But you′ve stated a question that should be taken a bit seriously. “Is something real if it hasn’t been put on Twitter?” But if its not, then it remains virtual, like a thought, like a wish or desire that isnot meant to be fulfill through its own actualization, instead will remain like something to be repressed reactively, like a blind spot maybe, or even a recurrence that points back out to our own microfascisms. Somethings to do, somethings already done, doing things on the course of their own action.. do they need to be published so we shall obtain a feedback benefit, which is not always filling an absense but complementing whats is already there, perhaps as a sort of territory that we have been holding to?
Experimenting such feedback retribution is to connect ourselves into a virtual circuit that can be complementary in both negative and positive ways. All things that are published are meant to be real, publishing things is the way to cristalize them as meaningful tiny weenie realization. Something is always passing that is also happening, something that escapes continuosly from ourselves and from our own activities: they dont deserve anything but a board, a placard that announces something like “this self is under-construction” (digitally, socially, virtually). Twitter has nothing to do with a lack memory & it is not just the simple urge to self-expression. At the same time, it is surely something as ancient as the ancients, new and frenetic, twitchy and pathetic.
]]>It’s just too easy to be cynical and point out the shortcomings of modern society. The flip of the drip is that it allows an educated minority to rule, and to argue against that is sort of arguing against the history of man’s politics and such (to make a really bald and funny statement, hah!).
I say let people twitter and photograph things as long as they remain quiet and content.
]]>