#yeah indirect manipulation is still a form of lying

[the-barefoot-hatter]

Ford is always 110% committed to whatever he puts his mind to and never looks back or hesitates over his choice... and can always justify it.

This both a very good thing and a very bad thing.

Summon the creature surrounded by 'dear god did not summon him' warning signs? Clearly Ford is about to have a new best friend! He knows better than some stupid cave drawing! Going to dedicate his life to building this portal now!

Oh, got to stop Bill? 'Kay, going to throw himself into 30+ years of triangle eradication, no prob!

Got to get into university and be a success? ONLY his dream school will do! Nevermind his 12 PHDs, generous grant money, and meeting his good friend/roommate/research partner Fiddleford McGucket, it wasn't his dream school so it's worthless

Oh, and Stan ruined his chance at his dream school? Stan is 110% Dead to Him, NO talking, Stan's only good for grunt work and only that as his literal last resort because Stan owes him. Ford stalled out the anti-Bill ritual during the actual apocalypse JUST to be a dick to his brother.

Dipper is just like him FR? Obviously going to make this child his apprentice and secret-keeper. Tell no one. Clearly the smartest choice!

Ford is so binary all the time. It really takes the end of the world for him to start easing up and start forgiving/apologizing to people in his life.

(Could easily also read as be Ford just flipping on his former grudges, he now 110% Supports Stan and the Stan'OWar Dream, 110% is sorry to Fiddleford for not believing him in the 80s, etc)

...Now, what I find interesting about this is that Bill in on-screen canon... he never lies.

He flatters and loopholes and implies things, but he doesn't lie. The closest to outright lying is Sock Opera where he uses vague wording to trick Dipper into being his meat puppet and smashes the laptop. (Bill didn't lie. Bill only promised Dipper a hint to Author, not the password to laptop. Smashing reveals it's McGucket's, which is another clue to finding the Author).

When Ford asks where the portal really leads and accuses Bill of lying to him, Bill is honest. Rude, but honest. Bill is always weirdly honest with Ford. Most villains would try to cover their ass here, but Bill doesn't even try to hide his skype-call with the firey-evil-looking minions in the scary fire. He even moves aside for Ford to get a better look at them!

And there's almost no tricky language with Ford either, just "you're the man who's going to change the world!" and "genius happens with a little help from a friend!" and "we'll teach your dimension how to really party!" - all objectively true statements. Flattering and chosen to manipulate him into doing what Bill wants, but not lies. Asking Ford to pwetty please flex his big, stwong brain and build an interdimensional bridge to his place isn't lying, it's just not mentioning Bill's place is hell.

And it seems like Ford just... didn't actually ask where it led. Until Fidds fell in the portal test. Which is pretty far into the project to not know where it goes exactly!

Ford turns on a dime at that- which Bill finds cute. Until he doesn't. Because we know from the Book of Bill, Bill folds fast and tries everything to get Ford back (from flattery to fear). And even during Weirdmaggeon, AFTER he got what he wanted but BEFORE he found out he still needed Ford to break them out, Bill was still trying to get Ford onboard. Bill really thought Ford should be onboard with the winning team, he knows how bad Ford wants a big win and fame. Infamous is even better than famous! Are they not friends anymore??? For reals???

Bill's main flaw is he knows how easy it is for Ford to flip. He just didn't think he'd ever really be on the bad side of a Ford flip and stay there. He's trying so hard to get that shift back and it's just not happening.

Bill is the only one left standing that Ford won't at least start considering in more than black and white terms.

The only person Ford has been that hardline dead-to-me, nothing-good-remains-about-this-relationship about is... Stanley ruining his life with a science project.

Ford is Big Mad because Bill is acting like it's all a game. If there is ONE THING Ford cannot deal with, it's people not taking him SERIOUSLY.

I think billford fans every once in a while should step back from the emotional turmoil of the "Sometimes...I miss him. and i hate myself for that..." (which is very very good and fun) and examine some very interesting elements of canon which I think are overlooked in favor of angst.

Namely, the fact that there is NO indication at any point that Ford ever looked back. As in, once he found out about the betrayal, he never once (in observable canon) considered it an option to return to Bill. He had no regrets when it came to the falling out. He had regrets about what led to it, but "bill you lied to me! where does that portal really lead?!" Were his first words after the fight, and "ill stop you! I'll shut it down!" were the second. Barely even addressing the betrayal.

From the first paragraph of TBOB post-betrayal, his entire focus is on stopping armageddon, while repeatedly telling Bill via writing that he plans on DESTROYING him. He is unresponsive to ANY attempts to "talk". He is ready to KILL INSTANTLY.

Which brings me to Bill. Because i think BILL was expecting none of this. Bill expected anger, but he saw it as an emotional obstacle. Because he DID NOT KNOW/UNDERSTAND STANFORD. The two of them are, in reality NOTHING ALIKE.

The "hes the only one who's ever understood me" was almost entirely projection on both sides. Ford was being lied to, the friend he knew never existed, and so why would he care about Bill? To him, Bill basically killed his friend and spit on his grave. He mourns that friend, but why would he go to his murderer for comfort?

Bill is stupider, because Bill knew he was lying. Bill knew that the version of Ford he was relating to and falling in love with DID NOT KNOW WHO HE WAS. He projected his own wants and desires on Ford, all while keeping them secret. because as long as he never gave Ford the chance to disprove their connection, who's to say his wants and desires weren't the same, in a way, deep down? He thought ford was a mad morally grey freak scientist (Which is a common fan interpretation and valid, but canon bill is not in the fandom, he is trying to fall in love, so his differing opinions are unfortunately invalid).

While Ford is a freak, drawn to the strange and often evil, often has trouble with empathy and street smarts due to his impulsivity, wanted a fictional deer to kill fictional deer because he felt excluded...He isn't morally grey. I need people to understand this. Ford is a HERO. Ford is always doing what he thinks is best for the world at large. He found out he'd made a mistake, and dedicated his life, without ANY question, to fixing that mistake.

Bill made a severe miscalculation. Because the betrayal was not a LYING issue. the issue wasnt pretending to be someone he wasn't. the betrayal was an APOCALYPSE issue. While Bill may have objectively known Ford would dislike the apocalypse, he didn't realize it would be an instant dealbreaker. But Ford got the ick. it was over for him the moment he learned the truth. it wasnt even a "betrayal" to him, for the most part. It was "There is a villain trying to end the world, and I need to stop him"

(TL;DR: for Ford, in canon, anything that was or could have ever been between he and Bill was dead and buried the second he knew the truth. He is the hero, and he must destroy the villain.)

[not-delicious-milk]

So i was randomly scrolling through as you do lol and saw your timeline on the mindmap and how you said that Yuuji is a suitable vessel because Sukuna's blood might have become strong enough, do you think it could also be a case of genetics and Yuuji being a practically identical match genetically to Sukuna hence why he is a suitable vessel?

Also with the theory going around about Brain bring Yuuji's "Mother" do you think that is where his memory manipulation technique could possibly come from and why Brain is so interested?

wow this is gonna suck bc it’s on my phone but let’s go

i think that whatever relationship sukuna and yuuji have left some amout of genetic material in his body. i’m not sure if it’s directly that he’s his descendant — gege has stated that sukuna had no children, though of course he could just be trolling — but i think of what the brain said in shibuya about how the body and soul are the same. i think that part of the reason why yuuji can house sukuna without harm coming to his body AND suppress his soul is because they share some genetic material or otherwise have some overlap concerning their bodies. maybe yuuji is his reincarnation, or had genetic material implanted in him in utero, or is distantly related to sukuna through other means. or maybe he’s just sukuna’s direct descendant. whatever it ends up being, i think that something is definitely going on. it would be much easier for yuuji to merge with sukuna, as gojo stated they had in chapter 2, if they already shared genetic material, blood or some other physical congruence.

it was stated by gojo that the appearance of sukuna’s vessel was part of the “wave of power” in the new generation, and later during the spv arc it was revealed that gojo’s birth was the catalyst for this, that it forced curses to evolve and become more powerful, including dormant cursed energy in potential sorcerers. what if sukuna’s blood relation or whatever it is to the itadori family was distant and weak enough that they still weren’t suitable vessels? they don’t seem to be sorcerers, although pappy wasuke gives off the air of knowing at least something about sorcery, but they bear a striking resemblance to sukuna from what we’ve seen. and yuuji was born after gojo. maybe because of that wave of power, sukuna’s dormant influence was strong enough to make him a suitable vessel — probably having to do less with genetic material since that’s not quite how genetics work, but indirect influence on his cursed energy and body development. idk if that makes any sense but basically the little itty bit of sukuna that was in yuuji was enough, after gojo’s birth and the forced evolution of curses, to actually influence yuuji beyond physical resemblance to sukuna and cause him to be ridiculously strong and capable as a vessel.

so think of recessive genes as an example. through generations and generations of “carriers” it might never manifest, but given the right catalyst — an environmental stressor, reproducing with another carrier and getting the recessive gene from both parents, et cetera — it can suddenly show up almost out of nowhere. real life examples range from brown eyed parents having a blue eyed child to serious genetic disorders and illnesses.

now imagine, if you will, that that recessive gene suddenly became a dominant one because of, oh i don’t know, a certain blue eyed baby being born and shifting the equilibrium of the world.

imagine if a child like that is about to be born, or potentially about to be born, but there are complications with the mother and she dies. if you were an incredibly patient body hopping sorcerer with a vested interest in seeing that child born, what would you do?

the brain states that they altered peoples’ brains with idle transfiguration to make them suitable vessels for cursed objects, at the end of the shibuya arc. the relationship between the brain and cursed energy is an in-universe enigma, but it seems like changing the structure of the brain can forcefully awaken a technique or make someone able to handle a cursed object. yuuji most likely is not an experiment in this sense — creating sukuna’s vessel is a rather ambitious first attempt, and the brain didn’t have access to mahito’s cursed technique when yuuji was born, so they didn’t have a reliable and precise way to alter people’s brains to change their relationship with cursed energy. it’s possible that the brain STUDIED yuuji to determine what, exactly, made him a suitable vessel in order to be able to replicate it, but that would require already knowing that he would be a suitable vessel. either yuuji was an incredibly risky and ambitious experiment from birth, intended to be a vessel for sukuna, or the brain had some reason to know for a fact that he was one. such as being related to him.

jogo asks after yuuji’s first death whether it was “worth wasting a precious finger to determine the strength of sukuna’s vessel”. that suggests the brain was double checking to make sure yuuji could house sukuna freely and without limiting his power, since it resulted in sukuna taking over to fight the cursed spirit. this wasn’t to check if yuuji could handle consuming more fingers. the brain seems to be very sure he can.

with the cursed wombs, the brain states that sukuna’s fingers are an exception when it comes to cursed objects — that they are powerful enough to influence their surroundings even when sealed in the form of dormant fingers, and that they can choose their vessel. other sentient cursed objects, such as the death paintings, can reside in any vessel, albeit completely taking over their hosts. there is no relation between the objects and their vessels in this case, and the cursed objects can exercise their full power at the cost of taking over the host’s consciousness.

it’s possible that the brain wanted to make sure that being suppressed by a suitable vessel still allowed for a curse to use its full power, i.e sukuna, but that’s just me theorizing.

in terms of the memory manipulation thing, gege has stated that it’s not a technique and that the causes were different for todo and choso’s cases. i’m not inclined to fully believe him because again he could just be lying his ass off to distract from the very real similarities between the cases. i’ve seen some interesting theories concerning it, such as that it’s a technique that uses positive cursed energy, that it’s a defense mechanism, that it has to do with the soul like mahito’s technique, et cetera. i don’t think it’s why the brain is interested in him — that most likely has to do with his status as sukuna’s vessel. i find it suspicious that the brain knows so much about his body and how it will react to sukuna (for example telling the disaster curses that should yuuji eat one finger a day up to 20, he would most likely retain control, but if fed 10 fingers at once he would temporarily be overwhelmed) AND how it seems that they already knew he was sukuna’s vessel even before he consumed the finger — someone else said this in the notes of my other post, don’t remember who, but when discussing with the disaster curses after yuuji’s first “death” it seemed like he’d been part of their plans for a while and that they knew he was sukuna’s vessel before anyone else did. but! the memory shit is very suspicious and i am looking very hard at gege for an explanation.

gosh this got long. i will probably cross post this on twitter because i kind of popped off. anyway yeah

[thelittlehansy]

How many signs of Narcissistic abuse can we catch in a the book "A Frozen Heart" ?

i took a article from psychology today : here the point of view is of course not partner but hans/ his narcissist father and worst bro.

I hope my reasoning are gonna fit and unfortunaly i m gonna used quote from À Frozen Heart several time for Hans family appeared only at the start of the book.

What is Narcissistic Abuse : Abuse may be emotional, mental, physical, financial, spiritual, or sexual. Here are a few examples of abuse you may not have identified:

Verbal abuse includes belittling, bullying, accusing, blaming, shaming, demanding, ordering, threatening, criticizing, sarcasm, raging, opposing, undermining, interrupting, blocking, and name-calling. Note that many people occasionally make demands, use sarcasm, interrupt, oppose, criticize, blame, or block you. Consider the context, malice, and frequency of the behavior before labeling it narcissistic abuse.

Hans on his everyday life At the start of the book :

Belittling( undermining i think also)  : "you should apologize to your mother she is after all the only one who would have ever noticed you were missing"

Bullying : "like sharks smelling blood in the water a few more of the brothers began to join in the "teasing" "

Accusing : "did you not think your mother birthday is worthy of your presence?"

Blaming : " Westergaard are lion not mice hans you should listen to your brother maybe you could learn a thing of two from them if you stopped acting like you were better than them"

Shaming : Rudy and Runo : "whats thats ? We cant hear you really should learn how to speak up father abhors mice"

Demanding : "dont disappoint me...again !" 

ordering : "his father had requested his presence and when the king made a request you did whatever was asked"

threatening : i think “dont disappoint me...again” can work also because Hans knew that what kind of treatment he receive if he dont follow his father belief thats the reasons his brothers bully him. So there is an idea of punishement if he dissapoint his father i think.

Criticizing : as you might imagine i dont have time to listen to you whine about your brothers being bullies again 

interrupting : “the king did not waste time to the point Hans , always just get to the point he would say whenever he deemed Hans had stay too long in his presence” i thought i will find nothing for this one but guess i was wrong 😅

Raging : " he didn't care if his father would be mad later it wasnt worth the torment to sit through of this assault" later

Fighting Marsmahllow : " thats all you got ? You big snowy beast ? Hans thought as he pulled out his sword and began to swing it skillfully. Compared to my father when he is angry you seem like a cuddy bunny"

Sarcasm : not any quote but very much possible with that environment !

Manipulation: Generally, manipulation is indirect influence on someone to behave in a way that furthers the goals of the manipulator. Often, it expresses covert aggression. Think of a “wolf in sheep’s clothing.” On the surface, the words seem harmless – even complimentary; but underneath you feel demeaned or sense a hostile intent. If you experienced manipulation growing up, you may not recognize it as such. See my blog on spotting manipulation.   

“Dont disappoint me...again " i think works too for this one ! This is what hans father told him after he ask if he can help him and before he go help him with a citizens that criticize him.

it has an effect on Hans who is upset and therefore wants to please and prove himself to his father even more.

the effect are there and the goal of course of the king was only for his own interest. Stopping his people To criticize him by emotionally manipulating Hans to be effective.

Emotional blackmail: Emotional blackmail may include threats, anger, warnings, intimidation, or punishment. It’s a form of manipulation that provokes doubt in you. You feel fear, obligation, and or guilt, sometimes referred to as “FOG”

one example i think : " his father had requested his presence and when the king made a request you did whatever was asked" Hans end up having a sense of obligation to come at a place where he know his brothers are gonna bully him. After when he decide to leave he talk about his father anger implying he is gonna be mad and punished him. so that an example i think we can spot also ! 

Competition: Competing and one-upping to always be on top, sometimes through unethical means. E.g. cheating in a game.

"You know you fit quit well in the southern isles everything is a competition back home " Hans to Anna during the coronation party big clue !

Negative contrasting: Unnecessarily making comparisons to negatively contrast you with the narcissist or other people.

" you should listen to your brothers you could learn a thing or two if you stop acting as if you were better that them "🤔

Exploitation and objectification: Using or taking advantage of you for personal ends without regard for your feelings or needs.

After hans works during 3 years for his father as his gofer on his way to arendelle " getting to this point had not be easy. It had taken nearly three years to convince the king that he was responsible enough.(..) all the begging, pleading and generally making himself a lapdog to his father To procure a spot as the representative would pay off"

= indication the king exploit Hans during 3 years and what is sad is that he still dont trust him at the end. So yeah deftntly take advantages of hans to me.

Sabotage: Disruptive interference with your endeavors or relationships for the purpose of revenge or personal advantage.

The princes : “after each well placed jab they would look to their father to gain his approval even at the expense of their youngest brother”

i think that quote can reflect this one because there we see the reasons why Hans relationship with his brothers is broken and the reasons is because they all want to have their father attention/approval. that’s a situation the king voluntary let happen between his son for personal advantages.( boots his ego i beleive) the king defitnly sabotage Hans relationship with his brothers and even i would say all the relationship between his sons.

Neglect: Ignoring the needs of a child for whom the abuser is responsible. Includes child endangerment; i.e., placing or leaving a child in a dangerous situation.

“it wasnt as thought he had woken up that morning to found out he was the youngest of thirtheen son with a distant and careless father that had been his ife always and that would be his life forever” this is what hans say about his life at 17 years old 20 years old with his true age.

Character assassination or slander: Spreading malicious gossip or lies about you to other people.

“ So ? any new of when i might  become an uncle again ? i m hoping your child might like me at least ?”  Hans to Lars

So here thats interpretation ! i could be wrong but to me its kind of imply the niece and nephew he got so far do not like him a lot. so now the question is how little kids may end up disliking their uncle ? unpleasant gossip from their fathers or even grandfather about their uncle !

Violence:This includes blocking your movement, pulling hair, throwing things, or destroying your property

“at least they had thrown bread this time not glassware” 

Isolation: Isolating you from friends, family, or access to outside services and support through control, manipulation, verbal abuse, character assassination, or other means of abuse.

 "For him the southern isles and it castle was a prison and his father the jailer"🤔

Withholding: Withholding such things as money, sex, communication or affection from you.!

Hans dad is volountary distant and cold with him and show less affection to him in order "to toughten him up "

Gaslighting: Intentionally making you distrust your perceptions of reality or believe that you’re mentally incompetent.

to be honest i didn't catch exactly what is gaslighting i have understand the definition but each time i see someone used the word i m confuse because cannot connect it with the definition.

so here no sign of gaslighting ( distrust perception) i don't know if this one works for "make believe you are mentally incompent"

"hans could hear the voice of his brothers (..) you dont have the guts to do anything. Princess elsa what she want is a man not  a boy. What about we go find her and you stay here where you belong."

3 are no present on the book with the last one very much possible because the king of the southern isles abuse financially his poeple :

-Lying: Persistent deception to avoid responsibility or to achieve the narcissist’s own ends.

-Privacy invasion: Ignoring your boundaries by looking through your things, phone, mail; denying your physical privacy or stalking or following you; ignoring privacy you’ve requested.

-Financial abuse: Financial abuse might include controlling you through economic domination or draining your finances through extortion, theft, manipulation, or gambling, or by accruing debt in your name or selling your personal property.

I think lying and privacy invasion can both be things Hans and even his brothers are submit since little by their father.

[nofomoartworld]

Art F City: An Interview with Aleks Slota: Language is a Shell Game

Years ago, if you read Derrida, Lacan and their fellow travelers and then came to the conclusion that language is inherently unreliable, you were considered at best pretentious and at worst mentally ill. Here, for instance, is Lacan on one of the various, maddeningly indirect ways in which words acquire meaning, or a lack thereof: “… insofar as it forms part of language, the signifier is a sign which refers to another sign, which is as such structured to signify the absence of another sign …”. Um, yeah, exactly. Language is a shell game.

Now, in the post-truth era, all that giddy philosophizing (presented in a style as nutty as the ideas it proffered)  suddenly rings true. Hell, it clangs. The relationship between words and their assigned meaning(s), never all that comfortable in the first place, now strikes us as illusory, if not deceitful. You can’t trust your own reading glasses.

Multimedia artist Aleks Slota’s latest works ask a further question: if all of the above is true, how can you trust an artist?

A Berlin-based Polish-American, Slota has built a career out of being, in the larger and best sense of the modifier (signifier?) an irritant, or “irritainer” as the Canadian artist Andrew Harwood coined; an artist who puts his audience’s his own comfort aside in pursuit of new, less easy revelations. His performances typically involve acts of endurance, for both artist and witness, and no end of noise.

But in his latest projects are markedly more pensive. We met for a chat at Berlin’s Ex Girlfriend Gallery on the final day of his understated exhibition of text works It Happened Here. And a few weeks before our get together, Slota presented Meat Puppet at the Berlin literary centre Lettretage – a concise performance wherein he attempted to verbalize into sense a word salad derived from President Trump’s barking. Better him than us.

Slota’s new works acknowledge the simple fact that we are all part of the now-heightened language/meaning problem because unless you’re a hermit, you too are , of course, communicate and almost all of us also contributing to the constant cross-talk and, by extension, the reduction of words to mere noise. There is no getting away from the collapse of the familiar formula of words = distinct (or at least agreed upon) meaning. We burned that barn down. Nor is it useful to simply blame this slippery slope on Trump and his imitators and not acknowledge our own complicity. Slota wants us, instead, to own the chaos.

RM Vaughan: It Happened Here appears fairly straightforward: you spent time in the gallery, performed various actions, and then documented the actions and where you did each with large sheets of text and X’s on the floors. Many of the descriptions are quite funny, and the project appears deceptively simple, but what else is going on here?

Aleks Slota: The show is called It Happened Here, and the performances were made for no audiences, so the only documentation is what I provided. I even blacked out the windows so nobody could see what I was doing. What you read on the printed posters are my own recollections, taken from notes I made immediately after the actions. Of course, I reworked them a bit and edited the texts. Because I only had a week to do the whole show, performances and printing, everything was done very quickly.

And we have to decide if you are telling the truth?

I come from photography, and I document a lot of other people’s performances. So, I understand really clearly that photography can’t be trusted. So, for me, language is in the same bag. Anything can be manipulated. But people still think photographs are some kind of proof, some sort of reality. I don’t know why. I think people want an anchor, of reality, of facts. They want this in photographs and in text. But even in “documentary” photography there is manipulation. This question of validity and trustworthiness is to me finished, for any media. The question of what is documentary, what is representation, is long over. I want the performances in It Happened Here to live first in people’s imaginations. It makes the viewer have to work harder, but that is more rewarding because you create your own image of what I did, or write that I did.

What we imagine then becomes all that we can trust. Which seems like completing the circle.

Yes. Doing this, when I think about the larger implications, does not frighten me. I am at peace with this dilemma because of my understanding of image manipulation. But today all of these questions seem much more urgent, because these questions are now in the spheres of real power. We want to still believe the US is the world leader, but we have a president who is using this understanding of language’s unreliability to his own advantage. The concerns about language and expression, representation many of us have had for decades. It’s not theoretical, it is not just in our entertainment culture anymore. Putin is a good example of this: he always says at least two things at once and says everything is “true” when it suits him.

Doing work about mass lying (if that is not now an outdated verb) is particularly resonant in Germany.

Yes, because the reactions of the audience showed me that when they saw Meat Puppet they had deeper references than Donald Trump in their heads. They saw how the pattern has played out over their own history. German audiences recognize where Trump’s strategies come from. For sure, to me the absurdity is that I can never be as absurd as the people in power. I am employing their techniques, but I have no power to back up my actions. I’m on the low end of the spectrum of the problem. I am adding to the uncertainty, but I don’t see an alternative to how I can engage with this topic of (language). But I also want people to laugh! Plus the context is very specific: when I do performances outside of the comfort of the art world, I worry about how to relate these complex concerns to a more direct kind of public. When your work is not contextualized by the “art space”, even more interpretations are possible. I notice that when I do public performances people think I am insane.   Or because they don’t have an understanding framed for them by a gallery or a stage, they get really annoyed. Even violent. The lack of an easy context can be really threatening for people now.

Much of your previous work has been about sound, noise, and sensations. How does that inform what you are doing now?

The sound art that I make comes from punk aesthetic. But I was feeling squeezed by that aesthetic, even though I still do sound art and will make more. I felt constricted by the way anger and pain are presented in the punk/metal style and wanted to try to express that same set of feelings in new ways. The text works I am arranging the anger in a cleaner way. The sentences are shorter, the descriptions use simple language and are concise. It does not look on the paper like a punk text, like a chaotic text, and I think it is more understandable that way. Aggressive sound art, the noise art world, is only now getting to the galleries in Berlin, it has always been an outsider thing. I guess I wanted to find a middle ground and reach new people. The connection between the sound/noise art and the text works is that I have learned not to be afraid of the audience’s reactions. But with text works, I am trying to be more of an editor.

Given all the factors at play, how can you tell anymore if a performance or show is successful?

In this case, some people have told me that they felt uncomfortable reading the posters, because I talk about my body, masturbation, feeling sick, etc. And for me discomfort is a good thing, for all of us, because you have to consider what causes the discomfort. Discomfort leads to questions. The worst thing is when people tell me that they agree with me.

from Art F City http://ift.tt/2ra2GBF via IFTTT