"Derivision"
Derivational
Derision (derisus)
Vision
So how is it that we call into question what we see? The act of vision (VIS) is only just that, the simple act of looking with your eyes and there is nothing more but to follow through. Literally the word says that there is nothing more than to simply "see" and without the rest of the process, the imbuing of the impulse of the image with association and context, do we arrive or derive that which we relay and remember.
Innately we are prepared to tear down that thing before us; indeed our full capacity to change, adapt or adapt the world to our whims is what we are best built for. If it were not for the capacity for derision and full destruction we may never understand more than the simple use of the environment around us. Has it to be that we must destroy nearly all before we then realize the preciousness and wealth of insight that seeps up through this mockery of an approach that is man's innate ability to adapt and adapt fast? So it may be that full devastation be best described as sublime.
There is some fun is the extraction process. Pulling out of the pile the gem that only peeks or offers a suggestion of value. Trash pickers are an efficient lot. They know intuitively if any pile is worth any measure or investigation, though every pile offers some value and opportunity. Photon pullers use something like a camera and better know the process of matching the final view to the scene that started the whole investigation. Technology is changing the exploration patterns and style of these photon trash pickers, but any tool they choose is equally up to the task - the application of the results helps determine the tools needed. Deriving the steps of a history will not wait for just a look or seeing alone; in fact this endeavor pulls equally in the opposite direction that any photon collector thinks is "all theirs". So what are we looking for? Enough that there is need to record or remark and will this matter as a result of the push to clean the view of anything that intercedes the grasping of the gem clutched inside? Certainly subjectivity competes against objective derision in a view, should we accept anything less than this challenge to balance these matters?
We are keeping tract of the past and include little cipher codes in our language that spells out the chance and designed steps toward whatever revolution turns about in our heads. A derivational process to restore a degree of symmetry in our lives is a good effort and drives new creations to the foreground. These reflexive investigations carried to a high order bare out categorical comparisons clearly. Consider that with emotions torn askew and blasted for all to witness, the constructive frame laid bare is well examined, a match of insight and value is gauged and later we may say it to be complete. The selection process with the camera is a part of no other effort but to place into vision, as a remark is injected in conversation, something of a perceived gem and spares the viewer that effort to collect and process those same elements on their own. Sure we can’t all be there so what to do, but knowing that there is something created through the material of the image is only a derision of the event itself. So we may be limited with tools and need to return to think over new inventions to cover this problem. Until then choose the pen, brush, camera or a fat stick to scratch in the sand it should all do very nicely and therefore I arrive to this title: derivision. Corrupt –certainly, but at 0200 hrs I stand on this and call it enough.
Fernando Cundin
Consider these views of Cordoba, Munchen, Grecia: http://www.caballano.com/galeria.htm
Derision (derisus)
Vision
So how is it that we call into question what we see? The act of vision (VIS) is only just that, the simple act of looking with your eyes and there is nothing more but to follow through. Literally the word says that there is nothing more than to simply "see" and without the rest of the process, the imbuing of the impulse of the image with association and context, do we arrive or derive that which we relay and remember.
Innately we are prepared to tear down that thing before us; indeed our full capacity to change, adapt or adapt the world to our whims is what we are best built for. If it were not for the capacity for derision and full destruction we may never understand more than the simple use of the environment around us. Has it to be that we must destroy nearly all before we then realize the preciousness and wealth of insight that seeps up through this mockery of an approach that is man's innate ability to adapt and adapt fast? So it may be that full devastation be best described as sublime.
There is some fun is the extraction process. Pulling out of the pile the gem that only peeks or offers a suggestion of value. Trash pickers are an efficient lot. They know intuitively if any pile is worth any measure or investigation, though every pile offers some value and opportunity. Photon pullers use something like a camera and better know the process of matching the final view to the scene that started the whole investigation. Technology is changing the exploration patterns and style of these photon trash pickers, but any tool they choose is equally up to the task - the application of the results helps determine the tools needed. Deriving the steps of a history will not wait for just a look or seeing alone; in fact this endeavor pulls equally in the opposite direction that any photon collector thinks is "all theirs". So what are we looking for? Enough that there is need to record or remark and will this matter as a result of the push to clean the view of anything that intercedes the grasping of the gem clutched inside? Certainly subjectivity competes against objective derision in a view, should we accept anything less than this challenge to balance these matters?
We are keeping tract of the past and include little cipher codes in our language that spells out the chance and designed steps toward whatever revolution turns about in our heads. A derivational process to restore a degree of symmetry in our lives is a good effort and drives new creations to the foreground. These reflexive investigations carried to a high order bare out categorical comparisons clearly. Consider that with emotions torn askew and blasted for all to witness, the constructive frame laid bare is well examined, a match of insight and value is gauged and later we may say it to be complete. The selection process with the camera is a part of no other effort but to place into vision, as a remark is injected in conversation, something of a perceived gem and spares the viewer that effort to collect and process those same elements on their own. Sure we can’t all be there so what to do, but knowing that there is something created through the material of the image is only a derision of the event itself. So we may be limited with tools and need to return to think over new inventions to cover this problem. Until then choose the pen, brush, camera or a fat stick to scratch in the sand it should all do very nicely and therefore I arrive to this title: derivision. Corrupt –certainly, but at 0200 hrs I stand on this and call it enough.
Fernando Cundin
Consider these views of Cordoba, Munchen, Grecia: http://www.caballano.com/galeria.htm
Comments