10,000

what will become of the 10,000?

10,000 photographs of people, reduced to dots of light. have all these souls become equal, points on a uniform grid? some are missing… what has happened to these lost souls?

10,000 (1)

10,000 (1)
2010
digital c-type print, 50 x 50 cm

dots of colour are not an artifact, but an archetype. all art is something that reinvents, rediscovers. we already have the answers within us, and in the process of realising the self (potential) we come across patterns and images that seem as if they are shared. perhaps they are shared because we all share common ancestors. colour pictures (arrangements of flat colours in grids) express our collective need to be part of a group, a community, reconciled with the fact that we are individuals, and alone. there is a space between the dots: this space is part of our nature and also part of the problem that we need to solve.

perhaps it was inevitable, that souls could be abstracted to pixels; an impossibility that is a partial definition of art. but the picture has to be done, not thinking that it is an end to something… and so it often seems to me that there is no attainment of peace in art.

(feb 2008)

~

In anatomy, each neuron in the human brain is estimated to connect to 10,000 others.

In philosophy, Lao Zi writes about ten thousand things in the Tao Te Ching

In Zen Buddhism, the 10,000 things is a term meaning all of phenomenal reality.

~

if we isolate a particle, we find that it composed of smaller particles:

10000 (1) particle (clarity)

10000 (1) particle (clarity)

however the nature of particles is that their true nature is only exposed, paradoxically, indirectly, when they are described imperfectly… a pure theory is one that only describes itself, and so leads to the mistaken belief that the perfection and elegance of the theory is a true reflection of the intrinsic perfection of the reality that the theory describes.

however the nature of particles is that their true nature is only exposed, paradoxically, indirectly, when they are described imperfectly… a pure theory is one that only describes itself, and so leads to the mistaken belief that the perfection and elegance of the theory is a true reflection of the intrinsic perfection of the reality that the theory describes.

perhaps as our uncertainty grows, the true nature of things exposes itself more, as we move away from the idea that we can formulate perfect theories. it is as if our theories fold back into themselves, because even though randomness (irreducible or perceived) and the principle of uncertainty are embedded into these theories, we continue to believe that they might one day reach a perfect state of completeness.

when we view the particles through an imperfect lens, they reveal themselves as being made up of even more particles, which were previously hidden, not existing…

10000 (1) particle (doubt)

10000 (1) particle (doubt)

…and as the inaccuracy multiplies, the particles become a mist…

10000 (1) particle (mist)

10000 (1) particle (mist)

… a mist that can still be viewed perfectly, and so perhaps lead us to believe that this is really what is out there, because the degree of imperfection in our lens is ultimately unknowable for us; we cannot step outside our own theories in order to measure them.

(2010)