The bantam lord at last doth strike!

[imomus]

One has a tendency to think of the man—nay, the phenomenon!—the world knows as Lord Whimsy as an end in himself, a work of performance art, an "affected provincial" about whom articles are written, films made and books published; a dandy, an avid horticulturalist and eminent apian. But Whimsy contains multitudes; he's also a partner in graphic design company Plankton Art, where he goes by the Clark-Kentish name of Allen Crawford.



Whimsy's design work is perfectly wonderful; as optimistic, baroque and colourful as his dandy persona. That's why, when he announced back in February that he was working on a Flash animation for my song "Bantam Boys" (from the award-winning "Otto Spooky" album, one of the Chicago Reader's Top 10 albums of 2005, apparently!), my heart fluttered like the song's heavily-filtered madrigal guitar chords. It's been fluttering for ten months now, and might have killed me had Whimsy not, yesterday, delivered his masterpiece. Yes, the animation of "Bantam Boys" has now arrived! It turns out to be the most spectacular safari since Rex Harrison talked to the animals in "Dr Dolittle" or Cousteau flipped off the deck of the Calypso kitted out in flippers and snorkel. Click the picture above to embark on an extraordinary journey! (Flash media, 1.2 MB.)

Lord Whimsy's colourful and beautifully-curved extravaganza (it reminds me of a Matthew Barney film) joins the Flash pieces made earlier in the year by The Lady Pat (Your Fat Friend) and Blayne Greiner (The Artist Overwhelmed), both still available for your viewing enjoyment.

Comments

[nomorepolitics.livejournal.com]

It's a wonderful break from the philosophical discussion I'm having with uberdionysus (http://www.livejournal.com/users/uberdionysus/)here (http://www.livejournal.com/users/uberdionysus/276957.html)).

O.K. I promise that's the last comment today.

[(Anonymous)]

Nomorepolitics, I have to say that your discussion is one of the most painful examples of two equally condescending pifflers arguing the toss over whose simple and rudimentary view is in line with their respective superficially understood philosophical (and in your case religious) concepts I've seen for ages (why on earth did you direct people to it?!). Incidentally, your idea of subjectivity is way off - pure experience precedes the formulation required for the faculty of will that you advance as subjectivity's essence. And please, don't reply.

[nomorepolitics.livejournal.com]

Ho Ho Ho

Momus originally linked to this, so I referenced it for that purpose.

The reason I express my philosophy is to help digest and regurgitate the philosophy I study; I'm not interested in converting people to my way of thinking.

But you're right, the discussion is not pleasant or interesting. I made a mistake thinking uberdionysus would be an interesting person to talk to.

However, your note is condescending, since you deem me superficial, simple, rudimentary, while it seems to me that you haven't really read what I wrote; I am not religious but an atheist.

I think you're confusing Sartre's thesis "experience precedes essence." That is part of my own philosophy, too. But I don't understand what you mean by "subjectivity's essence;" how can subjectivity have an essence? That's not part of my philosophy. And, definitely, yes, "experience precedes will;" that's part of what I'm saying since I derive my whole philosophy from my body.

And please, don't reply.

That's so absolutely closed-minded; are you god, sitting in final judgment of everyone?