NAârt is how i name my art, my method of artistic research. I seriously believe nAârt, or whatever it needs to be called, is rapidly becoming a new, transvergent discipline.
Not Art+Science (+...), but a folding of art instances in science instances in art in programming instances...
Instances being actualisations of virtualities that have no lack of reality in their own right, from their own position, in their private places.
The term 'transvergence' has an unfortunate connotation of transcending what has been before, perhaps, indicating some new level above what we know now. I do not believe in levels, because the existence of levels would imply that something can be less real than something else. When something is real, it can be observed in its process of actualisation, and the degrees of clarity in the act of observation are not levels or even degrees of reality of the thing itself but degrees of clarity of the observing process.
There's a volutile aspect there, in the sense that as monadic human beings we have the free will to perceive what we choose to perceive, we know what we want to know, we continually construct our own fictional account, our own reality, at least that part of reality that we perceive clearly.
Such a statement, however, has nothing to do with any Romantic illusion of creating a beautiful personal world, an escapist flight into an ideosynchretic world of make-believe. We all have a tendency to bend our perceptions into a tunnel-vision, a quasi inescapable spiral inward and art processes have in the past been prone to fly straight into those tunnels. Such artistic dives into the personal and the sentimental may be inspiring, but they annihilate themselves finally, leaving little power of validation for the spectator after the act has been completed.
Any succesful form of artistic research will always strike a balance between the personal as a resource and communication as its purpose. When a nAârt process dives into its fuscum subnegrum, the dark zone of the universe as included in its soul, it does so in search of correlating processes, snapshots of working algorhytms that can shed some light on the case at hand, the thesis that it attempts to falsify or prove. A soul's history is eternally present as a resource and we are able to manipulate that resource in a continuing, scientific process of actualisation, a methodic unfolding of the reality before us. I think its a big mistake to think that what is fictional has no scientific value. Its more the other way around, as German philosopher Vaihinger once put it : the attempt to do without fiction would be ruinous to science and the whole of human aspirations.
People are places but places are not objects. Places are co-ordinates in the Continuum. Any calculation on a place changes it because calculations take time.
In a way, i came up with the term nAârt because levels and topdown hierarchy and staticly defined objects make me sneeze. They made me sneeze before i read Deleuze, but since i have read him the sneeze has gained some direction, a unity of movement and my allergy has been developing into a methodology.
So, once more: what is nAârt? What can we perceive of it?
Read the rest of it
Introduction to Cathedral Building Theory ; a provisional outline