Dome Wood 

Egothávma- The Four Stances of being.
Published on the occasion of the exhibition at NICC Vitrine:
The Agprognostic Temple. Zebedee Armstrong, Brussels

The Egothávma presents four stances of being, proposing a new ontological model of the universe. Free from God, spiritualism, and materialism.

Written and illustrated by Dome Wood


To view PDF and to find out how to purchase the NFT edition, go to:
https://egothavma-manifest.carrd.co/

The Agprognostic Temple, Brussels

Photos: Fabrice Schneider
 
The Agprognostic Temple co-founded with art critic / curator Sam Steverlynck.
It is a project that goes beyond my own art work in the sense of its curatorial framework, while still being connected to it through its philosophy architecture and scenography. 

.
4 exhibitions have followed in Chapters:

Chapter 1:
“Scripted Truths” with  Ricardo Brey, Fia Cielen, Benjamin Husson, Felix Kindermann, Philippe Koeune, Shana Moulton, Isabel Tesfazghi, Lou Touchard, Filip Vervaet

Chapter 2:
Nicolas Provost “The Warning”

Chapter3:
“Mirrored Infinities” with Serene Blumenthal, James Lee Byars, Laurie Charles, Eric Croes, Sanam Khatibi, Joris Van de Moortel, Julien Saudubray, Oraura, Antoine Waterkeyn and McCloud Zicmuse

Chapter 4:
Léonard Pongo “ Primordial Earth - The Beginnings”



More details on our website:
www.agprognostictemple.com

The Campaign :
Artificial Meditation Centre for Autonomous Power

Rectangle, Brussels Gallery Weekend - Vanderborght Buildin 

Artificial Meditation Centre for Autonomous Power. The Campaign.

Foreword by Damien Desamory:

I guess if Dome Wood had to start somewhere to explain what reality is, he would begin by discussing dimensions. It sounds obvious that we live in a three-dimensional space. Length, height and width at first glance certainly don’t warrant a closer inspection.

But if you start to scratch at it you’ll find that it gets interesting. First of all, our materiality exists only in the three dimensions. Although we can understand mono or bi-dimensional reality, we can’t actually interact with it. We can conceptualise what a line is, a one dimensional thing, or a plane, a two-dimensional thing, but as soon as we try to grasp at it, we have to trace it and make it three dimensional.

Now let’s take this slightly further, see if it sticks.

In order to contemplate an overview of one dimension, you must be functioning one dimension higher.

If you were existing in one dimension as on a line, while being able to move along said line in one dimension, you would only be able to perceive things in zero dimension ( a point on the line ).

If you were existing in two dimensions – as on a plane – while being able to move in those dimensions, you would only be able to map your trajectories in one dimension, along a line. However, because you can move in two dimensions, there could form the ability to know that what you perceive is also in two dimensions. To be able to perceive two dimensions, you would have to elevate to three dimensions.

By logical progression – moving to three dimensions – a two-dimensional plane can be perceived but not a three-dimensional object.

It therefore stands to reason that there is something on a higher dimension that is perceiving the three-dimensional reality we inhabit for us. This could have many names, Dome calls it Mind.

Mind is our immaterial essence that guides and makes sense of the universe for our three-dimensional “meat suit”.

The human brain is the first thing that has been able to conceptualise this higher dimension. It has invented religions, sciences and taxonomies in order to gain insights on its surroundings and its relationship to this posited superior dimension.

Dome’s model of everything doesn’t only go up to the dimension superior to the one we interact with. It also goes back down. All the way to what is underneath the first dimension, nothingness. This he calls the Void.

On the works of Dome Wood

Written by Sorana Munsya,  February 2019



An interesting thing about Dome Wood’s exhibition ‘Pre-human continuum’ is that its discourse can fit in with both the domain of psychology and the politcal field.

Modern Western societies consider consciousness, and its mastery, as one of the central values in a properly functioning human system. Moreover, the idea of evolution takes shape in a clear continuum, moving from the unconscious towards a state of total consciousness – of oneself, of others and of one’s environment. The unconscious is seen as ineffectual or even potentially dangerous for others and for oneself – dangerous and ineffectual because it supposedly does not marshal its power and its active potential on the surrounding context and, above all, because it might escape the tight grip of control of the self.

What is more, in the literature and philosophy developed within the domain of psychology, all that is related to the unconscious is seen as uncontrollable, and only employable insofar as it can be read and interpreted in rational ways – in the ways of consciousness, of knowledge. Even if the unconscious part of the psyche is recognised as playing a decisive role in human behaviour, Western modernity has kept it well within the boundaries of a space inhabited by ideas such as intuition, sensi vity and feeling – terms and concepts that are perfectly valid when discussing art, for example, but completely ignored in a context of decision-making and even power.

One’s sophistication is linked to an accumulation of knowledge. In the age of internet and social networks, where information is being disseminated without discrimination, knowledge seems accessible and cheap. It proliferates all around us and infiltrates our consciousness, giving us the illusion of being freely offered and of turning us into masters of our environment.

The illusion of power created by a seemingly endless growth of knowledge goes hand in hand with the slow diminution of our capacity to use ‘extra-conscious’ zones that help us navigate through society. Intuition and sensory experience – with all their utility for survival – are being devalued and are no longer mobilised in a critical analysis of society. In other words, the effort to gain and employ knowledge acquired through channels relying more on subjectivity, is disappearing, rendering this kind of knowledge worthless.

However, now that we are no longer exercising this competence, we lose confidence in what we know. Our awareness of our own power is abandoning us. With his work, Dome Wood touches upon a highly political subject: our awareness of our competences, even our awareness of our capacity to create knowledge based on feeling and linked to experience. That is political, because when we become aware of what we know – in the midst of this ocean of information – we become agents in our lives and, without a doubt, vectors of change. Humanity’s potential and the power of knowledge will be able to flourish.

Flourish, yes, but in a certain clandestinity, for the powers that be feed o the knowledge potential of their subjects. They ingest it and then excrete it as consumable and mass-reproducable objects. Survival in this vast expanse of information should, maybe, be based upon a production of knowledge that is quotidian, intimate, underground and communal.