** excerpts from cache's earth moves have inspired a personal reading of 'framing territories' (as thinking scapes in acting and reacting to what's around us and what we think we know)
It all comes down to how you frame 'things'.
What you choose to include and exclude.
Inside and outside are notions devoid of meaning.
The frame selects because it eliminates the tendency for evasion.
'Things' are not stable. They undergo variations, giving rise to new possibilities of seeing.
'Things' are images not pictures.
We see 'things' as functions of actions in and reactions to a milieu.
But since such reactions are not automatic or deterministic and include 'zones of indetermination' from which unexpected movement might come, images involve what transpires in the intervals or disparities between 'things.'
They are connected through a logic where the whole is not given but always open to variation, as new things are added or new relations made, creating new continuities out of such intervals or disparities.
In this unstable dynamic world, 'things' are therefore no longer defined by fixed divisions between inside and outside.
Rather this division itself comes to shift or move as outside forces cause internal variations or as internal variations create new connections with the outside.
In this way we see that 'things' belong to a dynamic rather than a static milieu.
“THE INTERIOR IS ONLY A SELECTED EXTERIOR,
AND THE EXTERIOR A PROJECTED INTERIOR.”
The inclusion is a 'realization of the possible'.
The exclusion is the 'actualization of the virtual'.
One is redundant and the other creative.
The first operates by principles of limitation and resemblance.
The other operates by differentiation, divergence, and creation.
For framing 'things' always involves, at least potentially, the possibility of deframing, where what is internal discovers a relation to what is external in such a way as to open it up to the outside.
So, it all comes down to how you frame 'things'.
The imaginary line/wall/curtain/fence/tower/mountain/water/horizon we draw around 'things':
- to define 'things' and then let them define us,
- to believe we can frame 'things', that our way is the right way, the only way
- even though in this world, we are reminded everyday of the impossibility of this enclosure.
This is how we see 'things', as a picture not as an image.
We choose to accept and allow the existence of what's inside the frame.
The well marked barriers of the frame keep us safe from the fear of its bigness, the actual impossibility to enclose it.
Do we really know what 'things' are? How they become?
Our dismissal shows we don't care to.
We have shielded ourselves from further exploration of potential uncertainty and exciting new possibilities of seeing.
We choose to include.
With each inclusion, we exclude.
We exclude the curiosity of 'things'.
We exclude the imagination of 'things'.
We exclude the inspiration from 'things'.
We exclude new forms of singularities.
We ought to not use the frame as a leash, allowing only enough rope to hang ourselves in redundancy.
The frame is anticipation.
Release the leash.
Survive absolute uncertainty.
Fully explore 'things'.
Live new singularities.
** What are these 'things'?
All of us.
All of what we are.
All of what we claim to be.
All of what we can offer.
All of what has made us.
All of what we inhabit.
All of what we destroy.
All of what we inherit.
All of what we leave behind.
All of what we learn, misunderstand, take for granted, angrily project, and (hopefully) re-learn.
All of the passive-aggressive humor we use to pat ourselves on the back for cleverly manipulating a latent refusal to face the bleakness of a conversation or topic head on.
All of what we release to the world openly on the airwaves or as underground whispers, without once turning around and directly saying it to the other (wo)man.
All of our destructive mentality that follows the oh so great disruptive ideology.
One generation after another of somewhat disruptive ideologies that follow the same destructive agenda toward the previous, the other and all visionary opponents.
Opponents as in idea opposition, not fully blown combatant.
Plague and War should be fought. Not each other.
Each generation that (thinks it) knows more than the previous, dismisses (maybe rightfully so) the incapacity/incapability that has masked the latter's ignorance and corruption.
This newbie generation that in its revolutionary manifest shows willingness to change, potential to explore, talent to break free from past mistakes, refusal to cater to political associations and powerful patrons.
This generation that wants to be so alternative, so closer to the Western standards and expectations, that has been educated and (somewhat) raised abroad.
It now refuses to listen to anyone else.
Anyone else that has the same dreams and goals and wants the same break from past mistakes.
Anyone who is a peer but has stayed away.
Anyone who is an old friend and has lived the same obstacle(d), annexed, poor childhood.
Anyone with a different idea.
Different way of doing things.
Different way of acting on 'things'.
Different way of laughing with, constructively or destructively criticizing 'things'.
Different way of framing 'things.'
Anyone else that inherently wants the same 'thing' (outcome).
To be a better (big brother) generation to our youth.
To not repeat the same destructive way of ruining our resources.
To encourage change through disruptive thinking, making, talking through, receiving, and educating the rest.
Who's this generation and who is anyone else?
It is all of us.
And the (participatory or even the unaware) rest.
These 'things' are our spatialities.
How we frame them.
How we build our society, culture, community, and value.
A mature change doesn't stop at just a paradigm shift.
Our goal should not only be about proving to the previous generation how much (more) we know or how awesomely popular our events are.
It has to be about how we are changing 'things':
in our thinking, in our approach, in the lasting impact of our efforts.
As a generation, we need to be a community (after all our goal is the same) where each of us can bring in new singularities in order to create new continuities and responsibilities for the next generation to follow.
How will they look up to us if there is no lasting change?
Change should not be stopped and renewed with each national election, and what we inherit from the previous generation should not be claimed obsolete. Let's not be redundant in repetition but unleash our creative capacity to anticipate its growth potential beyond a single generation.
Let's not (only) include ourselves and exclude our public.