How notes are classified and linked. The moat isn’t “re-read what RM read”; it’s grow my own tree from where he pointed. The seed is his; the tree is mine. These rules keep that line clean.
The three note types
Seed: wherever RM’s finger landed (any medium: a book, an artist, a work, a show, a place, not just people).
- Holds: Provenance (where/when he pointed, with a real primary source) + “Why it matters: the door” (my own testimony voice, the shareable gold).
- Short. A hub, not an essay.
- Status:
tending. A seed is never “done.”
Branch: my own growth, such as a book I read, a work I see, an encounter I have. Grows from a Seed or a Concept.
- Holds: notes, edition info, the felt sense after.
- Status:
queued/encountered.
Concept: a recurring idea (留白, the sublime, Mono-ha-as-an-idea).
- A connective hub, not a leaf. Not part of any one tree, but the root network between them.
- Status:
tending.
The decision flow
Run any candidate through these three questions, in order.
-
Did RM point at it, with a real primary source?
- Yes, and the source is the thing itself → Seed. (Then check the Provenance rules below.)
- No, I grew it off something he pointed at → go to Q2.
-
Can I consume it? (read / see / visit)
- Yes → Branch.
- No → go to Q3.
-
Is it a recurring idea with no single instance I can point to?
- Yes → Concept.
The two tests, restated:
- Seed vs. branch: did RM point at this, or did I grow it off something he pointed at? Pointed-at → seed; grew-off → branch.
- Branch vs. concept: can I consume it? Read / see / visit → branch. An idea with no single instance → concept.
Provenance rules (the part that self-polices)
A Seed lives or dies on its Provenance. Be strict here; it’s what keeps this from being every other ARMY’s re-reading list.
- A Seed must cite a real primary source: RM’s own Live, IG post, Weverse, interview, liner note. No real source → it’s a Branch (my own discovery), not a Seed.
- The finger must land on the thing itself. Not the room he was in (standing in a space ≠ pointing at it), not the lineage (admiring Mono-ha ≠ pointing at one artist), not a fan’s inference.
- Source quality ladder: RM’s own primary source > a news report of that primary source > a fan aggregator. Aggregators (Namjoon’s Library, Goodreads lists) are signposts, not sources; follow them to the underlying primary and cite that.
- Ephemeral exception (stories & Lives). IG/Weverse stories die in 24h and Lives often aren’t archived, so the underlying primary is usually gone for good. A fan-preserved screenshot of the original post is acceptable provenance - the screenshot is the primary (RM’s own content, captured); the archive is only the vehicle. Cite as: @rkive story, [date] - screenshot preserved via [archive].
- Trust the screenshot, not the caption. The thing must be legible in the shot itself (RM’s handle / story UI showing, the work or book clearly identifiable). If the aggregator is naming a half-hidden cover I can’t actually make out, that’s still a fan’s inference with a photo stapled on → candidate, not a seed, until I can see it for myself. (Worked through on What Are You Looking At: it read at first like a half-hidden inference, but the Korean edition’s distinctive yellow cover is identifiable in the story - match the cover design to the edition, and it’s confirmed.)
- Don’t reverse-engineer provenance to force a seed. If I find myself wanting it to be a seed more than the evidence wants it to be, that’s the tell. Let the source decide; demote to branch without guilt.
The relationship layer (how notes link)
Three link directions, sorted by the type of note they point to.
- Grows into → points up to a Concept, the abstract idea this note feeds (留白, Mono-ha). Not consumable. (Seeds precipitate concepts: 留白 crystallized once Martin, Kapoor, and Lee Ufan all pointed at the same emptiness.)
- Branches → points down to consumables: a book, work, show, place. My own growth. Carries
queued/encountered. - Related seeds → lateral, to other Seeds on the same register.
Flow of the forest:
RM → Seed → (grows into) → Concept
\ /
→ Branch (grows from) ←
A Branch can grow from a Seed (余白的艺术 grows from Lee Ufan, since it’s his own book) or from a Concept (陰翳禮讚 grows from 留白, not from any one seed). Use the [[links]] to carry both when both are true.
Edge cases
- Same name, two types. Mono-ha the idea = Concept (the hub linking Lee Ufan, Sekine, Suga). A Mono-ha show (Glenstone, MOMAT) = Branch, since I can walk into it. Split by the consume test.
- Person vs. work. If RM pointed at an artist, the artist is the Seed; specific works/books are Branches. (Agnes Martin = seed; the Glimcher monograph = branch.)
- The room, not the subject. RM in the Lee Ufan Space photographing a Boltanski show → that seeds Christian Boltanski, not Lee Ufan. The venue is not the pointer.
- …unless the room is the work. The mirror case. RM in the Rothko Chapel photographing the chapel → that seeds Mark Rothko, because the room is fourteen Rothko panels as one environment, with no other artist’s show inside it. Room = subject → the venue is the pointer. (Test: is there a separate show installed in the space? Yes → seeds the show. No, the space itself is the work → seeds its maker.)
- Doorway vs. convergence (optional
origin:field). Most seeds are doorways: RM opened a room I hadn’t been in (Agnes Martin, Lee Ufan). A few are convergences: I was already there, and his pointing confirmed it (Mark Rothko: known pre-RM, stood in Houston pre-BTS). Both are seeds; the type is set by RM’s pointer, not by who arrived first. If I want to track the difference, one frontmatter line (origin: doorway/origin: convergence), and the door carries the rest. Not a new note type. - Non-bloom (optional
bloom: none). A seed RM pointed at that didn’t take - I’ve met the work and felt nothing. Still a seed (his pointer sets the type, not my response); it just grows no branches, and its door testifies to why it didn’t bloom. Worth a note only when the non-bloom is illuminating - a foil that sharpens what I do love (Donald Judd against Lee Ufan). Not a license to catalog everything I dislike (that’s the completeness trap). What won’t bloom maps the soil as much as what does. - Multi-parent branches are fine. Let a branch link to both its seed and its concept; the graph is the point.
Worked examples (battle-tested)
| Note | Type | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Agnes Martin | Seed | @rkive IG, Jan 2022, Glimcher monograph, clean primary source |
| Lee Ufan | Seed | @rkive IG, a Lee Ufan work dedicated “R M”, artist-signed, RM tagged @ufanlee. The finger landed directly. |
| Mark Rothko | Seed (origin: convergence) | @rkive IG, Dec 2021, the Rothko Chapel, room is the work. Known pre-RM; he confirmed, didn’t open. |
| 留白 | Concept | An idea, not consumable; the hub three seeds point at |
| Mono-ha | Concept | The relational idea; individual shows are branches |
| 余白的艺术 | Branch | Lee’s own book, I can read it; grows from Lee Ufan + 留白 |
| Busan / Lee Ufan Space visit | not a seed | RM was in the room but pointing at Boltanski; venue ≠ pointer |
| JooniesLibrary screenshot | source if legible | Ephemeral exception: a screenshot of RM’s own story is the primary. The fan’s caption/ID still isn’t - verify the thing against the image. |
| What Are You Looking At | Seed (confirmed) | Read like an inference at first - then the Korean edition’s distinctive yellow cover turned out identifiable in the story. Matched the design, not the caption: a real sighting. |
Two standing reminders
- The door is testimony. “Why it matters” is publishable: what moved me, what I read and saw. The raw inward inquiry (why does the void pull me) stays private in Obsidian; published, it curdles into performance.
- Ship rough. Every note is
tending. Plant a node, drop[[links]]to stubs that don’t exist yet, fill them later. The forest grows from links dropped while writing; I never sit down to “design” it. Designing the taxonomy up front is the deliberation trap; this doc exists so I don’t have to re-litigate it each time.