My Daily Food Readings

So I often check Serious Eats and NY Mag maybe every day or one every two days. Its very... hypocritical of me.

I would occasionally see articles that say that "this place has the best" so and so. Or this restaurant has awesomely good food voted best by out taste testers.

I'm sorry but I'm beginning to think that these blogs are either selling out or have no taste.

Ny Mag:
1. David Chang
2. General Greene
3. The Vanderbilt

These guys have low rankings on yelp. Not only that but I think David Chang likes salt too much. Even my friend who drinks soysauce thinks his stuff is too salty.

Serious Eats
1. Little Red Hen for Best Cheesecake
2. Amy's Bread for Best Carrot Cake

I'm sorry but I'm tired of Two Little Red Hens getting rep in Red Velvet and Cheesecake. Its seriously not that good to me. but this is just one person's opinion. At least I want the hype turned down a bit. Just a bit.

As for amy's bread, I'm sure they have good bread and I have not tried their carrot cake yet, (though I am always willing to be proved right because if its actually good, then I'll be very happy.) However, Their red velvet had stellar rankings from multiple sources and as a foreigner that was so excited to try her first red velvet cupcake for the first time, theirs was a failure.

I'm just saying. Take things with a grain of salt and trust your instincts. I know what I like, but people can have different tastes. Just because people say certain restaurants are the best and its on a blog doesnt mean that they're not getting money from the place.

What Have I Learned So Far

Pints of Ice Cream dont taste as appetizing as they sound like.

As for the Cube:

My thoughts are currently waning of interest. Maybe if I put it under a different context, I can salvage it.

So what I have to say about it for now:
Definitely I guess its more of a self portraiture. I’m egotistic that way. I end up making things saying everything I want to say and not saying more. And its hard for people to understand that because innately, I am a silent person. (This is true. I just “learned” how to talk to people when I began to live in america.) Talking with Peter (Patchen) was an enlightening experience and I appreciate him giving me incredible amounts of frustration (and I’d appreciate it more if I was given food). And I am one that easily gets discouraged.

Take for example my type class. My teachers questioned why I made such a move, I was eager to corrected it how they suited, and later they tried to defend my initial design.

As Rob said, I want people to tell me its okay.

Which is weird, because even if “its okay” (its not only Rob that says this, interestingly enough) and I can do whatever I really want, my perspective of this freedom is more like: I can do whatever I want and I wont be questioned for it.
and what is being given to me is not really that.

I do understand that discussion and argument over a piece gives it more depth and value, but I am a spoiled brat and I'm not very good at talking. I'm not very good at arguing either. It has something to do with my low self esteem (I cant stand by my opinion and believe what I think is right) and my horrible sense of memory (I dont remember what my opinion was exactly and I forget what I believed it again however, I often feel opposite about certain things.)

I personally dont think I'm fit for the real world. Theres nothing that I *really* want to do. Eating is a hobby I'm hooking myself into so that I can tolerate the rest of life and actually look forward to something (like my next meal). And art is entertaining. (Ooo, this might insult people.)

Though I do often sway between extremely clingy and extremely apathetic, I realized over time and age, to survive live in the world, you have to hold on to something. Whether that is your art, yourself, or your dreams, or some person or thing, you have to hold on to something and cling to it for dear life till the end of your days. Why? because if not, you'll just slip into nothingness. (ahh thesis...)

You will slip into the fact that you will die, you will deteriorate, you will watch and be watched by the world and by everything around you and the days will just continue. There is nothing to ground you. Nothing to make you cling into the moment of the world's sense of time, or overlap itself into venn diagrams of different contexts.

Like how atoms pop in and out of existence, you will pop in and out of existence with not memory or trace of yourself anywhere.

i do believe, though I have argued about this with Peter, that your are your work. You are not exactly our work but it is part of you. Everything you make would be a form of self portraiture. Your actions and your choices define you, whether it is something you intend to do or not intend to do, it adds to your story.

Well. Thats how I feel about that.

Moving on.

COMPOSITING PROJECT TWAH!

For some reason, the word disperse has been my favorite word since elementary. There is a difference with what I want from what is more commonly known of what I want.

I want to disappear. I dont want to die. But I want to be gone from the face of the earth. As if nobody knew me and nobody cared.

Though, it might be “emo” let me explain the reason of why I live: I live to repay my parents the amount of money that they spent on me my entire life so that I can leave without feeling debt. This discussion can go into length but think of it this way, think of a project that you’ve wasted so much time and money on and all the sudden it just crashed on you. Wouldnt you be pissed?

Back to my main point. Disperse. But more importantly, particles. (aha!) The other day, I had an amazing experience which is difficult to describe in words. But to give you a visual, I had a good moment of peace. A moment when all was right in the world and all I wanted to do was disappear in the moment.

My idea was of someone sleeping in the afternoon. and slowly their body disappears, not in a ghostly fashion but piece by piece. In beautiful days, in nice weather, when you just have to experience the air and do nothing, mentally, you just melt away.

And right now I would be talking more about this but I have to do other hw. ciao.

Things are in their Nature to do what they do.

So leave things alone and stop questioning it.

I think that just sums up everything I have to say.

So as for my little self destructive box:
1. person dependent or not person dependent
1.1 person dependent makes it more interesting and it will last longer
1.2 not person dependent is true to the idea about nothing: separation and numbness.
2. plaster boxes are killing me
2.1 its hard to establish consistency
2.2 i have to make multiples
2.3 i just realized that the speakers might need to be attached to these
3. thoughts on the second piece
3.1 a soundless room is not possible without killing people via vacuum
3.2 emitting sound back to the speaker so that they can "feel the vibrations of their own voices/selves"
3.3 translation over translation over translation > loss of meaning > its all about kinetic sculptures baby.
3.3.1 the idea of distillation, reduction to produce and essence
3.3.2 translating a form of something over and over again in different ways. point? the fact that there is no point, things are just regurgitations of other things. ie. it is not really a box but an alignment of pixels, and they are not really pixels but a combination of 1s and 0s and light being emitted and BLAH BLAH BLAH

Suggestions from Faculty:
1. research on minimalism
2. play with words
3. "put your mark on it"


BY THE WAY,
I want to move into graphic design temporarily. just a thought.

i've been thinking a lot

and I dont know if I am being productive but it is either because my subject is about nothing or it is my short term memory or it is my low self esteem.

Why would one think my low self esteem has a play in this?

"The more I read, the more I meditate, the more I can affirm that I know nothing at all."
-Voltaire

"Only the shallow know themselves."
- Oscar Wilde

Which pisses me off because I prided myself as a shallow person.

I feel like the more i try to add meaning to the "nothingness" the bigger the void becomes. It was interesting because in my type class, my teacher was telling me to make a part of the project simple. However it bothered me because, I didnt want to look like I was slacking off by putting so little on the page.



as my friday was ticking away, I had to do hw but I dont want to do it, but I dont want to be unproductive so I started drawing hair-like lines on a sheet of paper. Though I admit, I edited this in PS a bit, i felt like... it was showing me a direction (such a gay ass statement).

because, though the scan of it looked horrible, the real one on the sheet looked as if it had much depth in it. there was something behind those hair like strands. As I was drawing these lines, there would be little pockets of space that for some reason, my hand couldnt draw on.

as if it was natural to leave that space and to not make a straight line.

Its interesting to think that, how geometry is taken from nature, I dont think there really is anything in the world that is a straight line, or a perfect circle.

It interestingly distorted.

You know how people have dreams? I usually dont remember my dreams. My dreams are never vivid or memorable ot anything interesting. But what happens to me that is often is that I get stuck between the waking realm and the sleeping realm. what i mean is that, i am awake but my body cannot move.

It seriously bothers me because there would be moments where I can feel something touch me or brush against me but I live in my studio alone. Seriously. It's so fucking creepy. And its been happening more often now (the past two years) than before.

But it is an interesting sensation. Like your fingertips are on the edge of something you are trying to each.

I dont think. I think thats the reason why I'm having such a hard time with concept. It has always been abstracted to a memory of impression. That is why I suck at telling stories. I can never tell it well because I barely remember it but I do remember finding the story funny or annoying.

Anyway. thats my two cents of the day. I have more to think about. Its spring break!

Thinking and Scheduling

I somehow got myself an small internship even though I wasnt planning on getting one. But I wanted to help the person out because she seemed in distress and I wanted to help her out.

My problem is that, I seem to not have enough time for one because my classes are all.. killing me one way or another. I just had some major digestive discomfort from my time class out of stress and panic.

ANYWAY.

I was happy to be helped by those who offer. The concept is developing slowly as I continue reading. However, readings that I have partialy digested I agree with, I dont want it to be too scattered.

But on the other hand, I am those types of people were I want everything mixed into this one thing so I dont have to deal with many different things. EXAMPLE: I would rather if my friends all knew each other so I wouldnt have to jump from different circles of friends to another.

I'm having problems on which perspective to use for my work: a cosmological, zen, metaphysical, art performance? etc etc?

I think I need to, to say in photoshop terms, start collapsing layers into each other and simplify even more.

Luibo sent me an interesting article on destruction. Though I do think that my piece seems to show that it focuses more on destruction, that is not the case. But I have a feeling Luibo likes things that destroy themselves and I think thats kinda awesome.

But what I've learned from that article is: "vandalism not as something entirely extraneous to the piece in question, but as a fulfilment of the work’s inner possibilities, or even as a way of bringing it back to life."

I definitely feel that this can go back to either nihilism, cosmology or zen. Or life in general. But it just goes back to the idea is nothing is an extension of being.

There is also my perspective as the third person in this whole scenario: "wtf?" I will admit, I am the type of person who would usually say "wtf, I dont get it. I cant believe this douchebag is getting a lot of money for something a middle schooler can do." This is my old way of thinking. And what is annoying about art is that sometimes, one can take douchbaggery approaches by responding to "such ignorant statements" by making it and calling it art to piss such people off and just shoving it in a museum. (take james jean and his twitter incident. and inside jokes on a piece called "lonely tuesday")

I'm sure that art historians can also call douchbaggery as an art concept. Hell. Anything is possible. *mixed feeings*

So the presentation is next week and I feel like I have screwed myself over in many ways since its midterms. I cant wait till spring break because my mother is coming and she'll just listen to me bitch the whole day and in the end, she'll be cleaver enough to find a way to snap me out of it either by physically slapping me or threatening me.

And I charge her large amounts of money by going to a fancy restaurant later and she'll slap me by doing so.

I digress.

Anyway, Simulacra and Simulation is an interesting idea (Thanks, Rob!). However I'm having difficulty grasping it. I think I get it but I'm not sure. Is it basically talking about the disappearance of the actual objects and what we deal is the representations of the actual objects?

I feel like that was my issue against creating something that was fully digital in the sense that we are slowly being immersed in a world where there is no actual tangibility. (screen display installations and such.)

As I talked to Carter Hodgkin, I felt envious of her because she can make her works as an intuitive response to something. Though it is enlightening to research about this topic, at the same time, it feels repetitive, not spontaneous/not organic and maybe with a slight pinch of pretentiousness to research about it and lecture people how to perceive it than have their interpretation of it.

On the other hand, one can enlighten the audience and do brain yoga as one explains it.

I love my ignorance, mind you.

I think I'm getting somewhere

But I think it will take me a year to get there =_=; I appreciate the suggestions and recommendations.

BTW

I hate existentialism. It's not my shtick to be honest. I like going one level in but not all the way. (This is why I am shallow. Its comforting to be in the box.)

I just dislike the times when the work cant just speak for itself, and I have to make up... SOMETHING to make it make sense. It doesnt have to make sense.

I've been thinking about the suggested direction, making things isnt hard but making an elaborated explanation for things is hard (for me). I remember in class we were all discussing that we should all play our strengths.

Well, philosophy isnt one of them. If I have no strengths (almost literally "nothing" to offer),then what can I do?

/ Why didnt I go into accounting? shoot me.... Well, if i switch into graphic design... I'll stay an extra year... but at least I'll get a job from it. =_=; /

I think what I dont like about existentialism is that its trying to make Nothing into Something, when it is not really Something but just something. What's the point? There is no point. This is why I am not a fine artist. But honestly, I want to do as less coding as possible. (Important fact!)

Nothing Part III

There is the interesting idea in typography where, the negative spaces form the letters. Its the kerning and the leading that the typographers (some) tend to oogle at.

Also, in food culture, in the topic of food culturally defining people, like vegetarians and the like, what defines them is what they do not eat.

So lets go back to that disintegrating piece of plaster. What defines what is happening to it, (the disintegrating) are the spaces that open from it.

BTW, the idea for the box is not destruction. I think emphasis on destruction is over rated.
The idea was about decay---slow disappearance.

I hate concept art.

Anyway, I think so far, I'm exploring two possible definitions of nothing:

1. nothing as the space that defines the objects in surrounds
2. nothing as the space that in constant movement complementary to the subject.

I need one more... for the sake of senior project...

Nothing Part II

In continuing with the discussion about Nothing, so what is it about Nothing?

Lets pretend that I'm saying what my project is about:

AHEM.
my project is about Nothing as a space occupying space. It is present in its silence. It waits there silently and honestly. And will never try to argue for your attention. I want people to have to really look for it.

I was thinking of having pillars of dense plexiglass in the center of the room. My idea is that, its hard for people to tell sometimes if there is something there because plexiglass is transparent. However, you can tell its there when you really look because things seem a bit distorted.

One thing that I think that parallels with this is that, When you place an object, the negative space moves around the positive form. Thus when a person looks through the plexiglass as they move, the forms move as they move. The plexiglass, one might say, is like empty space itself in its lack of opacity. However it's present because you see that there is a change.

How to make it interactive, I have no idea. I'm still thinking. Leave me be.

a post about nothing

Seriously, nothing.

I've thought about it some more and some more, and it made me ask myself, what the fuck am I thinking about?

Basically, what I am saying about nothing?

I guess what I'm interested about is that negative space is a substance in itself. And although it is nothing, and it is something that is commonly overlooked.

I mentioned the example of white noise: though it is something that is atmospheric and is the audio version of negative space, it is a sound that is at the bottom of the hierarchy of your attention. It is something that you hear as you wait to hear what is more important.

Like the air is nothing, however under an angle of sunlight, there are stuffs floating about it.

Nothing is empty.
Nothing is silent.
Nothing is contains.
Nothing is contained.
Nothing is present.
Nothing is something.

It's like that quote in Up, "Sometimes, it's the boring stuff I remember the most." The every day of life that is commonly over looked because of its ubiquity (is that a word?). Silence is the pause that creates the fear when you watch horror movies.

Something that is there but not there. Transparency? Vibration in the air? I dont know~ I generally dislike things that make my brain cells exercise.

Essay to Article to 2009

Excerpt from Excerpts from a Conversation With Satan" by Paul Pfeiffer.

Editha Bensi, a working class home maker and mother of five from the Central Visayan island of Cebu, is another face of the diaspora. A vial of her blood appeared along side three others on the cover of the New York Times Magazine on April 26, 1998. Her family’s blood is a genetic gold mine: for generations the mutant gene considered to be the cause of cleft lip and palate disease has been running through their veins. Editha Bensi’s DNA is now part of the Human Genome Diversity Project, a detailed road map of disease genes that promises to one day provide an “operating schematic for mankind — a detailed picture of who we are and how we work.”

For her services she is given a plastic washtub, a beach ball and a thermos, a fast-food lunch, and candy and cookies for the children. On the agreement she signs with the project, the stated reason why she is not paid in cash is that “...money is a means of coercion, and compliance cannot be truly informed and voluntary if it is purchased.”

When the doctors come to take blood samples from Editha Bensi’s children, they struggle to free themselves from doctors’ grip and run away. Mrs. Bensi explains that they are fighters, that they have had to be because they are different. And when Operation Smile arrives with the opportunity for corrective facial surgery, Editha Bensi flatly refuses. The doctors and her husband attempt to persuade her, and she snaps, “You said it didn’t matter how I look.” So why did she agree to give blood to the geneticists? For the good of medical science? For the benefit of future generations? When asked, her answer is clear and simple, “Because they wanted it,” she says. “Because they asked.” How often had she and her family been regarded as the objects of fear, ridicule, and suspicion. Had she ever been approached before as the bearer of knowledge, the one holding the key to understanding the world?

According to the New york Times Magazine this family lives off of her husbands earnings of $2 a day sellings sacks door to door. And for them to just give a plastic washtub and candy?!

WTF. Give them money for the sake of Charity you dick. Give money for the sake of Appreciation. At least buy them a decent meal.

I know I'm 11 years late to say that but still.

ps. I still think my response to Joseph Gordon Levitt's new movie is "WTF, rly?!"