Art is total freedom

From Eluminatus

In an early 2006 lecture on "The Future of Computer Science Theory", John Hopcroft (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_E._Hopcroft) pointed out that an emerging trend for dealing with high-dimensional problems is to project onto a lower number of dimensions and then clean up outliers and other errors.

How does this look from the standpoint (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standpoint_theory) of the outlier -- or, more generally, the anomaly?

It looks like you don't exist -- you're an "outlier" or "error".

Two years later, I was doing some political activism on Facebook, and repeatedly triggering their spam filters (http://www.talesfromthe.net/jon/?p=82). Discussion with their customer support folks confirmed that I was sending "too many links", and they reminded me that "these limits are not set to affect the normal user".

Definitions for anomaly (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anomaly) include

• something that deviates from the norm or from expectations
• something strange and difficult to identify or classify
• a deviation from the common rule
• an irregularity that is difficult to explain using existing rules or theory

Theories, societies, and people have a hard time dealing with anomalies, and so the natural tendency is to make them fit existing norms [or expectations -- or alternatively to try to make them disappear. In many cases it's the anomalies that are the most interesting: the data points that show the limitations of a current theory, the interdisciplinary works that combine different viewpoints, the people with radically different outlooks on the world.

Anomalies are frequently to be intersection points in the network-of-networks. And anomalies tend to attract or discover other anomalies; so they're frequently hubs and linked to other hubs. Scott Page (http://www.cscs.umich.edu/~spage/)'s book The Difference (http://press.princeton.edu/titles/8353.html) explores how groups with diverse cognitive "toolboxes" (techniques, perspectives and experiences) outperform individuals -- even experts. (A thread on Liminal States (http://www.talesfromthe.net/jon/?p=111) gives some examples.) Anomalies provide additional toolboxes to any group, and so as long as the group accepts them and everybody works to overcome communication gaps, contribute disproportionately to better results... and transformational change.

Don't fear the anomaly; worship it.

See also: Eris and the anomaly, The anomaly and the goddesses, What an anomaly

Seduction, Fantasy, and Reality

At least for me, seduction operates largely at the boundary between fantasy and reality. I can't find the thread any more, but Libby and I once speculated that one good general approach to seduction was helping somebody live out their fantasies (through or enabled by you, the seducer).

What's especially exciting is when the fantasies starting in the seduction spill over to the rest of reality -- influencing, transforming ... revealing that the boundary between "fantasy" and "reality" (or "art" and "life") is much fuzzier than we usually consider it. I like that.

-- me (as OccasionallyFlouncy), on Seducersworld, November 2005 (http://p076.ezboard.com/fseducersworldfrm2.showMessageRange?topicID=1023.topic)

The rest of the Seduction, fantasy, and reality thread from November 2005 went incredibly well. It's mostly me talking, with enthusiastic agreement from pip, blackmojopin, and Lola; good questions and other viewpoints from soren, DaughterOfBaal and Dr. Jackal; and a classic from Professional: "I'm not familiar with any virtuous cycle." It's got references to several other great threads, Foucault, Hakim Bey, Torbett's Developmental Action Inquiry. It's a good place to start.

In July 2007, I started up an association on free-association with the same name. The original Subtle Seductions/Full On Flirtations association had been pretty quiet for a while, which I thought was a shame. Could kicking off a new association and restarting seductive interviews help to get it going? (It did, briefly; longer-term effects are still TBD.) At the same time, the tone in most of the areas of free-association I was hanging out was not what I found seductive: too much cynicism and geek humor. As Seducersworld continued to have problems, I thought it would be great if there was a haven in place for anybody who wanted to get away -- including me. It's early days yet ... we shall see.

Thinking of you

From Dzogchen Ponlop's Mind Beyond Death's discussion of the Dzogchen Buddhist tradition of the four great modes of liberation:

• Primordial liberation: When a moment of passion arises in a vivid and sharp manner ... it is already free from concepts; therefore, it is primordially and utterly free.
• Self-liberation: Like a snake that simply uncoils itself form its own not, passion returns to its natural state, already in the nature of transcendence. We cannot purify or transform passion except through passion itself.
• Naked liberation occurs when the mind observes itself. When passion arises and we look at it nakedly and straightforwardly, the very process of looking liberates the experience of passion. That vibrant, radiant, quality shows us the actual insubstantial nature of mind.
• Complete liberation occurs when passion is further liberated as mind observes the experience of passion again and again. In the first moment of the arising of passion, we look at it directly, and it liberates itself. In the second moment, we look directly again and it liberates itself further and further, or more completely.

an alternate approach to "add one or two at a time": attempt to add many rituals and observe which ones stick. introspect. iterate. success feeds on itself; complements existing thinking about which one or two to prioritize.

add reflexivity: while performing, be conscious of how the performance is composed of rituals, the interactions between the rituals and the performances, the way the rituals and performances have evolved (and what i was thinking at the time), and -- perhaps most importantly -- the destination i seek ... and why.

a few of the times i find myself thinking of you:

• as i wake up, dream images of you mingling with thoughts from the night before -- and anticipation of the day to come. how much more in love with you am i now than when i went to sleep? how much more in love will i be when i go to sleep tonight?
• in the shower and getting dressed (or contemplating it), replaying yesterday and considering the way i'll approach today. what will i wear, do, say, think that might put a smile on your face -- and remind me of you throughout the day? what experiences and memories and fantasies will this trigger? what opportunities did i miss yesterday, and how will i be more conscious of them today?
• whenever i check email at a place where we sometimes communicate (will there be something from you? should i drop you a note just to let you know i'm thinking of you?) or my phone rings (will it be you?) or ...
• whenever i enjoy (or think about) something tasty and/or intoxicating that reminds me of you
• whenever a word, or phrase, or image, or color that reminds me of you occurs -- in conversation, in something i'm reading or watching, ...
• whenever i see someone who looks vaguely like you, even if only partially (hair, movements, sense of style) or in general impression ("beautiful", "gorgeous", "sexy", "coquettish")
• whenever i'm working on, or appreciating, poetry ... any kind of art, really, but especially poetry
• as i go to sleep perhaps with the words of a favorite poem in mind. how did i transform today? how often did i think of you? how relaxed and happy did it make me feel?
• when asleep, in my dreams (with you there in my mind as i fall to sleep night after night, i guess it's not surprising this happens so often!) ... or present in my mind even when i'm not dreaming
• and whenever i experience -- or remember, anticipate, think abstractly, fantasize about -- desire

status check: which do i do regularly? which happen without even thinking about it? what opportunities are there to improve, or add more?

Our threads are the ashes of our art

 "We must create ourselves as a work of art" - Foucault (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michel_Foucault)

 "... Foucault, it definitely starts with Foucault " - What kind of postmodernist are you!? (http://www.quizilla.com/users/qirin/quizzes/What%20kind%20of%20postmodernist%20are%20you!%3F/)

Stripping this quote from its detailed context gives it a multiplicity of possible meanings. Since Foucault said it, it may well have something to do with power ... perhaps one or more of the following

• It is a moral imperative (perhaps because in the end there are no other options to create change)
• It's inevitable that we will do so -- might as be intentional about it
• It won't happen accidentally; if we want to be a work of art, we have to create ourselves
• Free your mind and your ass will follow and/or vice versa

This site (especially the poems, stories, and meditations) is a performative process of transformational self-creation.

See also: Our threads are the ashes of our art

On discussion forums (whether of the classic BBS, Usenet, and VAX Notes varieties -- or the more snazzy and 21st-century blogs and social networks), sometimes threads and sequences of threads turn into collaborative performances. The static representation remains after the fact ... but like Yves Klein's paintings, it's only the remnants of the art.

See also: Art is total freedom, We must create ourselves as a work of art