I had enjoyed watching the show as I’m sure it enjoyed watching me. I can imagine a similar relationship between the past and present. Our history creating our moment, and our moment informing our history, both relishing in the control they have over the other. A staring contest where everyone can win if no one blinks.
Healthy systems have a tendency to root and spread, even beneath heavily set constructions.
It feels like work that could be enjoyed by the snobbiest New York critic and by your uncle sucking back his second doobie and putting on an Emmerson Lake and Palmer vinyl.
What Double Life reveals is that the various worlds we inhabit and the lives we live are not as distant as we might imagine, and that what we return to, again and again, ultimately forms the shape of a life.
Perhaps quilts that appear unconventional to us now are ushering in a future of quiltmaking techniques that shy away from presupposed restrictions.
( ' ) ) ^v^ _ (`) _ (__)_) ,-- j j ------- , (__)_) / _.-.___.-.__/ \ ,8| [_] ,-. [_] | oOo ,,,oO8|_o8_|_|_8o_|&888o,,,
But to truly rely on [museums] to build systems that benefit us would be much like asking questions posed in this tweet: Is Mastercard a queer ally? Is [insert corporation] my friend? Is the Speed Art Museum a feminist?