One time: from contemporary to ancient

George was a old professor of philosophy, and he was accustomed that after the lesson, usually during the morning he in afternoon slept at last one hour in his bed, and after he has awoke he read and written until night; his life was very monotonous, but he has chosen this style and from when he was 17 years old lived this way. During the sleep he dreamed, in fact he got in a build where were much persons,  that told one other, and somebody has around much persons, hence he exited curiosity approached to this crowd and he seen a man with thick beard and he spook to these persons that in silence are hearing him; he recognized soon Socrates, because he has a sculpture of half length portrait; he was very excited and he didn’t asked to him how it is was possible, he was hiring and stop; and Socrates explained his way of acknowledge, he was saying: “I search the acknowledge from other with questions, logic questions, but no certainly because I want know, alone because I want that they know that their think is failure, because hasn’t connection to logic, and this word, logic, is from ancient Greek, λόγος, that means discourse, therefore the discourse must be logic!”, George brook this tale and: “This is dear Socrates is maieutic system”, Socrates gazed him and: “Yes, you are right, maieutic way, but how do you know it?”, and George: “Because I sit an exam on your way, and my professor woman was much exigent”, and Socrates: “Who is your master?”, and George: “You!”, and Socrates: “I don’t remember you in Athens place”, and George: “In fact am not from Athens”, and Socrates: “Are you from?”, and George: “Ab alter mundus(from other word)”, and Socrates: “What?”, and George: “From future”, and Socrates: “What do you are going in this time?”, and George: “I am here because must talk to you that it is maieutic way, you didn’t call so, in fact alone to future it is going to call so, but you never has used this name”; around Socrates the listeners seen all George and he turned and gone away, an improvise think had George and he turned toward Socrates, but he and his crowd where disappeared; a man sit the hand on shoulder George’s and he invited him to listen other philosopher, now Heraclitus, that explained the his concept about the ephemeral existence of thing, everything passes; George listened and brook: “This is panta rei, everything passes, and to explain better this concept: the man doesn’t wash never in same water of a river”; Heraclitus seen him and: “Clever! You know it because you have arrived from future”, and George asked: “Yes, how do you know it?”, and Heraclius: “Because it has said that lady”, and he indicated a female figure that spook in a group of men, George looked hers and he approached, and the lady gazed him and: “Dear George you are delayed, may is time past? Because I have seen that you was speaking to Heraclitus, and everything passes enclose the flies and the trains, whereby you are delayed”, George gazed the lady and: “Lucy you are always precise and punctual, I remember when I set four exams to you, and the Latin and ancient Greek aorist you was always precise and pitiless”, and Lucy: “For this you asked me Demosthenes, it is useless that I arise them because you know perfectly, Aristotle, Platoon, Democritus, Leucippus, Thalete, and Henry, Mark, July, Paola…”; and George recognized his class math of High school and University, and: “What do you are making here?”, and Paola: “We are called from Lucy and we have come here”, and George: “Here are the died alone”, and Henry indicated a funeral  back to George, and he looked it, and on the coffin was written: “The dear professor George”, he turned to Henry and asked: “Am I died?”, and Mark: “Panta rei, dear George, panta rei”.

Alessandro Lusana      

 

 

Γνϖθι σαυτον: know yourself

In a Italian romance The son of dream is translated the very famous advise or order on doors of temple in Delphi, that we know for use of Socrates, the advice, because Socrates never has ordered to pupils, because he considered herself a pupil and no certainly a master; about this words Karl Popper(1902-1994) has written that these words everybody mentions, but nobody knows what is meaningful; the meaningful is know your borderlines; it is true certainly but very partial! In this romance is other partial true, because Alexander the Magnus explains this words: “Known yourself is hardest task, because it involved directly our rationality, but also our fears, our passions”; certainly it is true, and here Alexander is right, but the explication is partial although has expressed from the Magnus, this is the Great. The judge of Popper an inquiry in herself, and acknowledge of owner limits is alone partial version of judge of Alexander, because acknowledge herself involves also acknowledge of owner limits, thence Popper is partial, why? Simple because these thesis are right but the authors didn’t consider that the unconscious reactions of personality, that is our hidden side, in fact in the mirror we when confess something to ourselves we are living the objectual rapport, this is the rapport with ourselves, but also to these occasion, when we are completely alone, we have difficult to confess something that isn’t right, also it is to confess to ourselves; it is human behavior and human reaction, because this something isn’t right to ourselves must not exist, it isn’t never is occurred, because it would be an admission of weakness, that we are living during that moment, because incapacity for confess even to ourselves is lank of courage, hence weakness, but it is certainly better admit our weakness than something of isn’t right, because this last is more serious; but although we didn’t confess it in the mirror we have other danger, the night, the dream, that transforms the reality and from unconscious something emerges always, though it is changed from oneiric dynamic, but always it begin from reality, that though modified the root is same real; known ourselves is difficult, rightly from Alexander’s point of view, and it is very difficult because the major obstacle to acknowledge of ourselves are we; in fact we want know in everybody because they are other, this is different from us, they are different persons, and therefore they aren’t us.

Alessandro Lusana

 

Theoretical politic: Guicciardini

This essay is about a figure a theoretical politic as Francesco Guicciardini(1483-1540), that was contemporary of Niccolò Machiavelli(1469-1527), the last was directly busied during the republican Florence; then was costume a show the political think although it was impossible; Guicciardini followed the mode, in fact in his book The govern of Florence, datable among 1521 and 1526, he through an ideal dialogue explained what is the better govern to Florence, and he takes the human truth and has took also from a specific book of Plato, the Republic. The human nature, during the first page, he describes an human date of men, he said: “…knowing that they need of your prudence and thrown the passion and vain suspects, recall you and they are going to will that the city is advised from you” Bernardo del Nero(1422-1497), influent politic man of Florence is co-star in this dialogue, and he said a truth that Guicciardini has certainly took from Machiavelli, from the book The prince, because the Prince was written between July and December 1513, anyway Bernard says: “…the send away of Pieter de Medici, for this I am grief to very affection that I have always had to de Medici family, and more because during much time that I have seen for experience that the mutations bring more damn to city than utile”. It seems a conservator concept and also immobility, but it isn’t because the historical reality attests this truth; after the French revolution and the radical changes, then considered so, to reissue the order, after the terror period and other questions, emerged the figure of Napoleon, that used the monarchical power, almost autocratic, to growth the French territory, but above all to impose the order with new arguments, that were not politic but alone nationalist, the French can becomes great also in the territory; but the change that the revolution brought was certainly radical, but the revolution destroyed that was very short and scant, why? Simple because the aristocratic class was died from at last a century, during the reign of king Louis 14^th, and the their power was died with them, an episode very meaningful of revolution, that is the principal episode of revolution because begun it, this is the attack to Bastille the revolutionaries, respecting the true revolutionaries, were 14, three French, three Holland, four German and four Belgian, they were alone tilers that wanted rob armies and after sale it to eat; when la Fayette, on of chief revolutionary, that was a doctor, was interviewed in a tribunal by the way this episode, he said that he doesn’t nothing, and about of this attack he known alone two years after, because he was in Marseille; if we follow the politic propaganda of Revolution the people of Paris attacked the Bastille, or the in Paris lived alone 14 persons or it is a lie that has had the propagandistic sake, because this is was and stop; and the truth of this judge is in the historical reality, because if are sufficient fourteen to undo a monarchy, or the monarchy state is failure always, but why in British, from more than a thousand years is present? Or the French monarchy was going to failure, whereby also 14 tilers were sufficient. To turn of Florentine state, the dialogue continues, hence Niccolò Capponi(1472-1529), politic man of Florence asked to Bernardo del Nero: “Do you think that every change is wreck to the city?” and Bernardo answers,: “I say that I have known for experience that the alterations give the grief to the city and give the wreck effects”, Paul Anthony Soderini(1448-1500), is one of protagonist of this dialogue, and he expresses the opinion that Guicciardini has took from Plato(428 b.Ch-348b.Ch), in the Republic, translated from Marsilio Ficino(1433-1499) during the 15^th century, in Florence, therefore Guicciardini could read this version, since the he didn’t knows the ancient Greek; anyway Soderini said: “Those brains more high, that feel more than other the pleasure of glory and honor, have occasion and freedom to show and to exercise their virtues. It is not certainly to increase their ambition, but alone to benefit of city, that if we tell about the benefits of every century both ancient and modern it attests that the benefit is in virtues of low, because short are capable of these duty so high, because the nature has given to them more intelligence and judge than other…”; this think is Platonic absolutely, and Guicciardini in this book is more philosophic than politic, because this position is absolutely theoretical and it leaves the politic contest, fundamental for a politic, thence this position has same nature of Plato’s Republic, theoretical, although Guicciardini has took the history of Florence too, because in a step he tells that Lorenzo de Medici(1449-1492), has privileged an part of Florentine people in spite other, and it has determined the hate and much enemies, thereupon govern of better is the best. We can add that the problem is again selection of these better, that Guicciardini didn’t advise; hence this position works perfectly on theory, but to practical selection is very impossible.

Alessandro Lusana             

 

 

Two manners and one painter: Giotto

Giotto was pinging in Assisi about 1300 and one historical art man gazed him and his frescos, and he approached to him and asked: “Why Vasari has written that you have excluded the Greek manner of painting and you have took alone Latin manners”, Giotto seen insistently him and: “Who is Vasari?”, the other historical art man smiled and: “What year are you living?”, and Giotto: “In 1300”, thence the art looked around and he seen very much painters that are painting on walls of church of saint Francis, and : “Vasari is going to be to future”, and Giotto: “Future?”, and historical art man: “Yes in 1556 he write the Lives of painters, sculptors and architects”, and Giotto, while he was continuing the painting: “I don’t know him, but can you explain what is the Greek manner and Latin please?”, and historical art man: “Simple it is you manner, this is you have translated the life in painting, the three dimensions, the body are existent in painting and it aren’t alone the ideal figures, imaginary but…”, Giotto brook the discourse and: “I have took this manner from Rome(Figs.1-3)”, and historical arte man: “When do you have come to Rome?”, and Giotto: “Never, but my master Cimabue, this Cenni di Pepo, was in Rome in 1278, a notarial act has his name in this year, and he has tool what was the Roman painting, and I asked to him if I could translate this style on Assisi, and he has answered that I can try, and I have made it!”, and historical art man: “Why other painters hasn’t followed you?”, and Giotto: “Because they are older than me, and the old generations refuse always the news; because in conformity with their code, or style, they prefer the secure style, that their generation and theirs masters has taught, they aren’t accustomed to think the news, because they are the past, as I am going to be the past to future centuries, and the future generations tell: “Giotto worked so because in his time it is the style”, and historical art man: “The future generations, or now they tell it?”, Giotto gazed him and he asked: “May  am I died?”, and historical art man: “No certainly, but your style is going to die for future painting”, and Giotto: “I hope that much painters improve it, but I have given the begin. By the way but this mister Vasari where is from or better where is going to be from?”, and historical art man: “From Arezzo, he is Tuscan”, and Giotto: “Hence he consider every Tuscan artist a better than other”, and historical art man: “It seems that you have read Vasari”, and Giotto: “No, certainly but I am Tuscan and I know the Tuscans, they are the better always”. Historical art man: “You have took indirectly from Rome, but you have improved this style!”, and Giotto: “Yes, as future generations do to my style, Peter Cavallini(Fig.4), for example is better in Rome and peer to me”, because also his generation that is my same, is master, but Rome is scant ready to news in painting; whereby he is going to be less fortunate than me, because we must consider also where an artist work, in Rome are traditionalist and they prefer the ancient style”, and historical art man: “Yes, but during the 16^th century the Tuscan artists are going to be request very much”, and Giotto gazed the historical art man: “Yes but now we are in 1300, and the generations are again traditionalist, thence Rome has begun the evolution of style and I have improve it, and the future generations improve what I and we has made, this is history. Excuse me but I must go to sleep because by now is later”; historical art man looked out and the sunset, and he got out and gone to other pictorial worksite.

Alessandro Lusana      

  

Fig.1

Fig.2

Fig.3

Fig.4

 

Continence is pleasure

In place of Academia a man with beard and chiton is speaking to three young whose names were Alcaeus Filisco and Phaedrus, and joined Apollodorus, that asked to Epicurus. “Are you atheist or no?”, Epicurus smiled and answered: “It is effect of slanders that commonly are said around me, because I was saying to them that above all you must consider the divinity as a living being blissful incorruptible, and you must not attribute them nothing that is contrary to immortality or contrary to blissfulness. The goods certainly exist but not as the plebs consider them, hence isn’t atheist who deny the opinions about the goods of plebs; because these aren’t knowledge but alone presumptions2; and Phaedrus: “What is your think about the death?” for this question Epicurus smiled and answered: “For this is stupid who says of scared from death, and no certainly because is come damn him, but because previewed become grief; in fact that presently doesn’t worries, when it is waited anguished us. The more horrible of hells is nothing to us, because rationally when we are life the death isn’t, but when it arrives we aren’t more, whereby nothing can worry us. When I can advise alone the indifference toward the death because so we don’t grief or worry, and our life continues. Ermarco from Mitilene asked: “The pleasure what do you think?”, and Epicurus: “Of pleasure we need when we grief to absence of it, and when we don’t grief the pleasure is to us indifferent; for this we declare that the pleasure is principle and end of happiness; because when we haven’t it the our condition is of worry, thereupon the pleasure must be constant, because we want suffer; also because we begin form it, every our choice is determined from consideration if this action bring to us the pleasure or grief.” Apollodorus asked: “Every pleasure is to us opportune or no?”, and Epicurus: “No certainly every pleasure, but we choose that are true pleasure, this is that enjoyment of a pleasure not be motive after of grief or pain, hence is necessary avoid a pleasure so that after is a major hell, and much griefs we preferred when we are sure that after it major pleasure is going to arrive; for this every pleasure is good to its nature, but not every pleasure we can consider beautiful, and so every dolor to its nature id hell, but not every dolor we must escape”, and Diogenes from Tarsio, other pupil that was joined short before asked: “Desire of pleasure is in every man, and the mankind searches always it, or not?”, and Epicurus gazing him: “We consider very good independence from desires, and not certainly because we must be content from scant, but alone because if we have short it is sufficient; in fact the frugal foods bring equal quantity of pleasure of sumptuous, when is lack the grief of need, and water and bread give the supreme pleasure when eats it who needs. When we say the sake is the pleasure, we don’t think the dissolute pleasures, as somebody or ignorant think, or they misunderstand, but it is don’t pain and grief. It is my advises and now you must spread to future generation and now thereabouts.”, and he goes away, and Alcaeus asked: “Where do you are going?”, Epicurus turn to him and: “I have end my life now you must continue my think, if it brings to you pleasure. Good bye”

Alessandro Lusana  

 

 

Law of contrappasso

Steve was a scholar of Dante Alighieri that he has loved from childhood when his mother, Ludovica, born in Florence read after the sleep a chant of Divine Comedy; whereby he loved the Italian Medieval poetries and above all Dante. He was professor in a University and was estimated very much, also in Europe, he was e reserved person and never has searched success, actually he avoid parties or meeting, is it was necessary to jobs; and also during these meets he was set in reserved chair, distant from colleagues, in fact sometime somebody asked. “Steve what do think about this question?”, he raised the eyes and: “I agree, much compliment”, and the same person explained: “We are speaking about the fail of millions and we don’t know how we can gain other, how we can regain these millions?”, he got up and called phone his brother, Robert, a true genius of finance, and when Robert has given some advice the problem was solved, the meet was ended and he gone away and very happy, because he could goes back home and read his poetries. One thousand of times he has thought of written a biography on Dante and medieval poetry but he was discouraged from immense bibliography, thereupon he left this idea. During a night he dreamed his mother that said. “Instead written a treaty on medieval time why you don’t write about yourself, your biography, fro example. He awaked soon and seated to computer and begun to write his autobiography, his birth, his childhood and adolescence and maturity, he was not married; therefore written that he is born in New York, and attended private school, above all religious school, he was also atheist; he tool about the first love that was a Cecco Angiollieri, a medieval Italian poetry, Cavalcanti, naturally Dante and the medieval culture; after he reserved a chapter to his character, more reserved, discreet, almost asocial, he used the computer alone to write and his faithful friends were the books alone, he loved repeat mentioning Xenophon that the discourse of historical men is with died. After then days he finally ended this book that he wanted alone published on internet; he was very amused from this new experience, a man whose nobody known something now could show his live to everybody, it is new experience and above all very curious, he was very excited, and he has forgotten also his discretion. A technical in University explained to him how he have to make to insert his biography on internet, naturally he shammed to understand, but the technic understood that he didn’t understand and thereupon took the biography and inserted it on internet. After some days from this insertion Steve gone out home and, while he gone on street noted that much person gazed him and somebody approached to him has asked: “Are you Steve”, and he answered: “Yes why know I you?”, and other: “No certainly but I wanted know you, excuse me can I make a photo with you?”, and Steve amazed: “Yes”; this success after a month was become normal, everybody wanted a selfie, some word and greet; the then days usually consideration, but occurred that a person than Steve thought of have seen  passed on street, he pursued him and he gone in front of this person, and asked: “I know you”, and the person: “Yes but my name is secret”, and Steve asked: “It is useless because you are Dante Alighieri, I have seen your fake home in Florence, because I have studied and have reached my master in Florence; whereby I know you”; while he spoke to Dante around the citizens are stopped as statues, every movement was stopped, unique voices were of Steve and Dante in all city. Steve scared asked: “Why they are stopped?” and Dante answered: “Do have read my Comedy?”, and Steve: “I keep all it in my mind”, and Dante: “ Do you know law of contrappasso, this is the law that reserve a pain contrary to vices of sinners in hell?”, and Steve: “Yes, I know perfectly it”, and Dante: “Good because you are convicted to celebrity, and the general acknowledge, god fortune”, and he gone away; while the citizens continued ask selfie, and advices.

Alessandro Lusana     

  

         

 Political chair

The students were busy to different actions, who read a book, who is writing a letter who spoke to other, while the master was gone in class, and: “Good morning lords, I could will your attention, if it isn’t excessive to your affairs”, the students were every composed and glazed the master, who: “Thank you for your attention, but if you want you can go away, but after alone you are going to say it to Julian of Medici, lord of Florence”; the students heard these words and when Niccolò has had the attention he begun: “The politic science is alone formally a science of politeness and diplomatic words, I give to you an example: when Philip king of Macedonia received the Persian ambassadors, he was polite and elegant, even luxurious, but after the gifts and other protocol words, he and Alexander, his son, and the ambassadors in a neighbor rooms spoken about politic; Philip wanted the peace in Greece, and the Persian wanted the same; they wanted the very good rapports with Greece and its cities; after this dialogue Alexander the Great, again young, asked to his father what has been cleared and what were intentions, and Philip answered that, they and he one other hasn’t said nothing, and Alexander asked: “What is utility of these meeting?”, and Philip: “For smell each other”, and Philip: “Yes in fact the true politic hasn’t of words, he thrust more of his nose. For example, in your opinion to him likes the girls or young?”, and Alexander excited curiosity: “To whom?”, and Philip: “To our hostess, obvious”, and Alexander: “I not a clue”, and Philip: He like the young. It seems that he gazed the blond young that served the wine, this night he is going to have this young in his bed”. A student particularly attentive after that he heard these words asked: “Mister…”, and Niccolò: “Dear thank you but my name is Niccolò and I prefer that you call me so”, and student accustomed to speak with person more great with you, as respect, was amazed, but he took the question and: “I would know what are the better states?”, and Niccolò answer: “I say that the state hereditary and accustomed to a family of their lord are less difficult to keep, because it is sufficient don’t beyond the past administration, and take time in case of difficult, and if this lord is in average he keep his state, unless a stranger force took this state”, and student: “Whereby the stare hereditary is better!”, and Niccolò: “The natural lord must offender less than other, and to him is necessary that he is loved, if he hasn’t extraordinary vices, he is going to love from subject”. Other student: “The new states are dangerous?”, and Niccolò: “No, but these are more difficult”, and same student: “Why?”, and Niccolò: “Because you have enemies, after the conquest, this is everybody that you have deprived and you can’t keep friends everybody that have aided you to conquest because you can’t satisfy them as they wanted or imagined; thereupon these states are very risky, because they are ready to betray you every moment, and they give you to enemy when you have unsatisfied them. We must also consider that we are  living in a historical time that is going to pass, because may to future the men become different therefore these strategy and these ascertainments are alone momentary, because for future it is different, with similar principles, but I am sure that the model is going to be the same, with modifications, but the govern of one alone is permanent”, thereupon he ended his lesson and after greeted  everybody, and a student asked: “Where are you going?”, he gazed him and: “To Florence where Julian de Medici want me”.

Alessandro Lusana

 

A lesson

The master entered in the room while the students spoke one other around the philosophical arguments that the day before the master has treated, and when they gave the attention to master somebody asked: “What is syllogism master?”, the master looked around and took and chair he begun the lesson: “The proposition is affirmative discourse or negative around something. It is or universal or particular or indefinite. I call universal that is belong to everything or nothing; particular belong to something, indefinite belong or not without indication of universal or particular, but belong and stop: for example, to identic the science of contraries…”, the student interrupted soon and asked: “What is mean of this affirmation? Because I and think we haven’t understood it”, the master smiled and: “Normal, without explication it is very easy but I must go you to think no one but two particulars. To understand one quality and have a deep acknowledge of one quality, we must know also his contrary, one example: for love the air that we breath always, and that to us now is normal, we must lack of this vital element to life, we can immerse the head in a bathtub, and after some second and after up the head, the air is going to be important and it is very pleasure; hence you have known the lack of air and you have known the danger of suffocation, thereupon you, after left danger you love the air, certainly very scan because you retake you natural habit as the breath, but some moment, after the danger you appreciate the air; whereby you must know the contrary of natural to appreciate the natural.”. Other student, exited curiosity, asked: “The difference of proposition?”, and master: “Yes very good question: the difference is so: the demonstrative proposition differs from that dialectical, because the demonstrative is assumption of one alone of two parts of contradiction, for example you want affirm that the sky is blue, and if somebody want demonstrate the contrary you very easily indicate the sky, this is right?”, and student: “Yes”, and master following: “But you has took alone the affirmative part of this proposition”, and student: “Because it is normal, the sky is blue and it is evident, thereupon it is undeniable”, and the master: “Certainly but now, and this night the sky is going to be blue?”, and the student: “No! During night can’t be”, and the master: “But you have took alone a part of proportion, that is affirmative, that the sky now is blue, and haven’t other, it is demonstration that you can affirm the reality taking alone a part of proposition; and who want demonstrate something doesn’t give question, but take that is necessary to demonstration of his thesis; the dialectical is question of a contradiction; in fact I have contradicted your affirmation, because I have said other truth, this is the this night sky is going to be not sky, this is dialectical proposition that want the affirmative and negative proposition” Other student said: “But you haven’t explained what works the syllogism”, and master gazed him and answer: “I am here: a proposition of syllogism, in absolute sense is affirmation of negation of something regard something, instead it is demonstrative if it is true; dialectical to whom asks, interrogation of a contradiction. The syllogism is a discourse, that set something, other is necessarily following from that is set since that exist, the explication of this concept: since these thing exist the derivation from these, and I say derived from these, this is not need nothing word to have that is necessary”, students were astonished because they didn’t understand the meaning of this affirmation, whereby the master: “I understand that to you it is difficult, because I have explain it with philosophical sense, but we can very easily: we must consider the logic existence of something, and we can set it syllogism, common objects that are in our life, and since these objects are present we can use to our logic think. The logic discourse is very easy to understand for this we must consider the common logic: if nothing pleasure is a good, neither good is a pleasure. It is elementary logic ands stop”; after given these explication he glazed the door and gone to exit of room, and a student asked: “Where are you going?”, and he turned toward the student and answered: “My father, Nicodemus is died in Macedonia, where is the son of Philip king that needs of a tutor”, and he exited from the room.

Alessandro Lusana  

 

Ecce homo: inquiry Aristotle around the human nature

The Aristotle’s Ethic of Nicodemus is clear representation of human nature, we can begin with, it is usual, step of this book, regard the sake of politic and the high good of action, around the name is the first inquiry, that today seems ridiculous, but we must consider that this book was written by Aristotle during 4^th century before Ch., and before him nobody has written something similar to Ethic; anyway regard the name of good Aristotle explained: “Regard the name almost everybody is concord, both the culture persons and the common people say that it is the felicity, and they think that be successful and to live good is motive to felicity, but they don’t concord regard the nature of felicity, and very much definite it by different kind the crowd differs from wise; somebody defines it a visible thing and manifest, as the pleasure, the richness or honor, and relative to persons somebody think it a thing and other instead other thing”; certainly the comments are it is normal hence where is importance? Simple the first is this book is a book exoteric, from ancient Greek έξωτερικός this is public book for everybody, instead the esoteric was to elite of pupils of Aristotle; this is explication of this easy to understand the think of Aristotle, and he continuing: “actually, often the same person  considers a different thing: if one gay is sick identifies it to health , if one guy is poor identify it to richness, if somebody is aware of his ignorance he admires whom speak about important argument…”; a question raises because curiosity is predominant: we are sure that this book Aristotle has written in 4^th century, because it seems the description of daily man, but today, that be distant two thousand and four centuries years from Aristotle. The Aristotle’s inquiry has acme regard a step that, he hasn’t called so because isn’t born, but that today we could define as compensation dynamic, the is a reaction of man in front of determined deficiency, Aristotle explains: “Furthermore it seems that the men pursue the honor to convince themselves of be good; hence they search honor from wise persons and from who know them…”; it is description of complex of inferiority that searches his compensation to approbation of somebody. The last step that here I want consider is very much important, because is a human reality that nobody has identified before and after Aristotle: “It is common opinion that the right man is a sort equal and that the friendship is in equality”; this is a daily reality, the friendship usually is born alone among is equal; the proximity between two persons is normal when they have common characteristic. This book is essential to understand the ancient Greek man and the contemporary man, because the man is equal in every century, improved the tools and technology, but the man is similar in his nature.

Alessandro Lusana    

 

Life in the romance

Roger had an idea, to write a romance with autobiographical romance, if the electrical light could let it, because, no certainly often, but during day the light switch off and after it turned, but moments were regular, in a day dark was total, other days it was constantly turned on, he has called the light society but to them the problems there aren’t. A day with light turned on he seen in his room much persons that spoke between them, who around the art, who philosophy, who commented the policy strategy or scientific matters, he raised the eyes and gazed these figures, that didn’t considered him, he cried to figures that was continuing to speak but nothing attention to him, suddenly the light witch off, and the comments were very sharp and impolite, the average that exited curiosity of roger was that much figures, he could hear the voices, were: “Margaret  has closed the book, evidently somebody has called her”, Roger didn’t understand because these comments, so what the book closed? The light while is turn on, and he continued to gaze the figures, and commented: “We hope that nobody calls her otherwise…”; he thought that it was a dream and he approached to a woman and asked: “What your name?” the woman continued to speak with hers interlocutor, Roger raised the voice and asked given the same question, but total indifference, hence Roger asked other figures in the room, but nobody answered. He was deterred and seat on his chair; suddenly a figure with name of Margaret approached to table of Roger, and: “You are in second chapter, do you understand, I have said to you it seven times”; Roger scared got up and asked: “Who are you?”, and woman: “Margaret, your writer”, and roger more scared than before: “What my writer?” and Margaret: “Yes, your writer” and she looked the book on the table, took the book and browsed the book until the second chapter, read some minute the text and after: “Read it”, Roger took the book and read: “Roger in his room was set on chair and he is searching the some idea to write something”, he raised the eyes and seen that every figure in room is hiring him, and some figure solicited him to continue: “Continue because we are personage of the first chapter alone, thereupon we know the second chapter”, Roger closed the book and asked to Margaret: “Do want explain it, please?”, and Margaret: “Yes, certainly, you are in second chapter instead they in the first”, and Roger very angry. “What is it? A joke?”, and Margaret. “No! It is reality”, and Roger: “I am a man and…”, Margaret interrupting: “You are the man when somebody open this book and read; you till the second chapter don’t exist, from second chapter till the end you are going to live, but we, now, don’t arrive to second chapter, whereby you aren’t.”

Alessandro Lusana   

  

     

 

Religio et politica omnia licent: Centuries of Magdeburg

In politic context the fakes are custom, because the people is owner of votes and of decisions, we are accustomed, in every country to fakes and the formal promises that haven’t a result because these are necessary to electoral campaign; but in religion sincerity is duty; but when religion is a mask to politic motives, all is different; the read of first pages of centuries of Magdeburg reports some no errors, but authentic lie, because the author, may Mattie Flacius Illiricus(1520-1575) that together with other written this Historia Ecclesiae Christi, this is History Christ’s Church, I think that he known the Latin language because the books of Saint John Damascenes from Middle age were translated from original Greek to Latin language, hence Illiricus read certainly this book on images of Damascenes; and that he has read this book, we deduce it from lie that he used, when he, or other, writes that: “ (saint John Damascenes openly indicated idolatry saint’s as corruption of divine doctrine and the oppression of roman pope(Qui uero aperte indicassent,idolatria sanctorum mortuorum, corruptelis doctrina coelestis. ueritatis oppressione, Romanorum pontificum et aliorum sacerdotum), the first oration of Damascenes is against whom decry the images, and the image of Christ: “Therefore I venture to draw an image of the invisible God, not as invisible, but as having become visible for our sakes through flesh and blood.”; and the lie of Illiricus is in following words of Damascenes: “I do not draw an image of the immortal Godhead. I paint the visible flesh of God, for it is impossible to represent a spirit…”; this explication is sufficient to consider that the idolatry, seen from Centuries is pure invention; this biblical step took from Damascenes is clarification: “Thou shalt adore the Lord thy God, and thou shalt worship him alone , and thou shalt not make to thyself a carved thing that is in heaven above, or in the earth beneath”, but in biblical tale is yourself you don’t make carved work, alone yourself; and Damascenes gives a historical and liturgical justification of this prohibition : “These injunctions were given to the Jews on account of their proneness to idolatry.”; it is very right because the Jews gone out from ancient  Egypt where the idolatry was natural communication to gods, thereupon God has prohibited the adoration otherwise the people could has worshipped the fakes gods carved. After other step is more explicative: “Now we, on the contrary, are no longer in leading strings. Speaking theologically, it is given to us to avoid superstitious error, to be with God in the knowledge of the truth, to worship God alone, to enjoy the fullness of His knowledge.”; thereupon for Damascenes we are exempt from idolatry. This one step of Damascenes that cunningly Illiricus didn’t transcript because this oration is against the adoration of imagines, this is the pagan believer, we must consider that the heathen interpreted the worship no certainly to sculptures but the carves were necessary to communication with gods. But the motive of these lies is merely politic, hence every lies is right.Saint John Damascenes, other steps: “We have passed the stage of infancy, and reached the perfection of manhood. We receive our habit of mind from God, and know what may be imaged and what may not.”, whereby we can’t become idolaters because we have received from God our faith; and: “When the Invisible One becomes visible to flesh(this is Christ), you may then draw a likeness of His form.” It is both the artistic and the theological right, and the other theological truth: “…He worked in the flesh through divine power…”, therefore he was a man, a visible man, whereby: “Give to it all the endurance of engraving and color.”, this is the human form. Other: “The worship of latreia(worship) is one thing, and the worship which is given to merit another. Thus, the Son is the living, substantial, unchangeable Image of the invisible God, bearing in Himself the whole Father, being in all things equal to Him, differing only in being begotten by the Father, who is the Begetter ; the Son is begotten.”The other step is clear representation of nascent nationalism in Germany, because the Illyricum said: “Pippin king of France with perjury and Charlemagne with imperial dignity from pope took and gratitude from a prostitute they worshipped and it they accepted”; the nationalism mentioned above is clear to hide or will forget that also Henry 4^th , in Canossa, in Emilia Romagna, Italy, where the imperator of Holy Roman Empire, for three days stated on the snow because he wanted the absolution from Gregory 7^th pope from excommunication, Otto1th the Great, imperator of Germany defensed the Church in 962 a.Ch., also Henry 3th, king of Germany, given the order to the Church against the Roman noble families and last Charles 5^th, that protected the Church during the 16^th century; these kings or imperators Illiricus has forgotten, very strange, but it is sufficient think that this book was necessary to promote the Protestantism in Germany and above all promote the nascent national wit, in fact he condemned the presumed worship of French kings but not mentioned the German kings. The politic and economic motive of protestant reform is in following step, that contains also an historical error, because Illiricus mentioned a king that isn’t in British: “Iuas British king his reign was elected to contribute to Church…lords in every town of occident didn’t lived as the Church…”, this is among the cosiness and richness; this king isn’t in British history and the tribute is mentioned and stressed, why? Because it is motive, repeat, for the nascent Protestantism confession. Other contradiction  is in the following step: “ …so truly orphan and lacking of aide the Church of Christ seems almost the sheep among the wolfs…”, this is the enemies, but a question has raised, the Church could pay the protection of somebody for immense richness that it has had, or this richness was not? Other step: “Our Lord Jesus Christ, who with very great love has embraced it(the Church) didn’t leave it”; hence Christ is accomplice of corruption and immoral behavior of Church! Regard the seat of Church it is indirectly accuse to God, although Illiricus didn’t writes, but we can deduce that it is intention or Illiricus didn’t understand what he was writing, the step says: “Its seat was transferred for his(of God) goodness both here everywhere(suo seculo Ecclesiam fuisse per totum orbem terrarum diffusam.)”; it is certainly true but if the Roman Church is so deplorable institution why God has stirred it everywhere, because he is hell or this Church isn’t so wreck? Other step: “In much towns of Nordic Germany during centuries of reign of Christ as sowing and grounds thrown are, and the Church much institutions(In multis Gcrmaniae locis,superioribus seculis regni Christi quasi semina et fundamenta iacta sunt, et Ecclesiae non paucae institutae); it is means that also the Germany, country of Luther was in origin was spoiled from the Roman Church, thence why, do you preach the degeneration of Church, when also your country was involved?

Alessandro Lusana   

 

Letters from…

Hunter an old professor is going back home and, like usually, opened the his mail box, and like usually among the letters of his university and other correspondence he found often a letter of his pupil of name Catherine, as his mother, by now died when he was born; he was growth with his father, a teacher of philosophy in a high school, and a stepmother, that was very proud of hers husband and hers stepson, and he has loved this stepmother for hers life, because he hasn’t known other maternal figures during his life, whereby he loved Ursula as his mother; in fact every time that a letter of Catherine he find in mailbox, others letters could wait because the first attention was to Catherine, very maternal letters, and full of references to episode that he has lived, also latter. Catherine often asked explication about the philosophical concepts; thereupon now she asked about the Hegel’s absolute spirit, she wanted know an easy definition of this concept, and he answered always, and the address of sender wasn’t never, he hence left hiss answers in his mailbox and after some hours the letter there isn’t, he answered above all during night, and he didn’t explained to herself when the postman took these letters that he sent; anyway he was accustomed to this practice. He read with usually passion and interest the letter of Catherine, and answered to questions, because asks were two, one about Hegel and second what is the owner code, that he has explained during the lesson of past week. He smiled for these asks and answered: “The first question loved Catherine regard to a Hegel’s concept and it is alone the human brain; I explains better; the absolute spirit isn’t to Hegel a metaphysical question, but alone a very earthly, this is the humankind; for example if somebody did a robbery to a bank, during the night, and he robbed a million of dollars and he after during his flight he meets a homeless, and he takes the million that he has robbed and gives it to homeless; it is the brain, because in brain is the negative and the positive absolute spirit, that were alone earthly, this is human! When I have explained the absolute spirit, I have said that in it is the negative and positive behavior, and the example of robber is very fit, because the robber does a robber, therefore a negative action but after he gives it to homeless, thereupon a positive action, but it is the human brain that can make positive and negative actions. The second question that you have given to me is equal personal and general, because the personal code were references that we find in our brain, in our culture, in our costumes, and we hence identify ourselves to that codes, because we acknowledge our familiar references, this is our code; when you gaze a painting you search in your memory some familiar references that can say to you something that is familiar to your confidence with painting, or style when you are reading a book; the boring books are these haven’t familiar reference, therefore we don’t find our code”. After this explication Hunter added: “I hope that you are going to be attentive the next lesson”, and a voice from dark in the room answered: “Yes I will be attentive when Hunter is going to be clear”, he glazed the dark and asked soon: “Who are you?”, and a figure from dark step after step was configuring, a young lady very beautiful and circa 30 years old: hunter glazed this figure and he got up and asked again: “Who are you?”; and the woman: “Certainly you haven’t in your code, because you never known me”; Hunter scared. “No absolutely but I know the police”, in fact he gone to telephone and called the police; the police arrived very soon, and asked a description of this woman, they searched everywhere, and finally, they got down from bedroom and one of two policemen has found a photo, and he said: “This is unique woman that we have found”, Hunter took the photo and gazed it and he thanked the policemen and he kept the photo in the right hand, he read back the photo: “This explication is very fit now explain it to your Catherine, this is my niece, and clearly, because remember that she is your stepdaughter”; he smiled and he raised his eyes and answered: “Javoll mein fuhrer”, and leaned the photo to night table. The after day a keys opened the door and gone in tenement with two persons, that asked: “Who lived in this apartment?”, and the realtor answered: “A professor of philosophy, died during the 19^th century, but I don’t know the name or other…”.

Alessandro Lusana           

 

 

Material hieratic; national portrait AndyWarhol

We know or can know Andy Warhol(1928-1987) a contemporary artist that has interpreted the American tradition with an originality and I think borrowing from Italian art, where is come much times among 1975-1987; I think that he has took the ideal hieratism of painter of Italy during centuries; it is possible that he has consecrated the daily use of normal objects as saints, as in Italian art, instead the worship of a saint of Christ of Virgin, the public can worship the can of tomatoes or a actor or actress of cinema, hence the Marilyn Monroe is perfect(Fig.1), as Elvis Presley(Figs.2-3), and Warhol used the silkscreen, a consecration of human star, thereupon the holy images now, in American society, are the stars, sanctification of human gender, that hasn’t Renaissance conception, but alone a portrait of American people, that has scant history and therefore scant tradition, hence could project yourself alone toward the future, because the tradition certainly is motive of pride but is always also a weight; the desacralization of saint, and the national habit that is presented to the public as sacred object; it is certainly not polemical nature, but alone a portrait of American society that is accustomed to common object, thereupon it is the consecrated image of a society that has traditional conception of use; Warhol has consecrated the common use of materials, as the cloths(Fig.4); and the love for Naples, Italy, shown to an eruption of Vesuvius, in 79 a. Ch.(Fig.5), that was a tragic event causing the 10 thousand died, but Warhol has took suggest, certainly during one visit in Naples, for painter the personal eruption(Fig.2), that is dress down for colors that bring happiness, it is evidently is the wit of Warhol, that after the consecration of material object, he has dressed down the dramatic event; therefore also this episode is tragic we can join about and celebrate as an common object; it is impossible! It is the comment; but the Vesuvius is always there, and we consider it as a common object whereby we can took and interpreted it as motive both tragic historical but also an object that we can look with other wit; as the cans of tomatoes(Fig.6), that are common object that can be consecrated, because in evolved society the can is used and thrown, Warhol consecrated this object because it is in a society daily use, thereby he given importance to common objects, that as stars or other we can consider as an artistic object, without worship but with consideration that it merits. It is the celebration of consumerism, a portrait today of much societies.

Alessandro Lusana               

Fig.1

Fig.2

Fig.3

Fig.4

Fig.5

Fig.6

 

Renaissance: the generational evolution

I do not want turn to literary Renaissance or artistic, because we have read thousands of books and essays about this matters, and nothing is new that we can consider or remember the last book about figurative Renaissance is Rebirths of Panofsky(1892-1968), that is the attests the medieval origin of Renaissance, regard to figurative arts, in sculpture above all. The literature about this cultural movement is concentrated above all about the development to literature, that is true, at last in Italy, of reuse of ancient literature, beyond the language, the Latin, that was natural, then, to culture men and very much monks and priests, in Roman curia it was the official language, and in Jesuitical order until 50 years ago the official language was the Latin, also in the daily life. A question yet never treated, the ask is: “Why the literature first and after the art?”, because the Roman and Greek art, or classic sculpture was present in Rome, above all, therefore this discrepancy could not be, but it there is, why? The first motive is merely material, this is the manuscripts copied in librarians, because the librarians there were and were kept, although attended very scant persons, these held much manuscripts, among the Roman poetries and Roman historic men; the humanistic culture was kept above all in convents and aristocratic families, where was taught the Latin language, and thereupon the transmission of literature was very easy, hence the Renaissance is birth thank the classical culture? No certainly, because during the Renaissance the Latin was spook as the Middle age, but because in arts is so late the rebirth? Simple because the figurative canon, beginning from the costumers, doesn’t want it, because they didn’t recognized each other to imagine that has had a different style; the faithful recognizes each other to an imagine if it corresponds to his culture, and the imagine must be equal to his expectation, to a Muslim of Lutheran pray in front of image is unthinkable because they are aniconic, the protestant church or mosques are without imagines; the painting art, in Italy, has development with Giotto(1267-1337), in sculpture with Nicola Pisano(1220-1284); when Giotto frescoed the superior basilica of Assisi, Italy, principal Franciscan church, and the costumers accepted these new style, it is meaningful because the costumers has changed the preference, because the medieval word was changed, and together also the men, that now accepted will the change, also regard the imagines, because it didn’t scare, also if different from usually canon; thereby Giotto was a man whose generation felt the change and translated it in painting, as Dante Alighieri(1265-1321), contemporary of Giotto has brought this change to poetry; therefore the Renaissance is born in Middle age, and it is normal, but is born from Giotto and Dante generation, why? Because the think and the rationality was changed, it was a silent revolution, and generational, this is the tradition was by now past, thereby we must go ahead; proof of this think is the frescos of Giotto that are again where was frescoed and the Divine Comedy, after seventh centuries we read. The Renaissance has been a generational development, this is evolution of with.

Alessandro Lusana          

 

         

 

Raffaello Borghini a Trimalchio of Renaissance

Scant frequent is presence of Satyricon, a Roman romance with a dinner very luxurious, carried out in rich villa of Trimalchion, a cortigian of imperator Nero, during the 1 century after Christ, in city of Capua, in Italy; Raffaello Borghini(1537-1588) written his Riposo, a description, very boring and useless, but that has took the source from the Satyricon, where the luxurious is principal argument, that the author, this is Trimalchio show off during all the romance, some step: “The usual megalomany, in the painting Trimalchio has made painted a ideal triumph, the principal steps of his life and his social growth, from slave to rich freedman, he is painted with caduceus with snakes, usually attributed to Mercury, god of commerce, and accompanied by Minerva, goddess of intelligence and cunning. The fates are three Clotho Lachesis and Atropos symbols of destiny…”; this luxurious villa is as to the pleasant panorama that we can read in the Riposo, a dialogue carried out in a Rinaissance villa in Tuscany whose owner is called the Vecchietto: “ to it much cypresses around bushy grass, that seems almost black for blooms painted…”and the synthetic description of painters of chapel: “…is set the chapel in are painted the Ascension of Christ and the Apostles, and on the vault some angels very beautiful of Francesco Pagani(notices from 1502 to 1548) that if the death didn’t remover to word so soon , he is going to be painter very excellent”, we must also consider that this dialogue is set in Tuscany Renaissance, therefore the artistic culture is predominant, in fact, the description of some rooms of a mister Ridolfo, description of this artistic works is predominant: “In the first beyond the thousand heads, hands and legs, and torsos, and other fragments of statues, whose the wells are full, and models of horses and other animals, and we can see the Night, Aurora, and other figures Michelangelo’s(1475-1564), that are in sacristy of church of Saint Lorenz, and same greatness, of chalk created through the great diligence…the second(room) has much things of ancient marble, some painters of very beautiful towns of Flanders, a model  of Apostle of Sansovino(Francesco Sansovino, 1486-1570, a Florentine sculptor and architect) and a great drawing of Michelangelo…”; these descriptions, absolutely imaginative, although took from real examples. But also Borghini failed in this book because he attributed to Michelangelo a sculpture that the sculptor has never sculpted, and an painting work in the Secret room of Francesco de Medici(1541-1587), Borghini hints to a sculpture that Michelangelo could not sculptured because died. The source of this book is Satyricon though in modern version; we can think the Riposo as a cultural vacancy of rich lords of Florence, that pass the time among the nature, painters and sculptures, therefore art both natural and artificial, as the lords of Renaissance past the days of rest in their villas; it is certainly a description of art works, but is also a document of life during 16^th century.

Alessandro Lusana