Not a Letter
One-upped by the Time Eater
Welcome!! If you’re yet to subscribe, kindly do so with this button. Also, remember to leave a like and a comment.
This is a letter unlike the title suggests, but it's not the kind you've come to expect from me. I'd hoped to write you about Football and Kpop—a strange mix, I know, but I had something. I still do, in fact, and I hope you get to read it soon. Unfortunately, the Time-Eater has consistently gotten the best of me in the past week or so, and he's likely going to continue on this hot streak. As desirous as I am of one-upping him, I'm at a loss what manoeuvre to use. He finds me in my sleep and ambushes me during meal time; he suffocates my alarm; he's the capitalist's henchman. He's been waging this war against mortals for aeons and I am but an atom in his unfathomable reality. Oh well, for now, I shall bide my time as he expects me to…but I will prevail. Haha, who am I kidding?
I’m sorry.
Allow me to suggest some works you might find interesting and hopefully, they’d fill the void this unlettery letter has created. First, you could check out any of my old letters—hopefully, I suppose, there’s one you missed. You could also check out The Intrinsic Perspective by Eric Hoel. Recently, I read the issue titled AI-art isn’t art and it was interesting. Art, Eric says, is defined not only by its extrinsic properties (say colour, form, etc) but also by intrinsic properties like the artist’s intentionality and the originality of the artwork. He says;
Consider the banality of this view, a view that reduces art to merely what’s in front of us. Without taking into account the consciousness of the artist, the word “art” loses all meaning, becoming merely a synonym for “beautiful.” We may find something pretty, or interesting, or striking, or pleasing, but none of these mean that it is art. We may find a natural vista affecting, we may even weep, but to say that it is “art” implies a cosmic consciousness working behind the scenes, an intrinsic property like a teleological origin, or a purpose that goes beyond the mere material. Without the intentionality of the artist taken into account, the definition of “art” is bled of all meaning, all differentiation, all usefulness as a term—such a move is really a defeat claimed in the name of victory. This is why deflationary theories of art, like how art is “whatever is in an art gallery” or “whatever anyone says” or “whatever pleases the senses” are all unsatisfying as definitions, for they strip the word “art” of all capacity to do the job of a word, which is to differentiate."
You could argue that he makes a philosophical argument, but I think it’s a good one regardless. And if you want something more philosophical, you may want to check out Philosophy Tube on YouTube. I watched the episode on Transhumanism some time ago, and I enjoyed it. It’s commonly said that “technologies are mere tools and it is people who are either good or evil”, but as Abigail Thorn explains, that may not be wholly true. Tools have values built into them that we may not realise, and also they may provide a framework for different kinds of people to exist. Check it out, and I’m sure you’d learn something useful.
I close with my hat off to a poem by Charles Bukowski titled “The Bluebird”, although I must add that I wasn’t wearing a hat. If you’d rather listen to the poem, check out this lovely narration. That’s it! Again, I’m sorry I couldn't properly write you this time. Wish me well against the Time Eater, dear friend.
Fin.
EDIT:
P.S.
The Time Eater is a villain in the Youtopian Journey substack series. That’s another interesting read you should check out!
Thanks for reading! I’m delighted you made it here. If you liked this issue of Dear Bolu, you could sign up here so that new letters get sent directly to your inbox.
If you really liked it, do tell a friend about it.
Also, remember to leave a like or a comment!
Write you soon, merci!
- Wolemercy
Is this the Time Eater I speak of?
Is this the Time Eater I speak of?