For me, the eye and the word go together. Even when I was working in word documents, I was always obsessed with fonts, size, margins - the look of words on a page. The way something looks or sounds is also what it means.

I still have faith in people. But that is getting increasingly harder to maintain. I just don't see many people today choosing love. I see people passing it up a lot. Foreclosing on it, deferring it, sabotaging, letting go.

One of the liberating things about having a blog is the total vision it allows.

The digital age is for me in many ways about temporal wounding. It's really messed up our ontological clocks. In the digital economy, everything is archived, catalogued, readily available, and yet nothing really endures. The links are digital encryptions that can and won't be located. That will have to be reassembled over time. It won't be exactly what it was. There will be some slightly altered version. So the book is both an immaterial and material artifact.

Having a love ethic, as opposed to simply being in love, or having a lover, means love is the way you actively choose to engage with the world - whether you're in a relationship or not. It's not about disappearing into existing structures, norms, and privileges. It's precisely about breaking with the existing structures, values, and norms that prohibit real love in our culture.

Both cinematic culture and the culture at large have changed profoundly. We're now in post-cinematic digital culture, and the internet has obviously usurped movies, which are no longer central to our lives, at least not as a collective spectator experience.

I am as much what I am because of what I still don't have as I am because of what I have had and what I might still have one day.