man – My Surreal Sketchbook of Reality

Smoke Rings – a 100 word story

A man, or a mere impression of one. He rises from the chimney of some factory or another, taking shape from the smoke. He hovers above the city, carried by the wind, the result of a secret project. Eyes are cameras, ears are receivers, recording silently. No door can hold him. Built from the latest in nanotechnology, he just blows underneath like smoke. His brain has the computing power of a supercomputer. The results are being sent for processing at a secret facility. He is just the prototype. More are being created. Watch out from the fog, it’s coming alive.

—–

Hi there and thanks for stopping by. I’m Guy, and you’re listening to my surreal sketchbook of reality.

—–

Episode 25, Eyes are Cameras

We know what a chicken is, or – do we? This episode Is a semi-philosophical look at the idea of chicken. I’m not a professional philosopher by any means and my approach can be quite absurd, illogical and not at all that serious, so – you’ve been warned. Do not take this podcast too seriously. If you tend to take things too seriously, this might not be the podcast for you. Seriously. I mean it. Find another podcast to listen to.

You’re still here? Good. Let’s talk about chicken. What makes a chicken what it is? Is it the shape of the chicken? Is it what it sounds like? The way it walks? The way it talks? You might begin by saying a chicken is a flightless bird, that is a bird that can’t fly. There are other flightless birds so that wouldn’t be what defines a chicken but merely one of the chicken’s characteristics or traits. Could you say a chicken is a collection of traits that make up a chicken? Do we need all of those traits to coexist in order for a chicken to be a chicken or is there one unique trait that makes a chicken a chicken. What is that one elusive trait that is uniquely chicken?

When we dig deeper into a chicken, we find a strand of DNA just sitting there, waiting to be found. DNA is the blueprint of any living organism or creature, a recipe for the makeup of that creature and the most unique trait of that creature. The chicken has her own unique DNA like every other living being and the sequence of that DNA can be sequenced and then mapped. No other creature has that same unique DNA map, so you can say that the unique DNA sequence that resides inside a chicken is what defines the making of a chicken. All this talk about the making of a chicken made me hungry. I think I’ll make a chicken for lunch today. I’ll be right back.

—–

The Science of Beauty – a 100 word story

They say beauty is in the eye of the beholder, so some scientists started dissecting eyes, searching for the exact place where beauty resides. First, they dissected the eyes of mice, got them nowhere. They dissected the eyes of convicted criminals, dead ones at first, but then someone reasoned that having some real-time input from subjects could result in important data. It didn’t work either. Someone pointed out criminals didn’t really have a sense of beauty, so they tried using the eyes of artists, poets, and musicians. When they finished, they looked around them to find a world without beauty.

—–

Welcome back. So, we say that the chicken DNA is what defines our chicken. What if we cook the chicken? That chicken soup still has those DNA strands in it. Does this mean the soup is a chicken? If it doesn’t, when does the chicken stop being a chicken? Is it when the last strand of DNA dissolves? Is it when we eat the chicken and it becomes part of us? Maybe DNA is not all that makes up a chicken. Maybe it’s a collection of DNA and other traits. It would seem that being alive is one such trait, but then it also seems that a dead chicken is still a chicken.

Let’s say someone builds a mechanical chicken. Is it still a chicken? We might say a mechanical chicken is not really a chicken, the same way that a drawing of a pipe isn’t really a pipe. What then if we take an actual chicken and start replacing all the parts that make up a chicken with mechanical parts until it becomes a mechanical chicken. When does the chicken stop being an actual chicken? What is that unique characteristic that stops a chicken from being a chicken?

You might say if a chicken thinks it’s a chicken, then it’s a chicken. What then if a mouse thinks it’s a chicken? Is that mouse also a chicken? You might then say that a chicken is whatever you think is a chicken. This would make the definition of chicken the same as the idea of chicken you have in your mind. In that way, the chicken itself doesn’t really exist. It’s just the idea of chicken that exists in your mind. This concludes episode 25 of this podcast. Close the door on your way out and don’t forget – I’m just a figment of your imagination.

—–

Kirin – a 100 word story

I stretched the line of my bow and shot a straight arrow using magical fire. The Rakuda fell down dead. I looted it. Got some Soft Fur and some coins. I looked for more Rakuda. Only six more to go. I spotted a few more of them, but then I saw it, the majestic Kirin, so rare and beautiful, his long neck towering high above me and his innocent eyes wise, timeless. I fitted my finest arrow and called up all my magic into it, air, water, and fire. It shot straight through, killing him on the spot. Epic drop.

—–

Hi there and thanks for stopping by. I’m Guy, and you’re listening to my surreal sketchbook of reality.

—–

Episode 23, So Rare and Beautiful

There are two kinds of qualities, one that is found in art, music, and literature and another which is found in crafts. This episode Is a semi-philosophical look at quality in art, music, and literature. I’m not a professional philosopher by any means and my approach can be quite absurd, illogical and not at all that serious, so – you’ve been warned. Do not take this podcast too seriously. If you tend to take things too seriously, this might not be the podcast for you. Seriously. I mean it. Find another podcast to listen to.

You’re still here? Good. Let’s talk about quality. Art is first and foremost a form of expression that goes beyond the boundaries of simple words and gestures. For simplicity, I’m going to use the words art and artworks to include painting, music, literature and any other form of expression that can be called art. Quality in art is often reflected in complexity and layering. Quality art can be understood on several layers while holding a strong overall message, or it can hold a paradox, having several conflicting messages on different layers. Quality art can also make us think and feel and we can often be moved by it.

The quality of art can be amorphic since it can’t really be measured. Art is an exchange between the creator of the artwork and the art consumer, thus making the art itself open to different interpretations. As a result, no artwork is the same for two different people. That makes the pursuit of understanding quality in art elusive. An artwork that is of quality to one person might be perceived as utter trash by another. This reminds me I should throw away this art reproduction I got, referred to by bystanders and observers alike as trash, to the trash. I’ll be right back.

—–

Yogerthy Yogurt – a 100 word story

He follows her around like a dog, and Yogerthy Yogurt loved it until he started chasing cars, barking and digging holes in her backyard, hiding his favorite bones. She tried throwing a stick into a bottomless well but he climbed out and fetched. She tried driving him to remote locations and accidentally forgetting him there, but he kept returning. Even when she refused his marriage proposal, bone ring and all, he kept coming back wagging his tail. She eventually had to call the dog catchers for him. The guys from the asylum just didn’t have dog food on their menu.

—–

Welcome back. When we pursue quality in art, we use our own perspective as the focal point of our observation. That means we are biased participants as opposed to objective observers since art is an interaction between consumer, artwork, and artist. When you consume art, you interpret it in your own unique way. No two people are alike and any one person would interpret the artwork differently depending on their beliefs and personal biases. In that way, your own interpretation changes the artwork itself. Art, in a way, is what you interpret it to be.

Art is first and foremost a statement by an artist who wants to convey a message to an art consumer. Art happens in the interaction between the two, and one facet of the quality of art can be seen as the amount of influence the artwork has on the consumer. The problem is that while one person might be completely moved by a certain piece of art, another might be completely indifferent to the same piece. In that way, quality in the arts has a quantum quality. It both exists and does not exist in the same artwork. That’s also the reason quality in the arts can’t be measured.

Since quality in art seems to be subjective and can’t really be measured, it begs the question, does quality in the arts really exist? The answer is that some quality exists in any piece of art in existence because any artwork has its own consumers who interpret it in their own unique way. Since art is the interaction between the artwork and the consumer, it’s enough that one consumer finds quality in the art for it to have quality. In that way, the potential for quality exists in the art itself and manifests in the interaction between the artwork and the consumer. It’s the consumer that puts the quality in the art, not the artist. This concludes episode 23 of this podcast. Close the door on your way out and don’t forget – I’m just a figment of your imagination.

—–