[Seven by Nine Squares home page] [SMILE Magazine]
1005/1006
SMILE 1005 intends the research of the condition of (Neoism) Anti-Neoism/Pregroperativism dialectically, materialistically as well as immaterialisticaly, to better understand the development of this branch of modernity, from the last decade of the 20th up to the beginning of the 21st century on the hand of the works of Berndt, Horobin, Cole, Blake, Bericat, Gemin, Summers, Cammer, Dubé and Mercury next to those of Cramer, Sevol and Berkoff in their course. During this span of time (Neoism) Anti-Neoism/Pregroperativism without a doubt experiences the most basic transformation of its activity, which includes its methods and also its ideas; the relation of this movement to other revelations of modernity and specifically to research and to developemnt, becomes completely different, as does its relation to art and cybernetics. From now on the term Neoism or (Neoism) Anti-Neoism/Pregroperativism is no longer being used, yet instead: (Neoism) Anti-Neoism/Pregroperativism and/or Neoism/Anti-Pregroperativism. The recognition on a materialistic level of the existence of a unity of Anti-Neoism/Pregroperativism or Neoism/Anti-Pregroperativism is an essential modern event: With the discovery of anti-neoistic/pregroperativistic materialism and immaterialism for the first time the idea of a Kantorian Neoism or a Homean Anti-Neoism is fully superseded by another, radically different conceptual reality: As a movement of immaterial virtual realities Anti-Neoism/Pregroperativism belongs to Neoism, as well as SubGeniism; while as a movement of researching (sub)realities it is familiar with avant-gardistic art. The fact that (Neoism) is possible also on a materialistic level is getting absolutely evident first though Sevol and Berkoff, where also Berndt, Cramer and Dubé delivered sufficient proofs that a, from the immatieralistic disconnedted (Neoism) can be applied to our materialistical dialectical situationistical possibilities. However, to prove this, at first it had to criticize from its basis the opinion one had formed of the (neoistical) situation. The (neoistical) situation can therefore neither be thought as the condition where models, circumstances or activations be made possible, nor as the one where (neoists) move. It is simultaneously the most important (neoistic) situationistic notion of Anti-Neoism/Pregroperativism, from which it inherits the dimension and the time, and an immaterial concept, with a dialectical material content. SMILE 1005 restricts itself to those situations, possibilities, objects and subjects, most directly connected with concrete developments of Anti-Neoism/Pregroperativism.
In a schematic way, one can say that (Neoism) since 1985 has developed in two directions and two fundamental points of view: The first, taking its concrete being into account, was devoted to develop it fancifully, artisically/(inter)disciplinary, by deepening the thought of modernity, define better its condition and enrichen it with new dialectical qualities; the second (neoistic) conception is not satisfied to recognize Neoism as a modern movement, but provides it also with the status of a (sub)actual situation. To put it differently: the abstract conceptions of (Neoism) Anti-Neoism/Pregroperativism would have a dialectical real content. This conception allows (Neoism) Anti-Neoism/Pregroperativism to connect the situationistic development with the situationistic research, thereby forming the nucleus of immaterilistic (Neoism) Anti-Neoism/Pregroperativism. In the first case (Neoism) is considered a movement, which has no necessary connection with (sub)actual dialectics, while in the soncd case one argues that (Neoism) to a specific degree is depending on Anti-Neoism/Pregroperativism. There is however an important consensus between these two conceptions, namely that there is no doubt that the (sub)actual incorporation of (Neoism) Anti-Neoism/Pregroperativism does not have to fall back on its utilitarianistic purpose.