The founder of The Royal Studio.
That could be that we are spinning. It isn’t a tremendous thought. Yet we are still. That might not be true. Innocuous they might say.
Tend to disagree, alike the reunification of Art & Life.
Only the real negation of culture can inherit culture’s meaning.
Such negation can no longer remain cultural.
That could be therapy. It is the transparency. The honesty. The psychotic breaks and basking in the nerves of anxiety-led bumps. To get up in the morning to break the norm. A significant other decomposed in triangles and other geometric shapes, colored, bright & in movemenet.
No one told me that in the real world the act of translating a context would be a lesser act of greatness than to create the context. Figured it equivalent. If visualizing is therefore inferior to the source, I suspect that visual arts are smaller than literature.
That could be dinner: to contextualize the design act as function driven is to instrumentalize a falacy.
A stalker of the addicted. A seeker for greatness through catalystic features. Stalking in the night so that one can see through, in the morning, in the park, before work. It’s a different world now.
That could be happiness.
A non-article like this should pintpoint how absurd it is to exist in a relational reality. Fuck Andrew Bleauvelt
It’s about communicating through a lens.
We are emulating the beliefs of tomorrow.
Oh no, not tomorrow. That’s the main storyteller: that is what we do. Create monuments; envision landscapes; overreact to briefs and question goals; we fucking; we fucking push it forward; we laugh; we do that and still care about that form; that’s seductive. We emulate the line, we formulate the question, but still, we are here building an argument. Are we not masters of what it is to be suspended?
That could be something that could’ve been.