I just had a chat with Thomas Kondilas, a chat of unparalleled philosophical depth, rivaling our previous eight years' discourse and correspondence combined, with allusions running the gamut from the intentions and goals of calculus; to the concepts behind the photoelectric effect, quantum mechanics, and the superstring theory; to elementary French; to Ohio Valley history; to the aesthetic & ontological philosophies of Messrs. Wittgenstein, Descartes, and Plato; to psychoanalysis; to the below-mentioned literary works of Bukowski and Thompson, specifically the very idea of "turdness". I could very well describe this conversation in terms in which you may pretend to understand, dearest bloggee.
But I will not, for Tom and I decided that his picture is worth much LESS than a thousand words. Take a look at the picture right now, and you'll see the catalyst for Tom's blog entry, this my present blog entry, and the pursuit of the aesthetic which may be said/written to describe the body of LESS Productions' work past, present, future, and inchoate. In writing a description of the doctored photograph, one may get glimpses of the catalyst but not of the phenomenon itself.

But the very ideas of the Enlightenment which this country and its supposed-Dream was founded on are inherently abstract-- that's why we're the nation without a nationality. In order to order these ideals, one must take them out of context, as lack-of-context is their original context, much like Tom's "New Obstruction". In teaching about the modern world for the past two years to high schoolers, I have seen the rise and fall of these ideals many times over, so positivistically-applied by inhabitants of the last century that "progress" nearly ended the world entire. Once "this" is institutionalized (even if that institution be language), "this" is no longer what inspired the "this", but rather a "thisness".
Therefore, how can one write about the flag, the photograph, the play, a piece of digital media, anything that is viewed so symbolically and subjectively? Very simply: by giving in to symbolism and subjectivity, and pursuing "this" anyway. That's why I'm writing this in "anarchic" words and not "ordered" binary code. For example, I cannot write of the beer can in Mr. K's right hand without being reminded of a line from a play of his I saw in 2003 in which Miller High Life is referred to as a drink for old females.
All I can write affirmatively for Tom (and you) is that I eagerly look forward to his next play, his next film, his next project, his next line to get stuck in my head and re-form the way I view beer cans, American flags, lens flares, or anything else which may be experienced and transmitted through dialogue, pixels, and neurons. From what I gather from his previous post, this is not a retrospective here's-what-I'm-all-about statement but rather an aesthetic landmark that will admittedly shift in future to encompass new lack-of-definitions and extrapolations of "this".
Through the latter end of our convo in Gfield, I was coughing quite a bit, and as I rode home, I spit out what felt like a small rock that was stuck in my sinuses. That very conversation, this very blog entry, and my previous near-decade with Mr. K are quite similar to that sinus-turd-- I stepped back and admired the work, but admired equally that it was a nice little mess of entropy that could and should be torn apart all over again. This LESS is a mess of thisness. Please, TK &co., I want some more.
- post by Matt Greenfield
As an independent media producer I am constantly struggling to describe my aesthetic or style to friends, family, potential clients...etc.

In this blog I will try to show the American Dream with inspired content from myself and others that pushes the envelope and gives us some new ideas about what the American Dream has become, where it's going and how we can make better use of it right now.
- post by Tom Kondilas