Proceed by sense alone.
What work? Think! Think!
in the work I’ve done, the objects have been part-objects, even when dealing with characters, Brecht, for example in Simplicity [page below], have been unsatisfying – insufficient to the sensed imperceptible, in the end lying just outside, husks and shells: husk forms, shell contents. A tone of rhetoric or an attitude, antipoetic, for example, has prevailed over the breakthrough, which has always been a matter of leaving the egg only to find oneself in an endless incubator. Representation has affirmed representation, in error. The error being that there is nothing outside of representation, when exactly that nothing can provide the difference, does.
Deleuze contradicts Werner Herzog’s “What we lack are sufficient images” by saying that it’s not that there are too many images, it is rather that there are too many cliches. A cliche will never cut through the veil of cliches (think apocolyptic banality!), yet in opposing cliche to banality to cliche, I’ve imagined the veil rent, the temple overturned.
Antipoetry, like atheism, is grounded on a prior affirmation of that which it negates, a judgement in its critique. Duchamp’s ‘anart’, in contrast, finds its object outside art without negating art, without a critique, a morality. Duchamp: ”I wanted to destroy art – only for myself.”
