hi res: (standard tuning) guitar scale sheet
251 frank jazz . com
I wished to be King of the world... I didn't realize, we'd each have our own worlds..!
Adam Gissin's band
Full Set--> Distant Wailing
tracks for download or play:
stained glass rhythm -- in my dreams -
- underground cavern -- pyramus and thisbe
Andi -- 4_20 -
- unforgotten truths
the films of David Christian Baird, on YouTube
the music of David Christian Baird:
Full Set --> Collection One
individual tracks for download or play:
beauty is clean (guitar wizardry)
bleeding keys cognitive enhancement
create to destroy -- an early effort
for children of late---> i see the system's face
envelope filter?--> birthday jam
like a bee <-impulsive over-dubbing
become the way <-acoustic
high keys <---coming from a high place
intentional distortion <---pleasing once the distortion ends
xblues <--our blood is red (or blue?)
spice tradition <-acoustic
a minor <--some like this
old best all is love
frampton <---I sound like Frampton?
grune early zappa <---Chris Gruneberg in early Zappa
grune jerry zappa <--full Jerry meets Frank
determinism drums <--this is what two peeps with a digital
heaviness <--heavy as in Pink Floyd heavy
real good <---titled in respect
rock_down <--can someone define rock?
dream times are here to stay noisy experiment for you
to_san_diego_ on his way to San Diego
avant trio two
joined by: Chris Gruneberg, Jake Breiding, Josh Wulff,
Paul Yelenovsky, Nathan Capenos, Buck McNeece, Bri Beard and Thomas Brophy
Agent Chlorophyl blog: achlorophyl.blogspot.com
the unspoken yes -- a new sight -- a new site for the century -- creationie filmproduktion
"So you think and do
-- but life can see through"
"So you think and do -- but life can see through" text
about Women -- feminist philosophy. Virginia Woolf's Mrs. Dalloway is a beautiful book and you may enjoy reading about it...
Are you interested in Israel Strategy ?
first new story complex_realizations.htm
This is marx versus nozick, judged by me
Why not check out the variance! Today is Only Day, Synthetic Variance of David Baird
If you frequent wacky peeps who politically "talk shit" and you'd
like to have an infinitely better approach, read about
heteropotentialities, and the aggregate-rational state,
and why even though you have the right to not be killed by a goon with a club,
you should also have the right not to be let die by a goon with a drug factory
who is depriving you of medicine you need...
((this paper is a key paper for anyone on the left))
This is a query I was going to send to the American Journalism Review in 2005:: A_Writing_Query
About the philosop list dispute :: Diasynnexus_Revealed
ultimate conclusions about the academic empire: Syntexy
text: philosop list dispute
This is a philosophy of schizophrenia
Do you want to read about friendship, making life sublime?
For you because you are human--> an introduction to the most important modern philosophy:
To See Philosophically: Introducing the (Publicly) Educated to Immanuel Kant
(written for high-school "kids", but I would suppose many adults also know too little of Kant)
I really want people to read about Kant, especially if they are going to become, or already are, scientists
or artists-- or anyone really, with a brain that is not familiar with the Kantian critique of
reality, the most fundamental point at which to begin a modern philosophical exploration
of one's life and world....
Poetry: Poems: "some times I want, too"
"So you think and do -- but life can see through"
"Writing to fight"
Spoken word: "So you think and do -- but life can see through"
if you do that thing called "thinking," but wonder, "What's it all about?", then why not
read about the beginnings of it...
David Baird “To begin to think”
Beginnings are atheistic. If life is grounded in god, there are no beginnings. There would be one origin—god—for everything. All would merely be a continuation, an unfolding, of god’s plan. Even so, the godly claim beginnings–ahistorical beginnings–divinely inspired origins. But beginnings in writing arise from the real natural context of the writer, not from god’s grace. Or as Said says, “we consider literature[/criticism] as an order of [historical] repetition, not of [ahistorical] originality—but an eccentric order of repetition, not one of sameness—where the term repetition is used in order to avoid such dualities as ‘the original versus the derivative,’ or ‘the idea and its realization,’ or ‘model/paradigm versus example.’”(Beginnings, 12) (He rightly implies that an idea’s realization is as close to the “idea” as we can get (other people)). So, to be ahistorical is to pretend to be a source of meaning, and not a (mutable) confluence of the flux of pre-existing meaning. It is to deny the past, and have us believe that one’s meaning is from the eternally-based present, not from temporally finite history. Or to perhaps claim a dynastic descent, leaving out the adjacent field of infinite totality. Said holds that there is “a necessity at the beginning for [modern literary writers] to see their work as making reference, first, to other works, but also to reality and to the reader, by adjacency, not sequentially or dynastically.”(10) The whole world counts, not just one’s (metaphorical, literary) family/nation.
An historical beginning is made by a writer who is freely realized within a complexity of forces and knowledges. Not realized with respect to univocal theory. Said says “the critic is aptly characterized in Lukacs’ epithet for the novel as being transcendentally homeless [or aparadigmatic]. He begins each work as if it were a new occasion [not bound to his (illusory) ‘cultural identity.’]”(11) The critic’s beginning has everything to do with history manifested now, and not some ideal model, or “home.” A beginning is a transformation of the current possibilities for being, for nomadism. Following Valery, “the tremendous undertaking of philosophy [is] an effort to [begin–to] transmute everything we know[, our history,] into what we should like to know.”(61) What he should like to know is close to what he would like to read, or have others read. In Said, “the writer declares his ambition to make the reader see [what s/he has never seen.]”(25) Such text cannot be known a priori or automatically, else there would be no struggle, no life, in writing. Whereas beginnings are sublime. Valery thinks that “we say that an author is original when we cannot trace the hidden transformations that others underwent in his mind; we mean to say the dependence of what he does on what others have done is excessively complex and irregular.”(15) Unpredictable or incalculable. The mind is not likened to a computer, which can manipulate data, but not make the data into part of its mental force. The mind is infinitely potentialled, with death as its horizon.
A beginning intention is not of objective desire, but subjective desire. In Said, it has a “field of play,” or theatre of action, and no immutable objective. Each step we take is itself an unpredicted goal. Nietzsche thinks truth is not ideal, “not something there, that might be found or discovered—but something that must be created,” and doing this is “an active determining—not a becoming-conscious of something that is in itself firm and determined.”(152) When a beginning is played out, we look back and map the transformations accomplished—though we could never have hoped to accomplish exactly them in the beginning. Rather, we could have, but didn’t.
A beginning is always historical, like everything else. But humans can be ahistorical in the sense of (actively or passively) forgetting history. If we forget the beginnings of life, we instead posit (imaginary) origins–posited, yet impossible. Teleology is also ahistorical. A reverse ahistoricality—positing future ends. But as open nonteleological critical (important) writers we seek to keep thinking alive. To make not a monument of it, but give it its theatre of infinity in which to function/play/exist. To not stop. We do not believe the promise that death will bring life. This promise, this denial of death, is ironically deadly, and denies life’s reality. We wish to avoid all of death’s manifestations, such as ‘death-in-life’–the curtailment of possibilities of liberation from repressive forces that would have us (or have us choose to) be less than fully alive.
Beginnings are to Power threats–they would abandon Power’s supposed divine origins, and approach new modalities of (subversive) life. Those in power were not chosen by god, but are historical accidents. As such, their ways of thinking are often warped, and attempt to justify this deathly scene. Ahistorical Power is that which sees itself as universally valid. Although it arose directly from a particular cultural matrix, it pretends to be the ultimate judge of culture. We would fragment the univocal thought of Power with critique. To have a fully functioning world, there must begin a literate/literary dialogue among the concerned parties—everyone. One paradigm can never be proven ultimate. There cannot be a permanent security. Terrorists will always find vulnerabilities to exploit, especially as the net complexifies, as the global interrelationships deepen. And our needs change as our lives change, requiring new ways of political thinking. The world is written, and we must make its script literary and anti-dehumanized. The world must begin to think. Life and poesis must intertwine.
In the abundance of water, the fool is thirsty.
--Bob Marley, Rat Race
if you wonder about "free will", then why not wonder about the following vignette, and if it can be proved wrong...
If x, then y. There is only one x, one present or "now." So there shall only be one y, one future. The only possible future is the actual future. There is only one possible future, because physical law is constant. Even if it changes, it will change for reasons. If you beleive in causality.
You may think you are free. You are free, to be who you are, to make the types of decisions you would make. These choices are not your fault--they are the fault of your luck in being born as you, or as philosophers call it, indexicality. Why are you you and not someone else? Someone has to be you. If someone else would have been you, they'd be feeling exactly as you feel now. So you don't really know which soul you are. You only know you're you.
Is determinism depressing? Or is it liberating. You can do whatever you want. And it will have been meant to happen. All you have to do is want it. Humans may punish or reward you, but god never will. Because you didn't choose to be who you are. You chose, but your choices were determined by previous causes. Nothing is your fault, good or bad. It is all god's fault. By giving the gift of life, if your life is a gift and not a curse, god is saying "I'm sorry for the hell that is the earth I've created. Here, take this life--for I meant for things to be perfect. And maybe they are. Pain is to warn of impending or actual tissue damage. Evil is a byproduct of the realities of neuropsychology. Maybe I try to help where I can. Look at the signs, the meanings of the elements that make up your world. And decide. Do I love you?"
<interview> <site to follow below>
Q: "What is this sight?"
A: "I don't even know that, and I'm the author. I can tell you it's a sort of outpouring, a way of approaching the surface of reality -- the horizon of the self, if you will -- a way that unfolds the hidden gaps in our perceptions to reveal workings beyond apparency -- workings beyond even our dreams, at times..."
Q: "Who is this sight for?"
A: "The music can be for anyone with an operational sense of harmono-melodo potentialities... The lyrics are graphic only insofar as the word 'graphic' connotes vibrancy, complexity, color, and intensity... The essays are generally at high school level to Ph.D. and beyond. The fictions, though, _being_ life, and not just _about_ life, contain the sort of disturbing variables that one would expect in worlds such as these..."
Q: "What hopes do you have for the future of thisfeel?"
A: "Persistance, development, substantial reconfiguration, thematic direction, and all the other things we'll know-knot -- the things, that with dread, major media's know not..."
Q: "Looks pretty disorganized... Where do we start?"
A: "The haphazardness is intentional... I want this sight to be as resistant to easy consumption as life itself is... This is a constellation of textual and media structures, and to navigate it you just start consuming, anywhere, and see how the vector of your trajectory of desire is resultantly tweaked... Good luck -- and, may the force be you..."
The music links will stream these days if you <(right click): open in new window>.
However, as with all of the net, you do not know that this site will be up tomorrow. A better choice is to <(right click): save target as::> and save these files for future viewing/listening... Saving video files before viewing is even a bit faster than trying to stream some of them.
[Note:: if you are paranoid about saving files because of the potential for viruses, you must know that if your computer is set up properly, it can no more get a virus from a music or video file than a dvd player could "get a virus" from a disc... The computer treats files according to their "extensions" -- (music may be .wav or .mp3 or .wma, etc...) When you go to save targets, you can look at the file extensions... Do not save ".exe" files unless you know what you are doing -- these "execute" when opened, and if you allow strange programs to execute on your machine, you may be in for it...]