Its curious that when writing about some visual objects in this blog, morethanjustwine talks of “effects” of infinity. In other words, perhaps only my own whims, effects are manifestations – in these cases about ideas of infinities rather than Being artistic – or possible artistic – infinities.

Such manifestations are bound by specific objects, eg paintings, because they are Manifestational. By Manifestationalism am trying to point towards reliance on meanings, specific conveyance operations and effects. An operation that is directed towards making an effect of perceptual nature that is linked to cultural meanings of infinity.

That is very transcendental, no?

In that case, the simple idea of an infinity of Reals, and an infinity of Primes, etc. seems for me much more profound. I can visualize these, manifest them this way or another, share them as numbers sets, and write some algorithms with these in mind, etc.

All these precisely because a set such as 0,1,2,3,5,7,11,13, etc – does not need the specifity and the investment of, for example, a blue canvass, or a blue room and such.

However, why do we need to be bound by math?

Do we need to be bound by numbers for abstracts?

Can We not have illogical, dys-numerical, value oriented ways to do, for example, infinities? An infinite time? An infinite rhythm – These not as clocks or beats on drums to represent some ideas, but made of abstracts that can be in itself manipulated and – if fancied – to be expressed?

## One reply on “infinity in manifestational art?”

infinity in manifestational art? http://itchy.5p.lt/infinity-in-manifestational-art/