A.N.
|
Authro Noté, Anthro Naughty, Atro Nöteē's Authors' Note: Texts (statement of beliefs) A.N.::Noté,Authro, Naughty,Anthro, Nöteē,Atro::1/1::Texts(sob) |
|
MMHTT believes (rightly or wrongly: belief is about clinging) that:
all the world is text; all texts are material, though not all texts appear material; texts are not fixed, they are contingent and subject to change; texts are fundamentally relational and are therefore written by and find their meaning in fluctuating and expressive matrices of other texts; and that as texts engage in the matrices of other texts and experience change as a direct bi-product, the change that happens is always story-shaped. Change expresses itself in the neverending story of our lives.
MMHTT believes (rightly or wrongly: belief is a crutch that allows us to hobble our way into the sunset) that there is no white, bearded, master, command/control, executive writer/programmer up in the sky creating texts. Rather, texts in this world emerge immanently through external and internal pressures exerted through open-source subtext systems, motivated by the lure to mean.
MMHTT believes (rightly or wrongly: belief is the upstream drive of a salmon that launches her directly into the hungry mouth of a grizzly) in the univocity of this textual world. Univocity is not a totalizing reductiontionism, wherein you would either be one or you are nothing (a total zero), but rather a plenitude of multiplicities produced by an infinite combination of 1s and 0s. Texts are immanently organized, emergent constructions located on the surface of the low-frequency, unified voice (univocity) of the Tehomic DEEP. Univocity is the sacred chord sung silently by a chorus of textual voices trained to silent-sing at their local, public institution: the Edith Bunker International Uni-voice-ity of Textual Analysis. The difference between a universe and a uni-voice is of course the voice (in this case Jean Stapleton’s Edith Bunker’s voice: a difference that yields repetition vs. a repetition that yields difference).
MMHTT believes (rightly or wrongly: belief is the entropic heat death of the world) that we are in the age of the risen Reader. Because all texts are interdependent—one text’s primary text is another text’s subtext—there is a constant flow of mutual intertextual writing. We texts are constantly writing texts and being written upon by other texts, making all texts subtexts. However, for something to become a text capable of reading other texts—to become a Reader— that text requires a level of conscious agency that only develops through disciplined training. In the past, literacy levels among texts were very low, usually only elite texts—priests and politicians—could read. But now, through various ART organ-izations like MMHTT—especially those who offer ARTappreciation courses— Readers are rising all around us. If you are reading this text, that means you are well on your way to becoming a Reader. —Authro Noté, Anthro Naughty, Atro Nöteē
(for more information on these authors and all other Author's Notes authors, please see 4.Communion)
all the world is text; all texts are material, though not all texts appear material; texts are not fixed, they are contingent and subject to change; texts are fundamentally relational and are therefore written by and find their meaning in fluctuating and expressive matrices of other texts; and that as texts engage in the matrices of other texts and experience change as a direct bi-product, the change that happens is always story-shaped. Change expresses itself in the neverending story of our lives.
MMHTT believes (rightly or wrongly: belief is a crutch that allows us to hobble our way into the sunset) that there is no white, bearded, master, command/control, executive writer/programmer up in the sky creating texts. Rather, texts in this world emerge immanently through external and internal pressures exerted through open-source subtext systems, motivated by the lure to mean.
MMHTT believes (rightly or wrongly: belief is the upstream drive of a salmon that launches her directly into the hungry mouth of a grizzly) in the univocity of this textual world. Univocity is not a totalizing reductiontionism, wherein you would either be one or you are nothing (a total zero), but rather a plenitude of multiplicities produced by an infinite combination of 1s and 0s. Texts are immanently organized, emergent constructions located on the surface of the low-frequency, unified voice (univocity) of the Tehomic DEEP. Univocity is the sacred chord sung silently by a chorus of textual voices trained to silent-sing at their local, public institution: the Edith Bunker International Uni-voice-ity of Textual Analysis. The difference between a universe and a uni-voice is of course the voice (in this case Jean Stapleton’s Edith Bunker’s voice: a difference that yields repetition vs. a repetition that yields difference).
MMHTT believes (rightly or wrongly: belief is the entropic heat death of the world) that we are in the age of the risen Reader. Because all texts are interdependent—one text’s primary text is another text’s subtext—there is a constant flow of mutual intertextual writing. We texts are constantly writing texts and being written upon by other texts, making all texts subtexts. However, for something to become a text capable of reading other texts—to become a Reader— that text requires a level of conscious agency that only develops through disciplined training. In the past, literacy levels among texts were very low, usually only elite texts—priests and politicians—could read. But now, through various ART organ-izations like MMHTT—especially those who offer ARTappreciation courses— Readers are rising all around us. If you are reading this text, that means you are well on your way to becoming a Reader. —Authro Noté, Anthro Naughty, Atro Nöteē
(for more information on these authors and all other Author's Notes authors, please see 4.Communion)