July 16, 2004

Tudor, A. Costache. What is there to-know, what is there to-tell? Do I know what is-there, do I tell what is-there? Who knows. Let’s stick with a media-ted [note the lack of capitalization, this isn’t a 1990’s film about grassroots terrorism] critique, analysis, or deconstruction.

Here we see Tudor’s quizzically engorged and yet subtly curious eyeballs staring out from beyond the portions of a typewriter indicated in the upper-left portion of this image. This got me to thinking: What Is Tudor’s General Relation To Literary And Digital Media? My answer, in two parts, of course…

1) Tudor’s painstaking urgency to beautifully or passionately investigate the banal or oft-ignored aspects of life and existence [aesthetic, conceptual, or otherwise] is something of a double-edged sword. Let us first use his Photography to exemplify this Uniquely Investigatory Mode. In his photography [which can be examined via a link at this site’s head] Tudor tends to seek out items, spaces, creatures, or expressions [of people] either without voice, regularly denied one, or having had a significant voice at some point in the past…which has since been vanquished or silenced by the ravages of time. His photographs of abandoned industrial spaces in contrast with his blatantly exuberant naked body most clearly illustrate this point. Tudor’s photographic skills are exemplary, never is an scene or sensation sacrificed for the good of aesthetic perfection, while uniquely, never is a potential image or aesthetic cast aside for its lack of immediately accessible symbolic or suggestive value. [Not to say that Tudor’s photographs are lacking in terms of symbolic or suggestive value, his work with His Own Phallus suggests quite the opposite!] In summary, Tudor relentlessly seeks and navigates through the world, as well as his perception of it, in the process of capturing and displaying the Objective World in Subjective Terms.

2) When investigating Tudor’s weblogging, this examination takes an unexpected turn. It is my personal experience, an admittedly biased and perhaps even jaded one, that Tudor’s blog has at many points sacrificed the benefits of long-term fermentation and development in favour of a Present-ation thrust into the Moment, and carrying a greater intensity or poeticism. While by no means a general criticism of his writing, my observation has been [on several separate occasions] that events and circumstances better left to develop [even if it means to wither or die, eventually] have been prematurely pushed into the limelight, so to speak. As if an actor not entirely familiar with her lines had been tossed onto a stage for a performance, the blog phenomenon presents a certain unique intensity and poetic power, but not always without a price. While the experience of an actor unfamiliar with her material, and testing new ground with an intuitive and catalytic performance may be powerful, it is by no means a universally or long-lastingly beneficial phenomenon. Tudor’s presentation of his experience and situation in an amazingly real-timed manner, utilizing such poetic language and structure, is admirable and often incredibly enjoyable. However, it can also pose a direct threat to the development of sustainable self-image, or even emotional stability.

So is this post a shout at Tudor to stop his writing!, trash the CSS archives!, and hole up in a dark basement forever!? Of course not! Tudor and I share a powerful friendship, ultimately one founded on many of the principles at which I have launched today’s criticisms. Would I sacrifice that friendship, his writing, and the intense fire in his mind and heart for an easier ride, peace of mind? Don’t bloody count on it. I’ve got my scattered problems with the technology, with what it can do to the writer, and with what it does to the subject; but my belief in the democratic, expressive, and artistic potential of all three of those parts of the process outweighs nearly all of my qualms. Charge on, Beautiful Loser.