Anthology (Revised)
Pyro 1488
on art, beauty, and culture are exposed.]
Message #1 - 8/1/99
Jumangi,
First at all, in this "what appears to be a blind/impersonal cosmos," this
state of "conciousness," which even you recognize to exist, should be a
matter of fulfillment and joy rather that an element of perplexity and
despair. To reach that "correctness or TRUTH," you have to equate it with
BEAUTY. Yes, TRUTH = BEAUTY. (Please, do not ask me what is beauty).
Yes, it is in the eyes of the beholder.
It is in nature; it is in the rumor of the breeze caressing the trees, in
the sound ot the rain, in the singing of a bird, and in a flower.
It is in an aria by Puccini, "Ave Maria" by Schubert, Mozart and Bach's; it
is in poetry and literature.
It is in a still life by Cezanne, a landscape by Monet, and "Las Meninas" by
Velazquez; it is in Picasso's works, Giotto and Fra Angelico's.
It is in Praxiteles', in Berninis', Donatello's, and Michelangelo's; it is
in the Parthenon, as well as in the church of Notre Dame and the new
Guggenheim Museum in Bilbao.
It is in the smile of a child, as well as in making love to the woman you
desire.
It is in a good cup of wine, as well as in the freshness of a glass of water
when you are thirsty.
It is in the dignity of common and humble people.
It is in the fluttering of a butterfly, and being able to hear the voice of
your conscience.
Yes my friend, this element that you are referring to as "conciousness" is
the _tabula_ that can bring you to awareness and give you the ability to
appreciate BEAUTY, which again = TRUTH.
After so many years of civilization, it appears that we haven't moved too
far from that Socratic statement: "There is only one thing I know, and that
is that I know nothing." (Is this the correct quotation?) Anyway, JB, you
are right about the fact that we are insignificant and with a very limited
perception of the immensity of the universe. But remember, the TRUTH is your
TRUTH -- and manifests from your own capacity to appreciate beauty.
Regards,
Pyro
--------------------
Message #3 - 10/21/99
Jumangi,
To compare Johnnie Cochran to Socrates is perhaps like throwing feces to
Michelangelo's "Pieta", or farting during the performance of "Requiem" at
the Salzburg Music Festival. It is a blasphemy to culture, a joke or just
plain idiocy. Please go back to school and take an elementary course in
history, IGNORAMUS.
Pyro
--------------------
Message #5 - 10/30/99
Jumangi,
First of all, let me tell you that you have disqualified yourself of being
able to participate in any serious discussion or debate on cultural issues.
It is very obvious that you are a cultural polluter. By naming mental
dwarfs such as Johnnie Cochran (the charlatan) and Winton Marsallis (a
former clown of Jay Leno) as the new Socrates and Mozart, you exposed
yourself as academically naked. What you said is beyond the need of a
cultural bath; it is (excuse me) totally idiotic. "Ignorance is bold." Who
are you, mental insect, to determine who is more successful, Johnnie, you,
me, or the other? What is your concept of success, anyway? Don't you know
that success is a "relative" term?
_Fortunately_, we do not think the same way, and what success is for you may
not be for me, or vice versa.
You are persistent in knowing in what point you are wrong in your argument
regarding "beauty and truth" in Plato's philosophy. Alright then, YOU ARE
WRONG ON EVERYTHING. First of all, the quote, "beauty is truth, truth
beauty" "all ye know on earth and all ye need to know" is from John Keats
(not J.S. Mill). Don't forget that the restful experience of enjoyable
BEAUTY is not limited to the contemplation of sensible objects. We can
experience it as well in the contemplation of TRUTHS we understand.
"Mathematics rightly viewed possesses not only _TRUTH_, but supreme BEAUTY,"
wrote Bertrand Russell. You, eunuch, have put yourself on a pedestal as a
new "oracle of Delphi." And so, you have made a good contribution to the
pursuit of TRUTH, except that to find truth we have to look at the opposite
of what you say.
Again, IGNORAMUS, Plato was not right on everything he wrote. The beautiful
prose he left constitutes a philosophical legacy by which we also learn
about Socrates. Needless to say, it should be preserved in golden letters.
He was the father of idealism. As Ivan Turgueniev wrote to Leo Tolstoy,
"The truth is like a lizard: you open your hand when you think you have got
it to contemplate it, and the only thing you see is the tail between your
fingers. It has escaped knowing it will grow a new tail." And Nietzsche
wrote, "Let's define our task: once and for all we have to question the
value of TRUTH." I have serious doubts that you are familiar with what a
library is; I think your
cultural nourishment comes from a TV set. Nevertheless, I recommend you
some
authors on truth: Herodotus, Hesiodo, Heraclitus, Jenofonte, Thomas Aquinas,
Fichte, and Kant.
Regards,
Pyro
--------------------
Message #9 - 11/12/99
The EUNUCH wrote:
"So, J.S. Mill, who was heavily influenced by Coleridge and the romantic
movement, inclusive of his 'deep impressions' with poetry such as Keats and
Wordsworth, obtained a recasting of 'philosophy' away from the classical
dialectics and instead became yet another of the WORTHLESS ROMANTIC
RHETORICIANS..."
When you say anything of this nature, the only thing you do is expose your
own ignorance. To make this affirmation about the ROMANTIC MOVEMENT, which
was probably the most vital and vigorous inspiration in the history of
culture, is (again) a sacrilegious profanity. Think about this. When you
trash the ROMANTICS, you are trashing Schiller, who inspired Beethoven to
compose the 9th Symphony "Ode to Joy" -- one of the most beautiful
compositions in the history of music. You are not only trashing J.S. Mill,
Wordsworth, Coleridge and Keats, but you are also trashing Lord Byron,
Chataeubriand, Rilke, Becquer, Larra and Victor Hugo, Gautier, Goethe,
Chopin, Verdi, Rossini, Falla, Granados and Turina, Debussy, Ravel, Poe and
Washington Irving, Goya, Delacroix, Schlegel, Tieck, Novalis, Constable and
Turner, just to name a few of those "worthless romantics".
Romanticism was the inspiration for Gaudy. Without the ROMANTIC influence,
you couldn't conceive the IMPRESSIONISTIC movement in painting: Monet,
Manet, Pissarro, Renoir, Cezanne, Van Gogh, Toulouse-Lautrec and Picasso,
CUBISM, and ALL MODERN MOVEMENTS. To cut the ROMANTIC period from the
history of culture would be like a castration, a cultural mutilation
depriving the arts from one of the most vital, prolific, and rich influences
history has ever known.
By the way, you never explained by what standard you measured these artists
to give them that low grade -- "WORTHLESS" -- and, on the other hand, how
you derived the title of your group of Negroes as "SUCCESSFUL, ARTISTIC, AND
CULTURAL TREASURES [...] RESPECTED INDIVIDUALS, LEADERS OF CIVILIZATION, AND
CONTRIBUTORS TO THE POSITIVE GOOD."
You must be a big masochist, trying to enter a debate with this ridiculous
criteria, because every time you come to the "mat" you get crushed by your
own words. Your position is not very respectable in this scenario. The title
of "EUNUCH" was not bestowed upon you gratuitously; you placed yourself in
this position with your stupid comments. You obtained the title "the
old-fashioned way, you earned it."
JB, it appears that you are using philosophy as a fig tree leaf, trying to
cover your cultural nakedness. We also see it in your boasting: "I am
reading a couple of dozen books." It doesn't depend on quantity, but
quality: how much you read vs. how much you digest. By the way you express
yourself, we can see you do not absorb too much of what you read.
Your subconscious is betraying you again when you say: "Eunuchs were highly
regarded in Plato." You are admitting you are a eunuch, but want to be
perceived as a respectable one. The plaintive litany in your replies to my
writings shows your ignorance, hypocrisy, and depravity. You refer to what
you perceive to be wrong answers as "lies", and then you come to that brutal
robbery and assault on John Keats, stealing one of his sentences and
attributing it to J.S. Mill -- and refer to this MEGA LIE and PROFANATION as
a mere "misattribution." You are a hypocrite and a liar.
This is a sample of your vulgarity. You wrote: "Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha.."
"cocksucker" "White race -- squirt squirt"
You then try to appear like a good boy, saying such a thing as: "I never
mentioned dick." Again, you brought that filthy language that I described as
"gangmember lexicon".
Jumangi, the Freudian fantasies that you have _demonstrate_ that you are not
only an ignorant bastard, but also a pervert. You wrote: "GET BEHIND ME,
SATAN!!!" This indicates that the perverted imagery that you had was the
result of being sodomized by Satan; and your "Ha Ha Ha.." "squirt squirt"
shows that you, son of a bitch, like it by the persistence of your "Ha Ha
Ha" in your writings. You really enjoy Satan's "instrument".
And again, liar, you brought up this subject when you lacked reasonable
arguments for the topic under discussion. It was your frustration of being
ridiculed in front of your audience.
We are still expecting your answers to Max's questions regarding the school
of philosophy and influences, as well as works, of that pithecanthropus,
Johnny Cochran.
Making a portrait of someone before their time happens often: Christian
thought portrays people as sinners before they are born.
Gertrude Stein's portrait by Pablo Picasso never had any likeness of the
sitter until many years later. For a good portrait what matters is the
"likeness" and "truth" rather than when or how it was made.
Shakespeare made a good portrait of you in "The Merchant of Venice," as
Shylock. It is clear, and it is true, hypocrite!
Your claim that MODERNISM led to 2 world wars is nonsense. There were wars
before MODERNISM. War is the result of man's greed and has nothing to do
with an artistic movement. What you say is fallacious.
Your questions on beauty and truth have already been answered in previous
posts to the "EUNUCH". Like trying to describe God, as the great philosopher
said: "The question is complex, and life is short." You cannot find God by
your own means in the same way you don't find truth and beauty only by your
own means. "YOU HAVE TO BE TOUCHED BY IT." Then, ignorant EUNUCH, if this
ever happens to you (and I have my doubts), you will be able to recover your
virility in the appreciation for the arts, being cured of your cultural
impotency.
Those "losers" (according to your own criteria) that were rejected by the
French Academy, and not allowed to expose their works in the Salon
constitute some of the most appreciated styles in art today: IMPRESSIONISM
and FAUVES (EXPRESSIONISM).
I believe Van Gogh is yet another "loser" according to you. He never sold a
single painting in his life. Still, one of his works was among the most
highly paid for in art history.
The kind of success we are referring to has to do with _artistic or
intellectual achievement_. It has absolutely nothing to do with money or
status.
Jumangi, you need to go back to Plato's "Georgias" and digest what you read.
I believe you have spent so much time posting it in this forum that you have
not had the time to read it. As ignorant as you are, I don't know if you
will ever be able to absorb the substance and ideas it contains. For an
idiot like you it is a heavy load that is keeping you like a prisoner
instead of providing you with the wings of freedom of thought to guide you
to art appreciation.
You sound like a short-legged Clintonesque liar in your responses, trying to
cover your stupidity and ignorance with verbiage.
It is time for you to turn the page on Plato and see a little bit of
Aristotle. Later on, you will learn that "THE HEART ALSO HAS ITS REASONS."
And then, ignoramus, "Kant's philosophy states that we cannot know with
certainty what the world is like 'in itself'. We can only know what the
world is like 'for me' -- or for everybody. Kant's greatest contribution to
philosophy is the dividing line he draws between things in themselves -- das
ding an sich -- and things as they appear to us."
We can never have certain knowledge of things 'in themselves'. We can only
know how things 'appear' to us.
As Calderon de la Barca wrote in "Life is a Dream":
"What is life? A madness. What is life? An illusion, a shadow, a story, and
the greatest good is little enough, for all life is a dream..."
And as Coleridge writes:
"What if you slept? And what if, in your sleep, you dreamed? And what if, in
your dream, you went to heaven and there plucked a strange and beautiful
flower? And what if, when you awoke, you had the flower in your hand? Ah,
what then?"
This is not "WORTHLESS"; it is a jewel in literature. Again, Jumangi, "Honey
wasn't meant for the mouth of the ass."
I can't imagine a world without the works you deem "WORTHLESS".
I can't imagine a world without "Carmen", "La Boheme" or "La Traviata".
Perhaps you can substitute these with masterpieces from your list of
"philosophers, artists, cultural treasures and leaders of civilization." Go
ahead and name some of their masterpieces!!! ;-)
You are a CULTURAL LEPER, a CULTURAL TERRORIST, and a MENTAL EUNUCH.
Regards,
Pyro
--------------------
Message #10 - 11/14/99
EUNUCH,
You mutilate the legacy of music, cutting off "Carmen," "La Traviata," and
"La Boheme." Your response was, "SO WHAT?" Do you think this surprises
anyone? Hearing this response is like hearing that the new Lazlo has
hammered Michelangelo's "Pieta," crushing her face again. Or, to hear the
Louvre, El Prado, National Gallery, or The Hermitage has been destroyed by
flames. "SO WHAT?" Well, this proves you are an imbecile.
When you say that lawyers philosophize to some degree, thus giving them the
title of "philosophers," there is no reason why you can't say the same about
kids going to school and learning. The striving and love of wisdom is the
core of philosophy. According to your rationalization, lawyers are
philosophers -- and so are children going to school. TAKE NOTE CENSUS BUREAU
OFFICE FOR THE YEAR 2000!!! The EUNUCH has placed philosophers as the most
numerous of all professions in the USA!!! Far ahead of waiters and
construction workers! This is one instance in which you would make Plato
happy.
Then, there is a chimpanzee in Tanzania that knows how to add and is able to
feed himself with the use of a computer, by pressing the right buttons.
According to your line of reasoning, he is also a philosopher. Aha! Now I
understand why you refer to Cochran as a philosopher.
You made a quantum leap from Plato to "quantum mechanics." This demonstrates
you are an individual without any convictions. Certainly not a philosopher
in the real sense (not according to your criteria, either). How does your
Plato stand vs. the theory of quantum mechanics? I know you feel more
comfortable now thinking of yourself as being a cluster of fart quarks,
rather than the noble concept of being HUMAN.
[...]
Pyro