« links for 2007-06-04 | Main | links for 2007-06-05 »

June 04, 2007


Hi Rod, stumbled across your capsule review of my talk via my blog referrers. I like your quote "...it appears to end at process-as-process and spherical-space-looks-better aesthetics.", will have to remember that.

You're right, there is no narrative or explicit ideas underpinning my work. My interest is in formal systems and kinetic behaviors as compositions. Not everybody's cup of tea, I guess.

I'm glad you like process-as-process but of course I now feel like I've been too blunt in my comment. I guess I tend to take "art" and "design" and pull them apart fairly brutally, requiring different things from each (and the inherent problems in both those labels and in any binary art/design opposition there being totally acknowledged...).

Meant to catch up with you afterwards and say hello - next time perhaps.

No need to worry about bluntness, it's rare to find direct commentary of any kind on blogs.

I don't think what you're talking about is a question of art vs. design. It seems to me that you're looking for something in the work that would resonate with your own expectations, essentially that the work should carry "meaning". My work doesn't - or at least not in a classical sense. But then neither does a Malevitch or a Rothko.

So I would tend to think that my work simply doesn't do it for you. Which I actually don't have a problem with at all.

Let's hook up next time and talk about it over a beer!

Jyri's beam-hum spectrum is slide 72 of his presentation, here:

The comments to this entry are closed.