art of face,

concerted bodily aging (more than just faces) in a family — a couples “visible soulwork” on selves, each other, children; outside influences mix in but rarely deflect the basal family changestream. With the lifetime length and closeness of performance, it is the quintessential art for two; few feel the need to self-inf when single (in a curious reversal of “nature” where a single spends more time on self-grooming to attract a mate): a loners face is a static, slowly fading, snapshot of their last love. ■    Face is one canvas you cannot erase and start over; the “everfluid face of love” (“creative imperative: move ever on”) is evolutionary, always fading and re-blooming in tiny daily steps, ultimately lived. Body malleability did more than strengthen family bonding: it may have made humans “too easy to love” — killed our ancestors “hard love” triumphing over the decline of flesh (wasnt writing condemned for making memory effortless?). An average art-of-facing couple may exemplify “a current idea of pretty” but a rare coincidence of talent and luck — having found the one — produces, legendarily, a “disturbing harmony” “painful for the unaccustomed eye.” ■    Early adopters gave art-of-face a bad name: once the floodgates were open, instincts of imitation and conformance spammed the world with “plastic” (genomic infing is no copying but its natural variation may be creepy when unworked); at the same time, faceforging tech gave a new weapon to those seeking to manipulate: it takes effort to suppress the hardwired face-reading intuitions — to see under the surface of a sculpted visage. Since then, humanitys facescapes have diversified to make these primordial intuitions much less automatic; face reading is now work: anyone art-of-facing with a sneaky backthought, or just not in a close feedback loop with a lover, risks looking fake — “artifacial.”

< art  |  artificium >

Unless otherwise stated, the content of this page is licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 License