Thoughts (spinning/linking)

The problem with consciousness is the consciousness of consciousness. What is this when you look at it? Time, of course, is dependent on consciousness, or to quote Lewis Lacook "artichoke techniques".

As I mentioned, in a manner of things, before, or what depends upon consciousness to seem that it was before, time seems to slow as we head towards greater conclusions with greater volition.

The greatest decision when writing these days is whether to employ the
somewhat Dadaist strategy of non sense, or whether to keep a sense of
communication within the text.

Inevitably, notions of Schizophrenia and other mental illnesses spring to mind. That is not to say that we are all schizophrenic, but, equally we are not all in a state of full mental health. And, ultimately, does it matter? One must look at consciouness/perception once again.

This leads to a rejection of medical models as significant indicators and treatments for severe mental illnesses.

This leads to the rejection of academic and (in particular) scientific
thought by many writers, artists, intellectuals, etc.

The problem with madness is the concept of madness. Mental illness is simply an illness, akin to, connected to and not unlike physical illness. It should not matter that one is ill, only that one is not discriminated against, because of this.

So how does all this tie up with consciousness? The fractals of consciousness!
The problem with computers is that, as with anything else, people begin to see them metaphorically, essentially as a metaphor for the mind. This is fine, human, harmless. The problem is that so many artists and writers who work on the Internet /computers are completely engrossed in these mental metaphors. This leads to an art/literature form that is unbearably introspective and excluding of the public.

Most non-artists would have very little patience for an art/text work
that conveys, in great complexity, what it is like to create art on
computers
that represent the mind to the artist. In a sense the
artist/writer is saying
that he has a way of making the mind apparent and
apprehendable to himself, and
isn't this fascinating! Add to this the mental
processes of creating within this
quasi-mental environment and you have an
art-form that cannot engage a
significant audience. Without an audience,
there is no art.

This is not what I set out to write tonight. As Damien Hurst throws paint upon a potter's wheel and watches it splay across a canvas, my thoughts fell from my mind onto an apparent paper page, or its representaton. One of the factors in this "omniscient" style is time, the lack of it! Societal preoccupations contemporaneous relevances, too numerous to touch upon in any detail, fall from one chain of thought to the next. If only now I had the time to think upon time and its irrational conception, its solipsistic (neologism?) perceptual existence, I may write in a manner that is closer to my intention and then times connection to consciousness. Then I could find an appropriate ending to my text, that would tie in with the beginning.

My conclusion would then be the start of something else, relevant yet quite distinct. Maybe I have acheived this, without even being aware of its manifestation!