note to self re notes to self: plz provide translation and/or TARDIS, yr pal LORD SUKRAT
ok this one (and it’s NOT THAT OLD) reads:
• read ziz — [what? which bit? ALL OF HIM!?]
• = suss’n of BNs — [actually translated by pure chance -- see below]
• zizek/banksy — [yes? and?]
• g04 — [are these like separate articles i'm reminding myself to write or is there some logical route implied?]
• stockholm — [monsters? syndrome? possible holiday?]
csi: interzone — [see THIS i recall! it was a stand-alone rfn idea anent the war in lebanon and the privileging of internet forensic in ref photographs over reported accounts from witnesses: the "EVIDENCE CANNOT LIE", as grissom sez, suggests the VICTIMS ALWAYS DO]
• age of heroes — [this is most likely shorthand for my favourite adorno aphorism: "horses are the survivors of the age of heroes", epigraph to "in search of wagner" -- i'm certain i had no plan to write a stand-alone piece on THIS, so that makes the list stages in an argument... but WHAT?]
• paris vs alger — [horatio alger? alger hiss?]
to be fair (to who? YOU? ahahaha) this is separated on the page so issume not part of this er “idea”
translation (FSVO): on another bit of paper, i find the following: “sussuration of betes noires — BANKSY, a GEEZER, a little bit whoo, a bit wahey” — AHA er
Site powered by
Tom on July 5th, 2007
Banksy linked to Gang of 4 album covers maybe?
FT's pˆnk s lord sükråt cunctør on July 5th, 2007
ok haha ploughing through the same pile i just turned up my ALL-TIME FAVOURITE BRUSQUELY OPAQUE NOTE TO SELF — which just reads “bubble”! — except this time, weirdly enuff, i think i recall what it means, which is as follows:
ITEM! bubbles in ref.economic value are unstable and preface market collapses, but what if bubbles in ref.cultural value are NOT?
FT's pˆnk s lord sükråt cunctør on July 5th, 2007
yes my GUESS is it contrast G04 guilty-pleasure connection to pop drive with banksy’s ditto — that in both cases here’s indulgence cast as critique, except that with G04, actual incompetence in craft-skill terms (can’t sing, can’t funk) is fetishised as “critical content”, an issue which doesn’t arise with banksy (he CAN draw — just to pick up on the classic anti-modernist diss)
Tom on July 5th, 2007
Did you read the “Is Banksy Good?” piece today by the Graun art critic? My enemy’s enemy and all that but it was pretty awful. (sample critique: B’s picture of the grim reaper with a smiley face isn’t very scary)
FT's pˆnk s lord sükråt cunctør on July 5th, 2007
no! and nor do i plan to until THIS is canon
Marcello Carlin on July 6th, 2007
HORRIBLE MICE actually sums it up quite nicely.
Also you have clearly demonstrated why the KLF were so brilliant as a Number One Pop Group and so hopeless as Number 1920 Conceptual Artists.
(in pop terms I take the HORRIBLE DOG equivalent to be the SR2 Moebius strip - i.e. S Rowley/S Reynolds, Guilty Pleasures TM vs - but not really - Hauntology TM viz SCARED OF HAPPY/FRIT OF LOSING YOURSELF in the Syd/Sid sense?)
FT's pˆnk s lord sükråt cunctør on July 6th, 2007
the actual real mice in my building seem to have vanished since mr b. switched his attentions to rawther lame LP-sleeve parodies: WHICH CAN BE NO COINCIDENCE
(who is s.rowley?)
Marcello Carlin on July 6th, 2007
Currently, the earthly personification of the Devil:
http://www.guiltypleasures.co.uk/
FT's pˆnk s lord sükråt cunctør on July 6th, 2007
ah right!
tardisnote to sukrat:
be more&more pro-pop by knowing less&less about it! hurrah!
Marcello Carlin on July 6th, 2007
Which brings us very smartly back to the Sweet…