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.

The way something looks or sounds is also what it means. Words as visual and aural phenomena, which mainly poets, not critics and prose writers, tend to be obsessed with. I think maybe I'm more of a curator than I am a writer in the strict sense because I am interested in how everything on the page, in a space, works together.

We don't experience things collectively or cathartically anymore. Viewing has become an intensely private, fetishistic, compulsive process that happens separately from others, and that reflects not only our relation to cinema as a space of possibility, belief, and imagination. But more generally, of what could be, of readiness, which is what the movies have historically been about - the ability to act on things and change.

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.

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

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.

Quotes are like prompts. A way of searching, connecting the dots.