Sunday, December 7, 2008

THE ANTI-MATERIAL MOVEMENT




well, it makes sense that we would arrive here sooner or later. I mean captialism has indeed conquered the world. just at the moment that we focus so entirely on material things and their possession (down to ideas & images & colors). . .we have subconsciously invented a cavernous virtual shadow world.

In this other world, we can horde infinite invisible space seemingly without consequence. . . build storages of thoughts and images, of alternative lives and architectures. . . all of which can be pulled up at will, much better than any human kind of memory. I dare say, artists no longer need canvas to secure their identity as leading communicators & image-makers & thinkers.

At first, we have found that mundane information no longer needs to take up space in our physical world. already we are free of a lot of our little things: photo albums, notebooks, music, list of contacts, bills, resumes, art portfolios. . .we now keep all that online. up there, no storm that can wipe it out, or so we believe. . . that virtual world floats above us somewhere, decentralized and uber-safe.

we can swap or sell or release all kinds of our junk through sites like craigslist and ebay. the unwanted trash is just flying through the air. unused spaces trade by seasons. (and, driving this over-production of trash is online shopping: the mail has never carried so much crap.)

there's also the added element of speed. For a common person, to be attached to things such as a house, or a neighborhood or a culture in a particular place and time. . .these notions are no longer stable in our rapidly changing physical world. large parts of our environment may change before our eyes at any given moment. the more we reconcile with this, the healthier we can be. so, perhaps there's a class of us forming who are free from a certain burden of materiality.

this of course, may not apply to some ruling elite (the wealthy who can own their own island, gate and make permanent a landmark or a community, build their own remote mega-city or protected wilderness). For they seem to be surging ahead into a mad materialism, despite an unpredictable world economy. this foolish and endulgent focus on bling things makes them especially deaf to the cries of the Earth itself, which seems to be instigating her own share of change and unpredictability. . .upon all of us ultimately material beings.

for most of us, making-do and fixing what we have, choosing our tech very shrewdly. . .it behooves us to move in the opposite direction from extreme materiality. the internet certainly can be of help here. the lighter we are, the more free to move around, and the less space we have to pay to occupy. perhaps, in time, this sort of resulting lifestyle might create the need for more "natural" as well as non-comercial public spaces. (one of my favorite ideas is: the transformed library space of our near future. its a sort of country-wide development of large, museum scale public living rooms of knowledge. . .these places would be as frequent to find in cities as coffee shops. diverse in environment, some full of plants as well as screens and glassed in discussion rooms, designed by local artists, interior designers and architects. some "libraries" would display actual books and archives of objects. other "libraries" might be solemn and sparse, with silence policies, like secular temples for contemplation or simple urban rest).

my friend carro (local artist lillian blades' husband, exceptional collector of objects) says that the one thing that high capitalism will always produce is waste. such a wise thing to say from a man who scourges the auctions and estate sales and thrift stores for modern furniture to resell. it will be a long time until we might really de-materialize. . .and get to be bodies on a more "natural" planet. . .all our materiality gloming up that other super developed virtual world. . .

for now we have tiers and tiers of garbage people (myself included), sifting through the streams of things and spaces falling apart and being thrown away. . .looking for diamonds.

two beloved references:
both called for the re-spiritualization of contemporary society
(two totally outsider perspectives):

Alexander Solzhenitsyn (critic of soviet russia) http://www.firstthings.com/onthesquare/?p=1143

Russell Means (American Indian activist and actor) http://www.russellmeans.com


-kt

6 comments:

Adam said...

Are you aware of the readings of ray kurzweil? I'm about to get two book's where he predicts where all this technology will get us in the 21st century and beyond. Look at what he says:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Age_of_Spiritual_Machines

and

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Singularity_is_Near

Adam said...

"Aware of the readings?"

What language do i speaking?

Ktauches said...

I don't know kurzweil. . .I will follow yr lead. . .thnx, adam.

(I love keeping a blog, its so educational)

-kt

also here are the url's . . .for some reason it wouldn't put them inside the blog entry:

Alexander Solzhenitsyn (critic of soviet russia)
this is a really good analysis of his position

www.firstthings.com/onthesquare/?p=1143

Treadwell said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Treadwell said...

maybe we'll digitize ourselves. dabble in an ebb and flow of creation: materialize on command. eugenics like minute rice. eHarmony.com on a whole new level.

actually, i figure once we tap into the cns with something akin to incessant orgasm life as we know it will be blissful abeyance: heaven. Dope me in.

-bt

Ktauches said...

wow. . ."eugenics like minute rice."

that's a keeper. although I hope that the more in control we are through technology (every detail can be engineered to a desired effect), the more out of control/elusive things become (the known universe is expansive). More control means more complication, more rules and heirarchies and this sort of society is locked away from raw creativity, freedom of expression, adventure and wildernesses, which steams up throw the blocked vents.

this makes me think of a basic understanding of the mechanics of communications. when a new stream of communication is established, it is usually a one-way broadcast. there's an instigator and a receiver. but then in time the receiver learns how to use the channel to respond back, and the original channel opens up wider the more it is used. the more the channel is used by a multitude of users, the less control there can be.

-kt