My problem is transcendence. I am interested in how anything specific can give evidence to anything greater. How total context can give form to that which needs no context.
My process is reaction to relationships. Relationships like, what is this? And what is it not? What do I want this to be? And what don’t I want it to be? What would this look like as furniture? And would this function well as a rocket ship? It is about what relationships are relevant. It’s about which relationships I employ and how. But it is not a matter of coming to a suitable compromise between relations. It is about delving into the relating process thoroughly and wholly, that an opposite of this process must appear. I am successful when I can glimpse that which in relation to a world of relationships (bigger, smaller, smoother, more pleasant) is unity and relation-less.
In this way it is not about an honest mark or purity, for I treat lies and truth as two parts of the same thing, and that thing is of our construction. It is the complexity and collective power of all that we share. I surrender to it, and I aim to exalt it.
Come to see how this is relevant!