photos of wet mounted originals, with mat board

The hc (human condition) as a projected actuality, as captured from behind.

Brush and sumi-e ink on Japanese calligraphy “rice” paper wet mounted on to Chinese mulbery “rice” paper.

The rest of the series, and with titles in Gallery 2 of Gendo web site : http://www.gendohcr.com/#!copy-of-gallery-2/c16nd

1 knobbly join, the self having an experienece set between outside and in

knobbly join, the self having an experienece set between outside and in

the human condition lined up, facing the front and cornered across under conscious's reign

the human condition lined up, facing the front and cornered across under conscious’s reign

3 the three bodies conscious mind floating erect protozoa

the three bodies conscious mind floating erect protozoa

21 ned kelly's letter box, mind's float tied up on its breath and swallow

ned kelly’s letter box, mind’s float tied up on its breath and swallow

19 ned kell's letter box

ned kell’s letter box

15  a

gshf abm’t let go with diaphragm’s spread

12b turned turned turned and wrapped across, our staggered stake with arch of language

turned turned turned and wrapped across, our staggered stake with arch of language

10 inside middle out, around the side and front and back 9 mind's spread held in, opens out through its line up 8b set across there there, above and below 7 three bodies set across there there, above and below 6 floating torso over underside underbelly and landing  of bottom cornering, tucks in left 5 the conscious and its shadow with their displacements 4 the conscious's reign over its settings and shadow

Do you see? to be or not to be.

To all selfy acts, not the identity, person or the whole being of whom pictures are of in the act but the act it self, including our statements and expression to communicate.

“Seeing is believing.”
But ….
is it true
is it real
or is that being skeptical?
How can it be
so easy
to believe in what we see.

We try to understand
what we see
and see what we
understand
determine, judge
believe
“Do you see what I mean?”
or what you understand.

It’s what was seen
we conclude upon
argue over in court.
Our notion follows
what we sense
rather than our
common sense,
we don’t mean to be mean.

It’s actuality in what we are
authenticity in being a part
lost with who is not seen.
Our whole being of reality
not to be seen or understood
is beyond our belief
a mystery.
Do you see?

Beyond our linear cognitive or knowing processes

We tend to stay in the accountable and the transparent especially in this post-modern world, and keep our selves occupied and diverted there (therapies to help with patient’s stay in hospital).

Behaviourism and the cognitive therapies of psychology have done away with the grey areas of the subconscious. Our deeper senses of gut instinct, intuition and the mystic and spiritual, are the foundations of our reality.

Right or wrong, good or bad, true or false, we are isolated from our whole, in our identification with our self and what we experience. We hold to what can seem consistent, certain, authentic or familiar, of knowing in our mind. It is reinforced by our assertions and actions, and again reinforced by the development of our interactive technologies and their use.

We have always kept each other in our linguistic linearity. However, language used to be the reverberance of a deep understanding, belonging, recognition and communion that welled from our deep subconscious we lived and acted by. Now, instead, our fellowship trails our language, our common points in our “texed” and digitalised bits of our lives.

I think it useful to distinguish the self from the whole self. A whole being has the body, brain and mind, the conscious and subconscious. Only in our minds can we consider a functioning brain separate from the whole body, when there is no living brain without a whole body and no whole body without a brain. The whole body has the eyes and allows us to think we see, has the brain and allows us to think we think.

Yes, we can ascribe the subconscious to take care of our concerns while we are otherwise occupied or asleep, paint beyond our thinking we know how and are doing it, indeed performances and feats are recognised as enacted beyond our cognitive notion and sense. However, in considering the human condition and all its states, conditions and functioning, what we may do, experience and notice in our reality, let’s consider a whole body in and of reality and our reality being a projected part.

A mechanism is implied and a guide and reference established that we can “contemplate” and test, for they are about our actuality being in relation with the whole body. An empirical pragmatism and process to our reality may be, and may also be a universal reference for us all.

The dynamism and vibrancy of our whole being is of creation, ie creation, distruction, creation in true existential and shiva-istic (Hindu god of creation destruction creation in polarity with Vishnu the preserver) fashion – incontestable for us as a part and in projection. Our transience and what we may hold consistent, are his/her projected parts. The whole body is present in the present, and encompasses our past, here and now, and all realms, entities and experiences we may encounter. What or who we experience, if they are true indications, exist in reality next to our whole being.

The mystic and intuitive extend deep into our subconscious, but physical in reality is the whole body. He/she is godly, more than the sum of his/her parts that include our sense of the physical, of “our body”, nature, others, humanity, life, the divine, the profound and the profane.

Physical is spiritual, the spirit being the essence of the whole self and All creation, God-presence if All creation be God, for the whole self being of creation. And our whole does not deny our part nor our reality, of experiences and our presumptions about them; projection is a part of the whole body, as are his/her solid, vaporous and fluid, vascular and musculo-skeletal spaces.

Our surrender and actualisation as a projected part (it is what we are) and in relation with our whole (our maker and source, and contact with reality); forever becoming a part for being in relation with the whole body because he/she is of the forever changing present.

Orientation to our projected part and whole, allows for this approach, to our self and to our whole. Without a notion of a whole being and our projected part, we can only point at reality from within the black box or the brown paper bag of our reality, of conscious experience and identification witnessed.

We keep our selves and one another, occupied and diverted in the linearity of story and vision, in what we “see” and understand. We must confront this incessancy, hold to our actuality, of our self, our reality and our depths, and introduce the whole self.

As projected actuality, in what we and our reality are, we may present our selves and be in relation with our whole. Our conscious is released and connected with our subconscious, through an integration of our parts with our whole. Beyond alluding to reality, we may be in relation with reality, the whole body alive in creation.

And our whole is more complete with more integrated parts.

How do you feel about this proposition, that the source of our conscious and subconscious, the mystic as well as the cognitive, being a whole being in and of reality, and with who we may be in relation. Would you consider presenting you self in your actuality to your whole?

The sub-conscious

In music, dance and any performances including martial arts and fighting, we are involved in a tacit association between us as the “apparent” initiator and the “on-time” movement of the body in reality, in real time and space, that is interrupted if we become too cognitive and determining or self-conscious. Long distance running usually requires a maturity (sprinters are young whereas marathon runners are usually older) and some nack over this tacit relationship, and Tai chi allows its practitioners to approach a state that enters right into the tacitness where our sense of self, will and enactment meld. In fact any activity, unless lost in the act, be it work, play or exercise, can bring on this problem of self-consciousness; we can be derailed from our reassuring sense of “I’m doing it” and be lost in our self separate from a sense of being and doing. We can either hold to our self and focus or mesmerise in on our sense of the act and deny the rest, or place ourselves in that tacit relation and find our place as a part of a dynamic happening.

This happening is of our whole to whom we as an identity and our reality of experience belong. Our sense of being in and acting within the world, is a part of him/her. The happening of our whole includes our subconscious functioning; beyond our linear conscious and cognitive or knowing processes and efforts, we can sleep on or put aside a problem and awake with or just realise a worked out answer.

We tend to stay in the accountable and the transparent especially in this post-modern world and keep our selves occupied and diverted there (therapies to help with patient’s stay in hospital). Behaviourism and the cognitive therapies of psychology have done away with the grey areas of the subconscious.

Whether right or wrong, good or bad, true or false, we are isolated from our whole, in our identification with our self and what we experience. We hold to what can seem consistent, certain, authentic or familiar, of knowing in our mind. This is reinforced by our assertions and actions, and again reinforced by the development of our interactive technologies and their use.

We have always kept each other in our linguistic linearity. However, language was the reverberance of a deep understanding, belonging, recognition and communion that welled from our deep subconscious we lived and acted by. Now instead, our fellowship trails our language, our common points in our “texed” and digitalised bits of our lives.

I think it useful to distinguish the self from the whole self. A whole being has the body, brain and mind, the conscious and subconscious. Only in our minds can we consider a functioning brain separate from their whole, when there is no brain without a whole body and no whole body without a brain. The whole body has the eyes and allows us to think we see, has the brain and allows us to think we think.

Yes, we can ascribe the subconscious to take care of our concerns while we are otherwise occupied or asleep, paint beyond our thinking we know how and are doing it, indeed performances and feats are recognised as enacted beyond our cognitive notion and sense. However, in considering the human condition and all its states, conditions and functioning, what we may do, experience and notice in our reality, let’s consider a whole body in and of reality and our reality being a projected part.

A mechanism is implied and a guide and reference established that we may “contemplate” and test, for it is about our actuality and being in relation with the whole body. An empirical pragmatism and process to our reality may be, and be a universal reference for us all.