You know, of course, that Malcolm Payne claims that there is no such thing as a visual metaphor. Apparently, metaphor is strictly something that is written or spoken in good old language. So, your post means nothing, actually. That is, if you are prof. Payne...
MP dude, visual analogy? i thought that's what it's called. who cares anyway, we are a bunch of dislexic apathetic sloppy tongued half castes with no clue how to make real meaning anymore. we might as well just grunt and sms the rest. you have to be so up the asshole of the cool kids to care about this inside joke anyway (here i refer to exhibit A -pussy- and exhibit B -black cock...hope it was good). when is art heat going to start kicking out the jams? Is this all we can talk about in the artworld?
Neither metaphor (for?) nor visual analogy (to what?) but an image of a kitten and one of a black cock/rooster/chicken like bird. Two signs fill our visual field, and by naming them, meaning, whatever that means, occurs, but only within a closed loop, that is within a previously ordained system, a learned language. In so doing they, these images become (or acquire the potency of) linguistic signs. By placing the words white pussy and black cock together, nothing surprising occurs. Its rather ob, done before, not even funny. It wouldnt even be funny if the pussy was black and the cock white. It only shows, Linda, to pinch from a semiotitian, that signs have a contextual destiny. Be warned.
What is a "contextual destiny" in this context? To pinch from the same semiotician: "where is my mascara"? Is the fact that this visual analogy (or are we forbidden to use this phase?) a hoary one significant here? As Ed Young writing as Andrew Lamprecht would say, surely the fact that this has not been done in this specific context (Artheat in South Africa about LS & LT) not ample justification for the posting?
all this anonymity is tres confusing... please adopt a name -any name. the volleys are hard to follow. I posted anonymous no.2 above. apologies, thought i was (b)logged on. nuff said. i am not linda but do wish i had a horse. dark horse. mmm.
oh, I really do get it now! the whole Black Cock/white pussy thing! I mean, I suppose thats funny, right? Its like, alluding visually to linda and that other dude?? Right? Would someone please just lay this out for me??????
10 Comments:
You know, of course, that Malcolm Payne claims that there is no such thing as a visual metaphor. Apparently, metaphor is strictly something that is written or spoken in good old language. So, your post means nothing, actually. That is, if you are prof. Payne...
MP dude, visual analogy? i thought that's what it's called.
who cares anyway, we are a bunch of dislexic apathetic sloppy tongued half castes with no clue how to make real meaning anymore. we might as well just grunt and sms the rest. you have to be so up the asshole of the cool kids to care about this inside joke anyway (here i refer to exhibit A -pussy- and exhibit B -black cock...hope it was good). when is art heat going to start kicking out the jams? Is this all we can talk about in the artworld?
Neither metaphor (for?) nor visual analogy (to what?) but an image of a kitten and one of a black cock/rooster/chicken like bird. Two signs fill our visual field, and by naming them, meaning, whatever that means, occurs, but only within a closed loop, that is within a previously ordained system, a learned language. In so doing they, these images become (or acquire the potency of) linguistic signs. By placing the words white pussy and black cock together, nothing surprising occurs. Its rather ob, done before, not even funny. It wouldnt even be funny if the pussy was black and the cock white. It only shows, Linda, to pinch from a semiotitian, that signs have a contextual destiny. Be warned.
Okay, which one of you is Malcie?
What is a "contextual destiny" in this context? To pinch from the same semiotician: "where is my mascara"? Is the fact that this visual analogy (or are we forbidden to use this phase?) a hoary one significant here? As Ed Young writing as Andrew Lamprecht would say, surely the fact that this has not been done in this specific context (Artheat in South Africa about LS & LT) not ample justification for the posting?
Who are "we"? What is "forbidden"? What is a "specific context"?What is "ample justification"? Touchy? It all sounds very South African.
all this anonymity is tres confusing... please adopt a name -any name. the volleys are hard to follow. I posted anonymous no.2 above. apologies, thought i was (b)logged on. nuff said. i am not linda but do wish i had a horse. dark horse. mmm.
I know I'm really intelligent and stuff but I'm just a bit busy being hot right now.
one word... vanity
oh, I really do get it now! the whole Black Cock/white pussy thing! I mean, I suppose thats funny, right? Its like, alluding visually to linda and that other dude?? Right? Would someone please just lay this out for me??????
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home