dead
know
how to read

-----------------------------------------
I
laid myself down along
the dark furrows
of language;
spread out in many traces
I
erected myself
as peaceful nightmare
surrounded by the humid past tense
wherein only the dead
know
how to read.
---------------------------------------------

I laid myself down
along the
dark fertile furrows
of language.
Spread out in many traces
I
erected myself
as peaceful nightmare
enveloped in the
humid past tense
wherein only the dead
know how to read
slowly
-------------------------------
I found
myself
lying down along the dark
fertile furrows
of language.

Stretched out in as many traces
I recollected myself;
ressurecting a forbidden monument;
a peaceful cenotaph for a nightmare
submerged in humid past tense
wherein only the dead
know
how to read
slowly.
-----------------------------------------------
Laid down
in detail
along the dark
fertile furrows
of language.
I recollected myself;

Stretched out in many traces
ressurecting a forbidden moment
as peaceful nightmare;
submerged
in moist past tense
that only the somnambulant
know
how to unread.
------------------------------------------------

If history is
that which is touched by language
Art is not
if Art is that which is
touched by history.

(If everything is explained language is not)


RECYCLING

Assuming that Art and Language can be described both as sets of indefinable expandable practices, than there cannot be a systematic theory of Meaning for either of them, as they consist of mere difference. The meaning of language cannot be founded on essentialistic concepts or static logics, thus any speculative presupposition of a common origin for art and language should only be articulated,
(Hereby assuming that not all the senses are epistemological equivalent: the corporal reflex caused by touching an hot object is caused by the same electric stimuli in the brains as is the stimuli caused by the visual imprint on the retina but the epistemic effect is not the same.)

This 'genealogical' writing reflects the contingent and idiosyncratic auto-realisation of the author in a paraesthetico-disruptive gesture. Demonstrating that no text has an absolute value or truth.