variousing

Thank you for your impassioned, detailed reply. We appreciate your engagement. May we answer you this way...You said: '...As you well know, I, Joseph Albers, am dead, and now only exist as a sort of collective of notions among men. My work's impact on society is who I am now. Yes, a certain inspired faceless individual acts as operative behind this page because of the simple reality that I am not able to myself, and would never if given the choice, but that person in and of himself is not of consequence--what is significant is the fact that this page exists at all and does solely because I have become an inextricable part of the tapestry of our cultural consciousness. To think one person is behind all of the various homages to the deceased greats is to vanquish the credit these individuals deserve for the great inspiration they have bestowed upon the masses...'.To this we say: All is collective in the sense in which you offer that idea, of history, of humanity. We favour this notion itself, and celebrate the ideology behind it and those ideologies which naturally flow from it. Subscription to this - as an ideal - is both liberating and liberalising. There is, though, nothing lightweight about this; the commitment is both political and Political. Similarly, hommages - if thorough, earnest, and in good faith - are perpetuations in and of themselves. If the idea is good, then the perpetuation is useful and interesting. We are glad that different people are 'behind' each such hommage on myspace. That is simply wonderful.Best wishes, e24s RE: Sources As you well know, I, Joseph Albers, am dead, and now only exist as a sort of collective of notions among men. My work's impact on society is who I am now. Yes, a certain inspired faceless individual acts as operative behind this page because of the simple reality that I am not able to myself, and would never if given the choice, but that person in and of himself is not of consequence--what is significant is the fact that this page exists at all and does solely because I have become an inextricable part of the tapestry of our cultural consciousness. To think one person is behind all of the various homages to the deceased greats is to vanquish the credit these individuals deserve for the great inspiration they have bestowed upon the masses. Joseph Albers ----------------- Original Message ----------------- From: esoterian24skidoo Date: May 13, 2006 8:29 PM We use source in a difference sense from the one you infer in your answer; but your point is natural enough. But then - as a rejoinder - we say how far back, in history, does one go to find some basic, primal, connecting ontological well-spring? The Enlightenment is to Modernism what Modernism is to Postmodernism. Additionally, it may be true to say - or at least tenable to say - that there are several Modernisms, several varieties of Modernity. Such terms are secure only so far. By source we mean myspace operative, person. But that, of course, is clear enough; and the question remains. Dialectics is what matters. It is ultimately human and ultimately humanising. ----------------- Original Message ----------------- From: Joseph Albers Date: May 13, 2006 7:53 PM What source do you suppose all of us are coming from, if not the consequence of the legacy of modern art? Joseph Albers ----------------- Original Message ----------------- From: esoterian24skidoo Date: May 12, 2006 12:01 AM Joseph Albers we like. We like that era of Bauhaus; with it's transitions and contadictions; squaring the circle between what it was and what it was to become: a bridge between Itten as monk and Maholy-Nagy as machine, if you will. A respectful question is prompted in us: all these Modernist heroes on myspace.com - Rauschenberg, Johns, Satie, Cage, Schoenberg, Breton - are they coming from the same source, on myspace, we wonder? Regards esoterian24skidoo