living loving learning

May 11

TAMBOLAR: Soooo... Boston Cops are disgusting. -

Here’s their union newsletter, talking about Occupy Boston, and other things —

http://bppa.org/PAX/PAX%202012%20JanFeb.pdf

TW: Misogyny, Racism

Choice quotes —

About Occupy Boston:

Since the occupiers were told to un-occupy a few months ago, the real professional bums have been…

Apr 13

lospajarosatacan:

<3 <3 <3

Apr 11

nickdrake:

Syd Barrett, by Mick Rock

oldflorida:

Take the road home to Winter Haven, 1939.

Apr 09

[video]

Apr 03

(Source: biggestloser-lynch, via pleasenone)

Mar 28

“Let us take chess and Go, from the standpoint of the game pieces, the relations between the pieces and the space involved. Chess is a game of State, or of the court: the emperor of China played it. Chess pieces are coded; they have an internal nature and intrinsic properties from which their movements, situations, and confrontations derive. They have qualities; a knight remains a knight, a pawn a pawn, a bishop a bishop. Each is like a subject of the statement endowed with a relative power, and these relative powers combine in a subject of enunciation, that is, the chess player or the game’s form of interiority. Go pieces, in contrast, are pellets, disks, simple arithmetic units, and have only an anonymous, collective, or third-person function:’It’ makes a move. ‘It’ could be a man, a woman, a louse, an elephant. Go pieces are elements of a nonsubjectified machine assemblage with no intrinsic properties, only situational ones. Thus the relations are very different in the two cases. Within their milieu of interiority, chess pieces entertain biunivocal relations with one another, and with the adversary’s pieces: their functioning is structural. On the other hand, a Go piece has only a milieu of exteriority, or extrinsic relations with nebulas or constellations, according to which it fulfills functions of insertion or situation, such as bordering, encircling, shattering. All by itself, a Go piece can destroy an entire constellation synchronically; a chess piece cannot (or can do so diachronically only). Chess is indeed a war, but an institutionalized, regulated, coded war, with a front, a rear, battles. But what is proper to Go is war without battle lines, with neither confrontation nor retreat, without battles even: pure strategy, whereas chess is a semiology. Finally, the space is not at all the same: in chess, it is a question of arranging a closed space for oneself, thus of going from one point to another, of occupying the maximum number of squares with the minimum number of pieces. In Go, it is a question of arraying oneself in an open space, of holding space, of maintaining the possibility of springing up at any point: the movement is not from one point to another, but becomes perpetual, without aim or destination, without departure or arrival. The ‘smooth’ space of Go, as against the ‘striated’ space of chess. The nomos of Go against the State of chess, nomos against polis. The difference is that chess codes and decodes space, whereas Go proceeds altogether differently, territorializing or deterritorializing it (make the outside a territory in space; consolidate that territory by the construction of a second, adjacent territory; deterritorialize the enemy by shattering his territory from within; deterritorialize oneself by renouncing, by going elsewhere…). Another justice, another movement, another space-time.” — Felix Guattari & Gilles Deleuze, A Thousand Plateaus (via sfpml)

(via oldnatkingcoletrickle)

nightscale:

hemingway reading

(via fuckyeahreading)

Mar 25

[video]

Mar 20

thedailywhat:

Street Art of the Day: A trompe l’œil mural painted by Egyptian graffiti artists over a military street barrier makes it “disappear.”

[boingboing.]