[Nettime-bold] (no subject)

[integer@www.god-emil.dk]

>hi,

i am human


>maybe you'd like to spend some time explaining to me certain points
>which i really didn't understand from your nettime post.  i believe i
>got the gist of it, but something does bug me about your post & i'd like
>to investigate why.
>
>> lastly - only artists desire money.
>
>how is that true?  

is it false +?

>unless you have a radically different definition of
>"artists" as usually accepted.

tell me - what is accepted +?


>> as tzara wrote `simple men manifest their existences by houses, important men by monuments`
>
>how is that relevant?

are you an artist +?


>> next to humans, money is the most inexpensive life form.
>
>how is money "more inexpensive than humans"?  how do you calculate the
>"cost" of a "life form"?

i.ll pay handsomely if you do my errands.


>> art sells the tools [religion. state. money. coca cola etc] which plant slaves on the plantation.
>> money is utilized to stage theatre revolutions that slash and burn plantations.
>
>what theatre revolutions?

there is one enjoyment that if i permit 
it would cost me a thhhhhhhhooousand other enjoyments.
you understand yes +?


>is that all there is to the role of money?
>
>> next to money art is the most humane currency.
>
>humane in what sense?

in the purely empirical sense.


>> in any case - art is for plebeians by plebeians.
>> important life forms ....
>> 
>>         once upon a time a single-celled organism swallowed a
>>         photosynthetic bacterium and created the first plant cell.
>>         the bacterium became a chloroplast converting light into
>>         energy on behalf of the plant - and the rest is history.
>> 
>>         other single-celled organisms just kept on swallowing.
>>         single-celled algae swallowed primeval plant cells;
>>         these were in turn swallowed by larger single-celled organisms
>>         creating microscopic russian dolls.
>> 
>> give life.
>
>interesting metaphor.  i (think i) understand you're justifying your own
>software work by showing how creating tools allows for art to exist
>whereas art doesn't create more art per se, which is an attractive
>argument to say the least, but i'm guessing that's not all there is. 

you have guessed correctly!
i was referring to my neightbor.
she gave life. 

can you do that +?


>for one, what does money have to do with your argument?

money is the most affordable introduction to consciousness!!!


>i hope you don't find these questions too picky.  

moi +?

i like answering you.

>it's possible most of
>my misunderstanding is in fact due to my little knowledge of your
>language.  

you want me to teach you +?
careful - you will then have less excuses.

>at any rate thanks for your help if you do decide to reply,

it is my pleasure!

>as i am, in fact, very interested in your answer.

that makex me all warm + giddy!!!!

>have a nice day

to you as well!!!!

>~ david

bye bye. 

nn







_______________________________________________
Nettime-bold mailing list
Nettime-bold@nettime.org
http://www.nettime.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-bold