The fabulous new, we exist in now, right in the middle of it, is an unprecedented point of the eon.  I speak now freely, in my own voice, as Jules Hancock, the inceptor & one of three curators bringing this show to life. I do not claim any of what I say here to be fact nor do I stand by my word, as my perception of reality is always shifting, updating and being re-written… I write as I see it, and I believe there is a major reality blinding illusion that has become a living by product of the rise of the media age and this apparent war on our focus, and it is not the content itself, it goes deeper, please lock in and find out now what ‘middles’ is attempting to showcase, to spark a even a glint of insight into what I see as a major conflict to cultural cohesion. 

 

 The purpose of media is well known, however what media itself is., being a middle has been subtly blended into a reflection, however this is dangerous. Stay with me, it is  vastly unconsidered,  the media, bombarding, advertising subliminally, overtly, 'socially', ever evolving, is such a an apparent reflection of the world that it seems, from my personal interactions with the world and its denizens that it is believed to be so..

 

But there is a middle ground that has been forgotten. No one, to my knowledge isn’t experiencing their own life looking out from their own interface of a human face. Yet we are not on the outside of that face, no one is… to my knowledge, I’m discounting the concept of astral travelling here for the sake of my argument.

 

My point is, there is so much media, that it seems that it is believed that this outer realm is where other people are existing… but that is only so for onlookers, all humans, exist from within and no one operates from this middle ground.

 

There are multiple philosophies that name this concept, Hermetics and the spiritual alchemists see this as the AETHER. I believe it’s simpler, rather than introduce an entirely new operating system perception overlay on how one may see our reality to explain this, painfully simple concept, yet so difficult to put into simple words, instead consider an online multiplayer video game; 

 

…even if you, yourself are not interested in video games, please don’t switch off, as it is as current, the simplest way to splay out my concept. So imagine, the users of the video game, their in game avatars exist within the server, yet each and every human operating their character is outside of the server, the server feels alive and all the avatars are really there and it’s immersive and alive, so much so, if effective, that it is forgotten for the most part that there is a human behind the controls that exists outside of the server.

 

This is how life as I see it, to be, everyone seeing the outer housing of everyone’s’ avatar so, to speak’ and it is more and more buried, under the sea of social media shares, films and news that there isn’t a single person in this world, presumably, that isn’t inside their housing, looking out.

 

This simple and obvious wisdom is overlooked, spoken about  in esoteric philosophies and mystic faiths, creeping into the sub-mainstream with the rise of accessibility to transcendental meditation smart phone applications, such as neuroscientist Sam Harris’ ‘Waking Up’, blending philosophy and science to do just that, cut through the illusions and wake us up.

 

‘A Dream of a Thousand Cats’ a story by Neil Gaiman, proposes in a beautiful comic format, (& don’t let the word comic fool you, this is important literature) that if enough of ‘us’ all dream the same reality, the dream becomes our reality.

I bring this up due to the beauty of the truth in this, most people do not think there is a gap between the social media post of their friends and the post when they see it, they think that is their friend… that was and never will be their friend, it is an extension of them perhaps and the media exists and is part of reality itself, but the friend who posted ‘that picture of themselves doing x, y z’was themselves inside themselves while doing so.

 

So, what’s my point? My point is grand, my point is that culturally, from my limited and ever updating perspective, it seems to me that the average Joe believes that the this middle ground is reality!  

 

The focus of anyone subscribed to that illusion is then more focused on how they are perceived by a hypothetical watcher, rather than their own inner self generating experiences. Is diminished to a puppet of nothing and has a plethora of unrealistic and impossible standards and sees their entire existence, in fact lives their entire reality as one who is not being true to their own souls directive. 

 

Each individuals perception of reality is subjective, due to endless variations, such as personal connatations, metacognition, values & standards, personal experiences, trauma, focus of attention, just to name a few. 

 

When individuals are able to truly hear another recount as their personal report and account, and keep in mind words can only do so much, our souls generate our reality from a place far before words, we can only do our best to define these experiences with words, however we can not be sure that our definitions of the words we choose to express with our vocabularies are received as intended, so when ones account is heard as fact even if it conflicts with our own reality, this is where things can get interesting… If we can accept that each individuals reality itself is a personal experience due to the factors pre mentioned, there is space to coexist in a place of compassion. We can address differences of perception with responses such as ‘ that’s not how it was for me’ but that kind of response only is effective if both parties are in agreement that their reality is not the one right reality and that perception reports themselves are not to be directed but understood as, oh hey, that person perceives, x, y z and I myself perceive a, b and x but y & z are incompatible with my experience, but I can accept radically, that my own view point is too affected by all the aforementioned… that is not to say that, one’s perception isn’t real, the complete opposite, it is, as real as reality can get and any point of discussion is to bring something to the table and discuss what it means, the table can be seen as a middle in itself, yet so much of what is brought to the table is pushed off as not being authentic or even existing, and then an argument about the existence of the very thing brought to the table becomes the argument rather than whatever accepting what has been brought, exists for the person who has raised the subject. 

 

This illusion that there is one shared reality that has one objective truth may be plain and true in terms of physical matter, but even the courts understand reality is largely socially constructed, decays and focuses on procedural truth.  My argument here is more focused in everyday slices of life, going to the grocery store, the thoughts we entertain during our private time, the sensory and perceptual experience of being a ‘member of society’ it is not the actions that can be proven as factual I am interested in here, but our personal view points. We’ve so often heard the expression, an opinion ’is about as useful as an asshole on an elbow’… perhaps so if sharing our opinion about another’s choices in criticism… yet opinion comes from the Latin ‘opinari’ ;think, believe & to reduce what we think and believe to useless is an oversight, our beliefs and thoughts can become us, however…

 

There is an interesting schism within this itself that is critical, what we believe,  etymologically coming from the Old English belyfan; to believe, trust, have faith, combining the prefix be; about, around with lief; dear, acceptable or lēfan; to live, what we truly believe, is not a choice per se, and yet thoughts can be intrusive, trained and even separated from our distinctly from our actions, yet to live our beliefs in action is of interest. Why? Because our ‘opinion’ means to simultaneously conflicting and important things, our opinions literally are us and also may not truly be us at all. When an opinion is shared that resonates, often the conversation rises, yet when there is a dissonance of compatibility, it is a rare direction that the ‘truth’ of the matter is argued… if it was accepted at a socially conscious level, that our own perceptions & feelings are important and in some ways are us, our truths could be shared without an emotional response if the view point was conflicting, as we could accept the differences as fact reports and the conversations we have can grow in exciting new ways, rather than attempts to prove who is right or wrong, it’s incredulous and extraordinarily common place that essentially most of what I personally share, which has already been experienced, internally validated and was how it was perceived, is usually met with immediate disdain, empathy; a bane of mine, the listener attempting the put them selves in my shoes… as them selves… as me… to feel what I’m saying, it does not aline with their perception of how they feel and see reality, they immediately spark into a debate upon if I had even experienced what I had recounted and begin to demonstrate the ways they see it, rather than simply believing what I was saying and then looking into and responding to why I brought it up in the first place and what it might mean to me and why I might be sharing it. This socially constructed, cosplay of caring, empathy stalls communication in its tracks, and although not gaslighting, as that would imply intention, it inadvertently reality denies, much like how murder and manslaughter have the same end…  please read on…

 

Empathy, in its intention, is to bring a unison between individuals, a sense of being seen, heard, and understood of what the sharer has experienced. This is the label on the packaging. Empathy in practice, evidently and empirically provable due to the insertion of the the widening knowledge and data of neurodivergence, that the concept of feeling what another is feeling to relate, if the speaker has certain neurological developmental disorders to a neurotypical & then that NT attempts to reply ‘empathy’ and feel what they are saying, the NT exists in a completely different operating system and they would be sensing what the ND is reporting from their own lens which creates a breaking point, this is where middle comes in, if there is an accepted middle ground that is understood, that can not be easily navigated there could be a harmony even if things seem to be conflicting with one’s personal reality. Because it would be known and accepted that coexisting and even conflicting view points would not cancel each other out due to the intrinsic knowledge that most of the reality we live truly is subjective. Neurodivergence proves this point. Instead of communication with intention as a focus, if a focus of attention was preferred as the status quo, in that we all exist in separate universal microcosms within this shared universe, with a middle that exists. Only if…

 

Media, only closes the gap of the middle rather than being noticed as the middle it is. The exhibition attempts to take the observer into the middle, not into the mind of the artists exhibiting, but instead, across outside of their own minds into the confusing and endless mainframe of the middle. 

 

Consider one person looking at themselves in the mirror, 2 spaces, looking out through their eyes and they see a reflection of their outer shell existing within space. Now consider a second person, also looking into a mirror at their outer shell, yet they look out from within. Now consider them standing next to each other still looking back into the mirror, there are now 3 distinct spaces, not two and when they turn away from the mirror to look face to face there are still three space.

Each individual’s personal view point, looking out at the other, and the third space being that place where the reflection exists. There is no mirror in this scenario now, our outer visages Latin; videre; to see, are however still seen by the other as had been reflected in the mirror. 

The middle. In conversation it seems practically impossible to convey this simplistic concept and I’m sure many eyes may glaze over these words, as much as I have attempted to be precise, to only find nothing of substance, experience zero breakthrough, convergence or sense in this. 

 

An awareness of this middle brings an entirely new light to perception, we are not seeing the person, we are seeing only a reflection of them. Do you get that? Sure it isn’t inverted like a common mirror will portray, but realising this converts to the understanding that we too are only ever seen and known by others via the messenger of our reflection. This then gives an individual an unbreakable paramount wisdom, safety, personal sovereignty and complete validation of experience that is perceptually, in fact,  completely impenetrable, an airtight garage, a hermetically private experience that is precise, that engages with all other entities in this  world through this ever present middle and that their side of existence is never, has never and will never be shared without the bridge of the middle. The middle is our conduit to everything, this demonstrates the sorely lacking fact that, our ‘outters’ are in fact our inners… as they say it’s ‘all in your head’, but I argue it is not and that although your whole reality is generated and processed through your soul, heart, mind, neurological system, whatever, it is not ALL there but in fact we are only interacting with an edge of the middle, and that the middle, the true middle is where everything is actually always occurring and happening. 

 

It truly is there and it truly is interactive, but if culturally as humans, we knew this all as common place, we would all be so much more empowered to be compassionate to those respectful of our side of things and a comfort in waging waring against those who would attempt to strip us of our personal worlds to argue that what we are is not all of us and somehow when referring to ‘inner world’ one is pushed back, completely out of their complete own world into their apparent heads, to perceive all that they are is somehow not themselves but the world itself, yet this lie breeds stagnant, stunted thought processes that make individuals question doubt their own experiences and perceptions and begin to measure their actual selves against all of the information they have been long term fed, disempowering them to complete ‘I used to be an adventurer like you, then I took an arrow in the knee’ type malarky. I assembled with precision, a team of chosen artists, that in fairness, don’t really know for the most part what I’m talking about here, and it matters zero… I shall tell you why, I chose also to work with two co-curators whom, bring what I needed to my equation. 

 

The reason it matters zero; It is because I already deeply understand myself. 

I am attempting to share not my theory, but how I literally live, breathe, perceive and already operate, but it matters not if it doesn’t translate, as successful translation of my maze, puzzle of existence is not the point; to attempt is the point in whole.

Being understood, is a non metric of success, in this exhibition. For it to exist, even now, as I wrote this, if it was to non-event, it was successful as my metric was to attempt and relinquish control of ‘telling’ people what it meant, and allow visitors to experience their own subjective worlds as it actually happened and only be wrecked with words, instructing as a manual on ‘how to experience this exhibition’ as something those who were curious to dive deeper could discover in their own time. 

 

I specifically resented the concept of an explanation upon a floor sheet, if it could be said on a sheet of folded a4 paper, or the abhorrent, multi page stapled a4 essay of explanation in the round, there would be no need to even attempt the exhibition in anyway shape or form.

 

Art is a bridge and is what it is to you, it can be enhanced, demolished, updated and reunderstood with additional context, but the point of discovering ones only personal experience of it is paramount, as that in its own sense demonstrates the very point of this show. That perception is subjective, can be influenced, and that the knowledge of what may be common place knowledge may have actually been something subjective that was pre-influenced prior and you are invited to reconsider your entire existence and paradigm shift into updated perceptions of awareness highlighting your focus of attention, what drove you to your conclusions,  if any, and what metric did you use and what were your contexts. 

 

For me executing middles is a response to my own ongoing multi-decade personal exploration of my own human condition, & understanding the universe. It is also an intentional private war, calling out the institutions incessant requirement of the artist themselves to explain their work. I’m explaining, in long, that even my own explanation is processed as it reaches you, through the middle and I relinquish any control of how you perceive it. I truly do understand this. Did any of this hit my mark, I may never know, but it may have, and I may have just updated the entire of consciousness just one bit further, further eliminating illusions and empowering both myself and others. There is a power in knowledge, that can be dangerous in many ways, and power is seen as such a filthy word… 

 

I believe that there is enough in this universe for us all to be empowered abundantly and that power is great, useful, and in fact imperative to survival and that one’s personal empowerment does not come at the cost of another’s power being diminished, but rather from an understanding of the middle, the interface of existence, and that power can be owned, used and abundantly accessed in all of one’s existence by understanding what it is and where it is we are. By knowing this we are able to truly build, transcend insidious limitations and respond to threats against our personal autonomy without guilt inserted via social constructs. 

I believe when one understands the middle is knowable as us, we become unlimited and invite others to be so too, by byproduct of ceasing to engage in the endless reality banter by accepting your reality as your truth that is objectively yours to behold.

 

Yes OBJECTIVLEY yours, see the Medieval Latin term objectivus (adjective, first/second-declension: objectivus, objectiva, objectivum) serves as the root for the modern word "objective". It is derived from objectum ("thing put before" the mind or sight), which is the neuter of the Latin obiectus, the past participle of obicere ("to throw against" or "present")

As that which has been presented to you, put before your sight..that is your very existence and that my friend, is the very meaning of objective, so although our perceptions are subjective in the context of is it objective to another… no it’s subjective, it is worth knowing that your own reality is objectively yours to own, shape, shift, hack and do with as you please and most certainly do more with it than you may currently know, one would certainly hope so, as you are a master of the universe, a spiritual being, from the Latin ‘spirituals’; of or pertaining to breath, wind, air’… a spiritual cosmic [Greek; cosmos; order or world…]

So now you see undeniably you are a spiritual, cosmic being & more than a ‘person’ you may have once thought yourself to be, as person, [Latin, Persona; actor’s mask, character in a play]… yes the person you are, is only the element of yourself that you see in the mirror, the reflection of your lovers eyes, the media that you appear in, how you appear to others, yes the person you may have thought you are is only a reflection of you and not you at all, never was, never would be, never could be, as that is how you are perceived, even visually by yourself, but now, whom exactly, may I ask, is perceiving that?

 

Welcome to middles.