The Geometric Perspective Augmented with Cycles Normalization. Tony Trehy

Marginalisation has a cone architecture – not a here not there flatness.


The geography and geometry – the periphery still reproduces itself as the periphery, the cutting periphery is the connective that is introduced not eliminated, a cycle structure cannot be a cut cycle and so his measure is called cut periphery: notice the cycle is not a cut cycle, but we do have a cut node. As a result, the cycle is the cut periphery. In terms of the above concepts we determine our normalization measure as a set of orbits organised as the hierarchy of mediations, the co-temporality of the periphery and centre mean an identitary logic – like saying we are lesser out here and less seen, no less resistant to their national capitals and committed to producing art in advance of capitalism they read the same material, look at the same works and talk to the same people as part of what is now an internationalisation of the margins, rather than a global convocation of differences.”

So if this were a poem, for instance, it’d be like:

non-instrumentalised ways of mediating

their exclusion and marginalisation their

exclusion and productiveness

the space in the core claims haughty

rituals and rules, the docile to consume not product but space

Being modern 

as a form of insurgency from periphery to centre

the privileged central location within the radial configuration

as the only power directionality of the arrow emotes be visible be unverifiable

as the search for heretics, devils and witches, as well as the more routine policing of religious consciousness, 

rituals and rules, the docile to consume not product but space, 

docile bodies moving 

quickly is an unfamiliar image of the internal bleeding/breeding of empire.

FOOTNOTE:

“A technical Logic Note: a proof of a fact is asserted in the body of the poem. It may be skipped by anyone willing to take that assertion on trust, as it assumes rather more mathematical background than is required to follow the general exposition of logic. The result is the admissibility of ‘cut’ for the sequent calculus formulation of first-order logic. Those details which pertain to formulae containing quantifiers and terms may simply be omitted to yield a proof for propositional logic.”