Other rationality of protagonist; Baron von Munchhausen

The Baron von Munchausen is a romance absolutely imaginary written in 1785 from Rudolf Erich Raspe(1737-1794), German writer, that has took from a German soldier; the tale is the other side of Enlightenment because now is the predominance of irrationality, instead the rationality, the science now isn’t because alone the fantasy is dominant, in fact the author tells: “My father(a student of physic thing, astronomic and geographic and he written much treaties among The influence of sun on the fur of bats…”; this introduction naturally is false because the bats haven’t fur, and second the name of his father, but the amusing lies continue in front of the chimney: “(the chimney that has had the measures an high of 12 meters and it was large 9 meters…”; I think that it wasn’t a chimney a condominium. A passion to travels is press for his parents whole grade of kinship is very comic: “..finally a good day come to our house a parent(cousin of wife of uncle of brother in law of sister of my grandfather)”; for the grade of kinship to this person was very rational and common consanguinity, who have some problem asks to secret service of some country. The fantasy is again the principal motive because after landed in an island a storm has brought the destruction, in spite of tragedy, is very comic: “…and a storm burst. It was a violence extreme, so strong that it torn the enormous threes that fleeted on air; beyond the fantasy I think that this image has suggest a scene of Witchcraft of Oz in 1939, although the movie is translation of a romance written in year 1900 by L. Frank Baum, but may the scene of storm is took from this step. The author evidently wanted amused herself because the description od end of storm is very absurd: “And when the storm was ended, every threes failed on the original position and the roots gone back in the earth, and the cucumbers are born on the threes. A crocodile long 40 meters is very laughable; it is a romance of reaction to Enlightenment, and his rationality, as after at last a century after it is going to be as the Verne, when the rationality of Positivism is very important. But among very much fantasy some cultured step is when Raspe tells that the baron was swallowed of a fish very great, it is the step of Iona when he has swallowed from the wheat that has, for theological explication, the announce of the resurrection of Christ, that before is swallowed of death and after he is born again through the resurrection. But I think that this image has suggested also the steps of Pinocchio, written in 1880 by Italian writer Carlo Collodi(1826-1890), that has took or from the Holy Bible or from the Munchhausen Baron; and the Baron, in this enormous fish, has found a nurse and child. We must laugh of these tales because he has written so that the reader laughs, but we must also think that this lively fantasy is the sign of a reaction to the prevalent rationality. It is individual rationality of Munchhausen; this is other rationality of protagonist.

Alessandro Lusana        

    

  

    

 

 

 New Munchhausen: Jules Verne

The new Munchausen, what means? Simple it is sufficient read The adventures of Baron Munchausen of German writer Rudolf Erich Raspe(1737-1794), that in 1785 edited this book where he told the adventures of this baron, that is truly existed, in fact Karl Friedrich Hieronymous von Münchhausen, a German soldier, that Raspe, has took for the adventures of his Baron; until here nothing of interesting , but the interesting is in the time when Raspe and Jules Verne(1828-1905) written their romances the times were different, but same faithful in rationality, aseptic and scientist rationality, and the reactions of these two writers are similar, some step of Raspe is indicative: “The essential advertence that I must set before of narration of adventures of my life much dynamic is this: I want declare that in the narration of modest occurred things whole I have been protagonist I have had fro the absolute sake the scrupulous truth. Unfortunately are the writers that, for the have an easy success, adorn their narrations…”, naturally it is an antithesis, this is the literary figure that has near two words that are contrast between them; the step that we have read is the semiotic contrast between a wit, this the 17^th century, and the wit of romance that is alone a fantastic narration, and Verne lived in a time that was similar, during the Positivism, where the science was dominant and the rationality was likewise; in fact in the romance of Munchhausen, Raspe begin saying that he want tell alone the truth, and in this romance are words, letters, point and commas but the truth nothing, and he is very immediately “lier”, other step is necessary: “I remember the advisement of my grandfather that is has died to age of 306 years for the fishbone of a whale( this good man was very great eater, and a whale of shark were his hors-d’oeuvre…”; it is naturally a book for childhood and the fantasy is fundamental for the childhood, but here is also a reaction to Enlightenment. The same reaction that Verne has had against the Positivism, in fact in his romance, The travel to center of earth, he described a code conversion of a document in Latin language that he code converses read it contrary, already here it impossible, but the text said: “Go down in the crater  of Yocul…and you are going to arrive to center of earth…”. The vulcan Yocul is in Island and the last eruption is in 2010. Some rationality is present in nephew of Lidenbrock, Axel, protagonist and scientist in this romance, his nephew: “Alone the scientific arguments could persuaded the professor Lidenbrock. Now I have excellent against this possibility for this travel. Come to center of earth. It is crazy! The connection to reality Verne has kept it for the descriptions, that have a valor of representation of reality, very much particulars that haven’t motive to be present, and also the interior dynamic, the wit that emerges the other tie to reality; the arrive to Island is the catalog of geography, because Verne mentioned every town; it is because the environment descripted must be motive to induce that also the travel in the center of earth is real. Hence this romance is has dual validities on for the real and other for the fantasy.

Alessandro Lusana  .

 

 

 

 

 

 

 The first awareness of class: the French Revolution

During the past century above all in socialist literature was repeated one true concept, this is the awareness of class; this is the conscience of a last class, the workers, that Karl Marx(1818-1883) has expressed in his book, The misery of philosophy, an answer to Proudhon, an French anarchic; in some step of this book Marx explained the consciousness of class, that is the right concept, but absolutely fliting, because if some worker has had the money, he has forgotten the consciousness, the class, the socialism and other; but the concept that I want consider isn’t the right or not of Marx, but the reality of this phenomenal, purely psychologic, this is the awareness that in history has determined a upheaval of a social class, that by now was already died and buried, but the final act, this is the funeral, was celebrated through the French revolution. The bourgeois class was the first in the history that has had the awareness of his importance; we must also consider the economic and social context of French during the reign of Lewis 16^th, by now the bourgeois was a social class definite in his nature, although the name didn’t mentioned, but it was the vital and economic lively that allowed to nations of to live; the taxes that in French there were for commerce and entrepreneurs, were very relevant, the bourgeois already has the true power in French, wasn’t the politic but economic, the 20^th June 1789, the bourgeois class was met in a room of regal palace, celled in history through the name of Real tennis court, and it is the first example of awareness of his importance, but the historical importance, and it is the central argument of this oath, that was alone an formal act; we can today read a chronicle of a English, Arthur Young(1741-1820), that has written, in a diary of travel in French, regard this oath: “26th. Every hour that passes seems to give the people fresh spirit: the meetings at the Palais Royal are more numerous, more violent, and more assured; and in the assembly of electors, at Paris, for send ng a deputation to the National Assembly, the language that was talked by all ranks of people was nothing less than a revolution in the government and the establishment of a free constitution: what they mean by a free constitution is easily understood — a republic ; for the doctrine of the times runs every day more and more to that point; yet they profess that the kingdom ought to be a monarchy too; or, at least, that there ought to be a king.” And the other chronicle of Jean Sylvain Bailly(1736-1793), described the meeting and the oath: “For the form of their constitution, where they have called two superiors orders, the municipalities, that composed almost the totality of nation, and counting the two present orders, they have could without usurpation, they attributed to them the rights of general States…”; it is the first gest of the French Revolution, that has took the principal motive of survival of the bourgeois class, why this reaction? And here the awareness of political class is present certainly, also because the bourgeois  was the intellectual class, of professional, and cultured class, therefore the awareness of to be a class was a sureness, but the question is same, why? The principal cause was the economy, the aristocratic classes and the clergy were exempted from the taxes that instead were on the other classes, this the bourgeois and grangers, that kept other two classes, we can also to doubt of this interpretation, but I ask: “Why the supreme politic organ, was called for  this meeting, after 175 years that it wasn’t met?”, the answer is the following: “Evidently also an idiot as Lewis 16^th has been informed that the economic condition was a disaster”; it is sufficient think that if the French have to go back every debts, the same French would have declared bankrupt. The refuse that to Jacques Necker(1732-1804) responsible of department of economy and finance during the reign of Lewis 16^th, that asked to clergy and aristocratic to pay the taxes, and they refused, the question is why? The obvious answer is: “because they didn’t want lost their privileges”, it is the automatic and ideological explication, but it is so or not? Not certainly, why? Because the clergy and aristocratic class haven’t one money, because the aristocratic has quitted the administration to the bourgeois, that during the time was become aware of its power, and hence the oath in the room of Royal tennis: “We oath that we never will be separate from the National Assembly, and we will meet everywhere the causes ask it, until the Constitution of Reign not is going to issue…”; the principal step is the word “constitution”, that reveled the politic program of bourgeois, this is the limitation of power of king, that occurred in 1791, when form the absolutely monarchy the French become the constitutional monarchy, inasmuch also the king has limited to his power, because the first power was alone the law. It is the first authentic awareness of class, that alone the intellectual bourgeois had, because the common people hasn’t absolutely extrange.

Alessandro Lusana                 

 

 

 Performances of private life: Francis Scott Fitzgerald

This Side of Paradise or in the first version The Romantic Egotist of Francis Scott Fitzgerald(1896-1940),  is an absolutely decontextualization, this is an absolutely will of remove of original education, for to assume behavior that are distant and stranger of the American habit; the principal motive is that the Beatrice Blaine, mother of Amory Blaine protagonist, has travelled on the word, she has studied in Rome, Italy, Austrian and England, hence she has received a formal education that was certainly much polite but also formal alone, we must also think to the historical context that seen the American women more emancipated in confront to European women, and Beatrice was also much rich inasmuch much freedoms were enables from the money, in fact he said: “A brilliant education she has had, hers youngness is past in the Renaissance, in the gossip of Roman nobility, she was famous as a American young, very much rich, and she was known from the queen Margaret and to the cardinal Vittori; it is alone a told about to the education of a teen but where is the contextualization? Simple is the following step: “Beatrice O’Hara assumed that kind of education, that isn’t possible; an education whose measure was given from the things and persons that she can despise…”; it is the remove of American education; he has received an education very fine and he has seen the American country, Fitzgerald mentioned some town of California, as Coronado and in the Mexico in the City of Mexico; but the finest education of Beatrice emerges from the impatience, that she bored in California and she has risked a nervous collapse; it is the effect of finest politeness that translated on itself the effect of extreme boring, that hides a weakness very radical of the women of high society, but not certainly of uptown, that are alone farmer cleaned. Anyway Amory felt herself superior to other, and here Fitzgerald is master when he describes the sense of superiority of Amory: “Amery resided by two months to Minneapolis, and his principal cure was hide to his classmates as he fells herself superior to everybody…”; certainly Fitzgerald, has seen and studied the human typologies that he has described, because is perfect this description, that followed to other, when Beatrice said to hers friends: “This is my son is very sophisticated très charmant but delicate. We are every delicate. Here.”, the decontextualization is also evident in the rescue of form, that must hide other origin: “Those pilgrims on every part of USA were always through the luxury: on the car with driver, two waiters Ms. Blain when he could and also the doctor…”; it is a pitiless of a social class that tries overcome his inferiority and can uses alone the form. And the form tries of rescues also the other women, because the description of Fitzgerald is very cruel when Beatrice spoke about the women of west: “They spike as would spike a English waiter that has lived much years in Chicago, in the theatre”…”it is the moment when a woman of west thinks that she considers her husband so rich that she can permits one accent, in short they tries impress me…”. Very pitiless because it is the egocentric reaction of nonentity that want believes that to be something. It is the distance from the context, social, cultural and it is alone a simulation of something that is very ridiculous. The tentative of imitation, hence of decontestualization, is after in other step: “There was, therefore, a curious weakness of wit, hence a phrase  sharp of a major boy turned to him, was sufficient  because he lost the calm and he becomes touchy or timidly stupid. He was slave also of his changeable humor, and although he was able to bold actions, he felt that he…”; the decontestualization is in the portrait of Amory that is almost mirror to a portrait of young lord of Italian writer Giuseppe Parini(1729-1799), perfectly idler and useless. Anyway this romance is alone a translation decontextualized of the humor and life of author, therefore Fitzgerald has translated in a romance his life.

Alessandro Lusana     

 

 Speculative category

What fuck is the speculative category? “This is the problem”, some years ago these were the words that in Denmark were recurrent; the speculative category in the first place isn’t other form of declaration of war, but alone a inquiry about the object that we study; it is alone the object that we consider for our inquiry, and hence we pick our method that is always equal, this the observation, but the change is in object; in philosophical words: we follow Aristotle for the speculative method, but as same Aristotle we change object, therefore that we see for the humankind we don’t see for a book, that although it is written from a human we read indirectly the author and not certainly the man, that there isn’t. The category is change; from the human to a book, inasmuch other category and other method, because with the category must change also the method, a book we can alone read, whereby the speculation is same, as I have said above, Aristotle “docet”, this is Aristotle teaches, but the object is different, thereupon the method must change, an example: we can gaze a painting, a sculpture, a tragedy or comedy in theatre, but the object is different, hence that before was the principal object, the book, during afternoon, in night it isn’t therefore the method is changed. Every object is a category, a scientist man inquiries something that can be anomalous or unknown, but the inquiry is always through same method, this is the speculation, but he study something that is very different from a book, that is in the same method seen but for other motive and for other material, but the motive is the major distinction, because also the scientist man read or has read, but for causes that are different from the literature man, hence the category of interest and the sakes are different, hence also the categories are different, what is valid for the painting, when the painter as Rembrandt(1606-1669) has painted the lesson of anatomy of doctor Nicolaes Tulp, an art history man can study this painting for the style, the reality, the growth of painter, but the surgery sees it for the correctness of anatomy, for the correctness of muscles and other, hence the category and the object are different but the method, this the speculative, is same. And two persons a surgery and art historic man see two different categories, but, repeat, the object is same, the painting of Rembrandt; why this change? Because, in the first place the obviousness, the interest is different and in the second place because the categories are different, the painting is always loved both it is seen from a surgery or art historic man, and Rembrandt would see twice for a portrait, if somebody pays him; and the portrait is opportune reference for this think, why? Simple because a painter portrait a model, and he must draw the anatomy, but his interest is limited to the face and body and neither other, but the object is same of surgery, that gazed the symptom of some ill, but the face is same, but the category is changed, the difference is in speculative category.

Alessandro Lusana                    

 The categories of semiotics

The category of semiotics can be very much, and I want add some other; for my personal think about the semiotics that I want add to, we can add, or better to specify the nature of these categories, that can be verbal, a tone of voice both for anger or to give an ask, we can understand if it is a question through the verbal semiotics, because the ascendant tone toward the end of proposition indicates a question, hence it is the verbal semiotics, as the use of a language enables the identification of a nationality, and it said to us that the national origin of somebody, as the inflection, this is the pronounce of some word in other language has different sound, and we can understand the original birth, it is the verbal semiotics. After we beyond the verbal communication as the written communication, and already is the textual semiotics, but since the worse hasn’t the end, the three categories of textual semiotics are ready: the first is the pure semiotics, this is the translation the words that has kept same meaning from the original language, for example from the original Latin the Latin word “captivus”, the prisoner is a man or woman that is in prison because he has made an wicked action, and the “captivus” in Italian language is the linguistic mother of “cattivo”, this is wicked, and the wicked often are in prison; semiotics contradiction when the meaning is different or partiality equal.; similar semiotics translation, when the word kept a similar meaning but not mirror, and finally the basilar semiotics, this is the capacity of to understand from the context, through the words, behaviors, gestures; who manages to understand it is a basilar semiotics, the human semiotics has demands also experiences to human gender, that are different because the men and women are different, hence a behavior is necessary to a person but to other is impolite, why? Simple because beyond the human wit is present also the social origin that has character that are own, because if something can be impolite for somebody, for other is daily, but beyond the social origin and cultural, also the nationality is important, because a custom can demand same behavior, an example that is very laughable, in the Parliament of Union Kingdom is absolutely forbidden to die, because the Parliament is in the royal palace and the protocol want that the died has celebration very solemn, and the cost would be excessive, in Alaska State is absolutely forbidden to give a drink to an elk, in Germany to be without petrol is illegal; these are alone something that can be given to us some sign, semiotics signs, that are very important reference for the understand a context or a person; it is the human semiotics; what is? The behavior and the reaction are motives for the human semiotics; we usually consider the behavior of somebody, both directly and indirectly for distance, for example the television, but never we think that it is also an argument of semiotics, no certainly literary but simply human. The behavior can be argument for the study, psychological semiotics; this is the inquiry necessary to understand who is face to us; one guy that boasted and songs successes is a weak that must be impressive so that he can overcomes and wines his weakness; this feel we can also understand from the documents that are indirect, this is not written for somebody, in letters, personal letters it is more evident, because we are sure that these letters are going to read alone the addresses, hence also the hide arguments are confessed; but from these letters we can understand better the rapports and the dislike of somebody, inasmuch more better we can use the semiotics as a matter necessary to know the familiar life. The social semiotics is other category that we can use, because we can identify the social level, the social culture, the social politeness of somebody, we can see somebody and recognize from him some sign, that enables to us to recognize the origin and culture.

Alessandro Lusana               

 

 The metaphoric theatre of Aristophanes

Aristophanes(b.Ch. 445-385), a comedies writer in ancient Athens is, as other authors after him, very much speculative, this is he is an observer of reality, and he seems managed it very nicely, in the comedy of Acarnians the soliloquist of Diceopoli is nice : “…Joys I have had scant, very scant,  three or four. Instead gravies very much, neither sand of sea…We consider the satisfactions? When they make so that Cleon split the five talents, I have recreated the soul, spectacular! It has been a very joy; I kiss the knocking, they are worthy of Elides. But other time I was waiting a tragedy of Aeschylus and that instead Teognides. I have felt a very grieve in the heart…”, it is alone a simple example of comedy that Aristophanes has written, the humor is, we must consider that the author lived in 5^th-4^th century before Christ, and then these were the canon for a comedy. The wit of this comedy is in the first motive that melted two events one comic, the comedy and other a historic event certainly not pleasant, as the war of Peloponnesian(b.Ch. 431-404); but Aristophanes has found a motive to laugh in this comedy because he has descripted of Diceopoli, a granger, that managed to reach a personal peace, it means alone for him and his family. An herald tells his misfortune: “I was running for to bring to you the truce, and some old Acarnian smelled the smell. They have very robust, bad as oak, robust marathon, and soon they cray: “Criminal, you are bringing the war…”, they gathered the stones in the mantles. I escaped and they back and crying.”, and Diceopoli: “Let them cry! But do you bring the truce?” and the absurd is in this step above all; because the herald gives to Diceopoli three small bottles and he says: “Yes I bring it. Three qualities. It is of five years, taste!”; in this context is also a hint demand for the peace, because the following words are very explicative of this will, because the herald gives the small bottle of thirty years: “hence it of thirty, for the sea and for the earth! There is!”, and Diceopoli. “O Dionysus what smell, ambrosia and honey…I take it, a drink…”; here we can get down on the practice life, because Aristophanes asked the peace, because evidently the Athens were very boring of war; therefore Aristophanes is spokespersons of Athens citizens. And the chorus leader that asks directly to public of indication regard the direction of flight of herald; some time in past in comedy movies the protagonist involved the public with request; and the chorus leader says: “Follow him everybody there! Ask to everybody passes. For the good of city we must take him(forward the public) Give to me a sign who he is, who brings the truce?”; this will of search of guest of truce is other polemical, alone hinted, to enemies of peace in Athens and Greek; Aristophanes hence takes the reality and translated it in theatre, also against the people considers the followers of war. The unicity of Diceopoli that want and reached the peace, is a metaphor like mirror to the same will in Athens, may the will of peace was asked from very scant, or from the great number but they were the common people that aren’t heard, because in those contexts was necessary the army, and the weapons and politic were very important. Therefore Aristophanes become the voice of short people.

Alessandro Lusana