TYRANNOSAURUS SMUDGE

wow, Charlayn, I mean WOW!

Myrmecochory is a word I learned today, thank you.

Lemming, lemming, burning bright.

Never let the truth get in the way of a good meme, I reckon.

Note: Gemini doesn't mean "two-faced."

lekker slaap to the furry fools that dog you. To some good morning, to others good night.

Going to bed now but would be curious to hear more about why you weren't surprised by his move to Australia. Does that mean something?

Yes, sorry, JM is the one (and only Coetzee I know.)

As a literature-loving person, he's the most important SA person on my mind and am curious about your thoughts, whatever they may be.

@charlayn.eurosky.social @80incognito.bsky.social @bevfromcapetown.bsky.social

Curious what you all think of Coetzee? Never read, don't care, hate, don't love but don't hate, have complicated feelings toward...?

So he spends hours and hours in bed tossing and turning each night (probably even consulting the watch a few times to see just how many hours he has tossed and turned) before he remembers, in a flash, “the watch…!”

He takes it off and falls instantly asleep.

However, the man always forgets to take the watch off. The watch has become such a part of him throughout the course the day he has forgotten its separate existence on his wrist.

Story. A man falls instantly asleep whenever he takes his watch off and puts it on the night stand by his bed. It is just as if the puppeteer had suddenly dropped the puppet.

I stand by my statement.

Progressives (for social reasons) and conservatives (for aesthetic reasons) have cause to stand against modernists.

Conservatives are against you aesthicaly (for being non figurative) and progressives philosophically (for endorsing the essence of the West.)

In a way, you're caught between political ideologies perhaps, because assemblage/ modernism is a left leaning thing, while the classics are a right leaning thing. Both left and right have an incentive to think of the classics as being distinctly figurative.

You posted a paper about that Zeus not long ago. I was left the impression was a sort of landmark.

Anyway, you resist that there's anything modern about modern art, which is fair. What made me think of it is that you chose to contrast your Polyhymnia with an ancient figurative example.

And yet, no one put a spear upon a plinth and called it "Fountain" nor was action painting a thing.

Why, I'm made to wonder, did assemblage, or just abstraction, not occur to ancient artists? (Or is that just like asking, why did the idea of a steam engine, or Newtonian physics, not occur to the ancients?)

awesome stove.

maybe a good lens upon which to view Trump is... Beatlemania?

I may now actually have Trump Derangement Syndrome. I can not and will not listen to one more second of Trump.

I have a grim, grey thumb myself.

(though maybe that's what the real world already is.)

Instead of the internet, how about a vast sculpture garden?

An issue is that the internet seems inclined to promote those very voices.

Enjoyed this, thanks, a "lonely ass room," indeed. Related came across this today:

while Tolstoy almost didactically tries to show what Christianity might realistically look like among everyday people of a certain class.

True, Dostoyevsky makes positive portrayals of Christians as well as negative ones of nihilists, but these often take the form of modern day saints (Alyosha, Prince Mishkin, Father Zosima),

that while the latter displays believable instances of Christian ethics in action (Karenin turning the other cheek for Anna, Ivan Ilyich’s death with its “it is accomplished,”) the former displays non-christian, or nihilistic, ethics in action, always disastrously (Raskolnikov, Stavgorin.)

I wonder if a central difference between Dostoyevsky and Tolstoy might be something like this: