mez on 15 Jan 2001 20:13:44 -0000

[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

[Nettime-bold] _ 17- [net w][inc][o][me][rk 17] 16..08..98

>Date: Sun, 16 Aug 1998 15:09:20
>To: net][1][wurk][7][
>From: mez <>
>Subject: Re: inter.teXt.u allitee
>n-tertextualitee seems to me like a quaint word....almost no.stall-gic in a
sense- can't n-counter wurds like  "deconstruction" "intertext"
"appropriation" or "parody" wiffout m-mediatelee ass.soc.I.ating them with a
postmodern purrspective........

][net.wurk17er is][:
> an artterm waiting to fade into the morass of isms we hist/oric/rionically
n-counter all the thyme, i don't even conzider interteXuality consciouslee
anymore [unlezz it is bought 2 my attention like thizz:)].  In terms of
fiction, ov course it seems almost unavoidable to write something wiff a
comtemporary flav.our _wiffout_ constantlee re.fur.ring 2 some other
bodee/access point of information...think itz a matta of degree 2 which u
take the reference point......

situation blerk:

][net.wurkahs slip thru the cracks][

n_  _  w_   _17
: a silly o' cracker code
:obviouslee flawed to the gi][lls][gs
:][n.sert larffing now][

>if, howeva, the situation waz different, mebbe the overt
acknowledge[wo]ment wood not be necessary, as in my meZang.elled posts to
lizts such as nettime, 7-11, etc......and even though mani may knott view
them as fiction/prose based, i do. So the interteXt di-lemm[ing]a getz more
and [sir thomas]moore complicated.


fictional animal: Anim][us][als x.isting only in fiction [usually in
children's stories]
fictitious character:


Nettime-bold mailing list