{ mooncake }

the fragments are then so many stones on the perimeter of a circle

--roland barthes




To be honest, I always found the controversy a little bewildering; it makes sense to me that this is what art does. I think I’ve always instinctively believed that truth is separate from fact, and that there is a truth (and beauty) of rhythm, tone, emotion. It’s important to dialogue and be aware and thoughtful, but one somewhat disconcerting result I’ve noticed, as the line (demarcating genre, truth, art) becomes a focus of discussion, is that I’ve become more and more paranoid-pedantic in my own writing. I used to be freer in my writing, barely gave a thought to the existence of a line somewhere. (I miss that.)

(What is also interesting to me is this tension as our society is both increasingly defined by an age of information, an obsession with facts and knowledge, and increasingly characterized by a fluidity of “truth,” a belief that all knowledge is a bit of an illusion. It’s like something building and something emptying at the same time. Maybe it makes sense: with chaotic accumulation comes a muddling of boundaries.)

*

http://harpers.org/archive/2012/02/0083770

http://ttbook.org/book/john-dagata-and-jim-fingal-lifespan-fact

http://www.salon.com/2012/02/09/in_defense_of_fact_checking/singleton/

http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/books/2012/02/the-art-of-fact-checking.html

[via brevity.wordpress.com/]

*

[Postscript]

Feb 12
notes, notes, notes

Meta: