See also:  [Feminism]
                  [Modernism]  [Modernism]
                  [Post-modernism]  [Post-post-modernism
                  [Art Talk, by Cindy Nemser]


Post-911 Era (2001.09.11 - ?)

Annotation "9/11" due to non-standard calendar, in computer-speek
2001.09.11 would refer to "Septembre 9th, 2001 a.d." (aka "Sept 9, 
2001 c.e.).  Take your pick, either way... "And I bet it don't get any 
easier from here on". (not an exact quote Harvey Pekar)



Issues:  The purely geometric vs the purely organic.

               From constructivsm it is possible to
create the purely geometric world, in this world all organic life 
would be completely impossible. Only mathematical life could
exist (such as algorithmic forms, like John Conway's "Game
of Life", or tic-tac-toe, and other board games, including
of course higher dimension. In such a geometric universe,
there would be *no* distinction (nor limitation) between
dimensions. That is, 3, 4, 5, and n dimentional spaces would
cascade into each other in an infinite progression (as well
as recession both with and without the concept of time.
Flow and non-flow would reside side-by-side without apparent
paradox. Indeed, there would exist paradoxical worlds (such
as the optical illusion of the impossible three-pronged bolt, 
the impossible cube -- refer to Escher's work.

On the other hand, in the purely organic world, there is
*no* mathematical (not even geomtric) forms at all. The
apparent geometric form (for example, the spiral in a
sun-flower, the nautilus shell, etc) are in fact only *apparent*
forms of the geometric "attempting" to intrude into the 
organic world. The fact that we (as organic forms, ourselves)
perceive this "likeness" of the organic as "being like" the
geometric is merely a ...


Another thing, that we as organic creatures can not really
interact with the geometric world -- even in its approximate
representation into our world. For example, we walk upon
a flat floor (a plane) and we do not fall through it. If it is
not sufficiently strong (eg, a glass floor), then we might
(due to our physical weight) fall through it, thus shattering
it (thus, it departs from its psuedo-geometric nature back
into its the expression of its manifestly organic nature --
it is composed of atoms and molecules arranged in 
some-what completely less than perfect conditions.

Note, that when an object takes on as much purely
geometric c haracter as it can, it begins to actually
leave the organic (physical) world behind. For example,
carbon (graphite) is made of loosely bound planes of
carbon atoms, but when these form the so-called
diamond molecular structure, the form is *much*
stronger.  We also see this is the form of the so-called
"iron wiskers". These are small (micro-scopic) strands
of iron that are formed with perfect atomic structure.
That is, the grid of atoms are such that there are no
gaps. In this case, a "rope" made of such fibres would
be 100,000 (if not more) stronger than "normal" iron
cable. Arthur C. Clarke (among other futurist writers)
discussed this concept in his novel "Fountains of 
Paradise". The idea of lowering someone on a rope
is impossible past a certain point, since the rope must
support its own weight. Thus, a rope that is 1 mile
long must support the total weight above it. Even if
the rope is made larger around in circumference, it
again reaches physical limits. In theory, with perfect
carbon fibres, a cable could reach from geo-synchronous
orbit around the Earth (some 25,000 miles or 40,000 km)
all the way down to the surface; thus, enabling an
elevator to be constructed.

These concetps should not surprise us, such is the
"power" (if I may use that word) of the border/differences
between the geometric and the organic.

The surgeon's scalpal is made into as close to a flat,
plane as possible and is placed edge-wise against
the flesh, and it CUTS. It can do nothing else, it
approaches the zero-dimensional limit of being
exactly one point-width wide and thus, any point
not on the plane is either above or below it. This
concept is given in the simplest form by the so-called
Dedikind cut ?sp? (after the mathematician, Richad
Dedikind.  A mathematical line (for example the 
real number line, usually called the "x axis") is 
laid out, and point is taken to "cut" the line into
two parts -- any point will do.  So, we might have

                                                                 
  <------------|-----|-----|-----|-----|-|---|------------>
                       -1      0       1        2       3  |    4
                                                                 pi


Thus, we have chosen the numbe r 3.14159265358979.... to
cut the line. A single point cuts the line into two parts,
in the same way a needle pulling thread re-joins the 
two parts of the flesh cut with the scalple. Thus, are
the strong interactions between the geometric and
the organic.  (not to sound to mystical about this, but
it does imply some "dividing" principle here; just as
9/11 forever divides us from the previous time of history
(And yet of course, we are no more "new" than we were
after Goya's "The Third of May 1808", or Picasso's
"Guernica", etc.


Quotes



Important works


Chronology