There are those who would say that removing all the letters from the Guardian and replacing them in alphabetical order would constitute a significant improvement.
I’m guessing the suspicion of OCD is a selling feature. There’s the usual press guff about deconstruction, “provocative commentary” and the “re-appropriation of medium and meaning.” But what’s interesting, or almost interesting, is the patience, precision and implied obsessiveness. A few years ago, an artist named Rutherford Chang did something similar, though less engaging. And I’m pretty sure someone alphabetised the Bible, though not, I think, by hand.
I like what she does, however bizarre, but would like to know if she earns money from it. Not that I care, being a taxpayer who has to try to educate kids who dunt wanna learn mate, but is this a state-funded hobby?
Ah, I see...Her philosophical divestiture of certain alpha-glyphs is an attempt to disengage a highly intricate local axiological set from subsistence behaviors that are regenerative of mainstream print media’s deep structure and its basis as a conduit for fascist patterns of social interaction. In this context, she shows that globalization (as was colonialism before it) becomes a revived process that divests the local of its model for human development, and thus attempts to delegitimate iconoclastic social behaviors.
To question her funding sources is rather gauche, wouldn't you say Sting?
Finally, a use for OCD.
Posted by: Daniel | November 09, 2010 at 07:49
There are those who would say that removing all the letters from the Guardian and replacing them in alphabetical order would constitute a significant improvement.
Posted by: Andy H | November 09, 2010 at 07:55
“Finally, a use for OCD.”
I’m guessing the suspicion of OCD is a selling feature. There’s the usual press guff about deconstruction, “provocative commentary” and the “re-appropriation of medium and meaning.” But what’s interesting, or almost interesting, is the patience, precision and implied obsessiveness. A few years ago, an artist named Rutherford Chang did something similar, though less engaging. And I’m pretty sure someone alphabetised the Bible, though not, I think, by hand.
http://www.cabinetmagazine.org/issues/15/chang.php
Posted by: David | November 09, 2010 at 08:06
I like what she does, however bizarre, but would like to know if she earns money from it. Not that I care, being a taxpayer who has to try to educate kids who dunt wanna learn mate, but is this a state-funded hobby?
Posted by: Sting | November 09, 2010 at 09:29
Bet she has cats.
Posted by: AC1 | November 09, 2010 at 15:39
Ah, I see...Her philosophical divestiture of certain alpha-glyphs is an attempt to disengage a highly intricate local axiological set from subsistence behaviors that are regenerative of mainstream print media’s deep structure and its basis as a conduit for fascist patterns of social interaction. In this context, she shows that globalization (as was colonialism before it) becomes a revived process that divests the local of its model for human development, and thus attempts to delegitimate iconoclastic social behaviors.
To question her funding sources is rather gauche, wouldn't you say Sting?
Posted by: WTP | November 09, 2010 at 17:15
"but is this a state-funded hobby?"
As Natalie Solent pointed out in Samizdata today, arts funding is producing an ever-increasing ammount of commercial revenue:
http://www.samizdata.net/blog/archives/2010/11/is_this_what_th_1.html
Posted by: Ted S., Catskills, NY | November 10, 2010 at 11:51
"To question her funding sources is rather gauche, wouldn't you say Sting?"
I used to paint with gauche at art college, does this count? Wait... or was that gouache...?
Posted by: Sting | November 10, 2010 at 20:16