First motive in life and second in history

The study of history can be very boring of charming, it is alone from the student and from the will that we have to know that is occurred; it is simply obvious; hence the fuck you are allowed; but I want stress that very much arguments, in official history, are very marginal, and never considered, but some monography, of Raymond de Roover(1904-1972), The Medici bank. Its organization, management, operation, and decline is a very discover because tells a argument that is fundamental always, but that isn’t considered, in this case the money. Some example can to understand what is the writer what want explains: “In Florence, in the fifteenth century, there were three or four different credit institutions called bank in Italian…The first were pawnshop, operating under a public license which permitted the pawnbrokers to make secured by pledge of personal property at a legal rate of four pence per pound a month or 20 per cent a year…”; certainly this is alone a historical information that hasn’t importance for history; instead has its importance, because we can understand, or better, hypothesize what was the spending of lords for a war, and where these lords took the money; that are argument very practical and daily, that aid to understand that the times and morality a customs are changed, but the needs are identical, the municipalities, at last in Italy, can reach loans from banks for public needs, streets, schools and other; it is the reproof of continuity of history and its necessities; because fortunately today war are extern to our countries but, at last in Italy a weekend could be not without a war, who given the money? Who given the finance necessary to arms and other? We can hypothesize that this cash come from these banks, these pawnshop; therefore the entrepreneurial wit was present also in old times, and it is normal, but we can alone think, but through these information we can understand that the history is continuous repeat itself, certainly though better tools, more easy, but always equal, this is the same ways that are better but equal in its nature; thereby Hegel(1770-1831) was right, when he has said in Philosophy of universal history that: “The present is the improved past”; it is the truth; because the tools are improved certainly, but the ways are always same; we can know that in Florence were also the retails banks, that may say very scant to whom isn’t Italian, but the retails banks were the rescue for family during 20^th century, I can witness it; in fact the bank with name Monte di Pietà, the Mount of pity was a bank that I have seen thousand, at last to name, and the name is always seems very strange, but now I can know that this Mount was present in 15^th century, hence it is an institution that has financed lords, imperators, popes and kings; today could finance a robber, because could to make easier the robbery. Anyway these arguments are alone synthetic but it are essential for understand the history from the low states, that are the true determination of history.

Alessandro Lusana        

 

Mixed genres

Dora was a professional writer that often was engaged form cinema productions, directors of theater for comedies or other, but she written also to television, some soap opera and other. A task to a movie, a very boring history of love, that by now was past and ended before that the production begin, in fact much experts has tried to dissuade the director and the producer, from project, but twice known the genius of Dora, and the director has had worked and he has strongly recommended her to the producer. Alfred, the director, called on phone Dora and asked an idea for a movie; Dora was very enthusiastic for this task, but when she begun to write, she recognized that ideas was very scant, but Alfred has insisted and she, that known perfectly Alfred, and his persecution, because for other movie he has called Dora every day for two weeks, hence was opportune that Dora begun immediately; in fact she written some ideas, and after an hours, during she has researched in hers brain something, she though that nothing idea and therefore Alfred have to call other; anyway before this phone call she gone to kitchen and she drunk a cup of the, hers preferred beverage, while she was preparing the discourse for Alfred, and proved the dialogue; when she has ended tea, she seated to table, and looked, very swiftly, the sheets that were on the writing desk, and she seen that on the sheets were written some history, very short, but that she hasn’t written; thereupon she begun the read of these texts, and hers nature of writer allowed to hers to recognize steps and episodes that she has written in past years for other movies and theater. She read it and recognized that among different histories wasn’t tie. She cancelled soon the first page and tore up the sheets, after it she looked again the sheets and she was very impressed, because on sheets was the same text, she read again, and it was the same; she was in fair and soon phone called Alfred, and the answering machine said: “You have read that text but, usually you read some lines and after you leave it, now instead you must read and stop. This message is from Alfred”; she, more amazing than before, begun the read of these text, and contrary to hers think, she was involved, and continued the read, and she followed an history of love, type Juliet and Romeo, and after half page, in history entered the knight for the Crusade; that was very annoyed some time before now was normal; the sudden change of argument, from Verona in Italy to Jerusalem in Palestine was a considerable change, and the tales of Crusade was very involving, fights and knights, Muslims and Christian and Jewels; and after the poetic moment because Homer singed his Iliad and he told about the isle of sirens and Polyphemus and other; after a description of an art historical man, that explained a painting and a sculpture; after a history of mystery, thereby a pendulum and the protagonist in a dark room, as Poe. She continued the read as for as the night, and after three husband pages, she seen out and recognized that was very later; but involved from excitation called phone immediately Alfred, that wasn’t in home, and doorbell sounded and she gone immediately to open the door; and she had in front of Alfred, that gazed the writing desk and after her, and after again the writing desk and he gone toward it and asked: “Do you have ended? Because I must be harry…”, and Dora gazed him and asked: “Whom do you are speaking?”, and Alfred: “To your sister Magdalene”, and Dora: “Magdalene is died 12 years ago, and now isn’t here”, and Alfred: “Excuse her, dear Lena, but she is out of word”, Dora approached to him and she seen hers sister Lena, that asked: “Do you think that name Juliet is fit for a whore?”, and Dora, gazing the image of Lena: “But you are died”, and Lena: “This name is fit or no?”, Dora was gazing and Lena, while got up, said to Dora: “Mom offers the tea”, and Dora turned toward Lea: “I go at once”, and they gone to door; Alfred gone to door and closed it at once opened and toward the reader: “For to know if this movie has had success or no, you must see the movie after that somebody has directed it. Thank you”.

Alessandro Lusana

 

 

 

 

 

Involuntary fame: Adam Smith

Everybody follow of Adam Smith(1723-1790), during the read of his An inquiry into the nature and causes of the wealth of nations, where he tells about the obvious economic dynamics, that are daily for every families and person, that lives on the word, in fact the read is very boring, but the same Smith, I think, would have said that his fame as founder of liberalist think is absolutely false; he certainly would have said it in conformity both of his intellectual honesty and because his book is last result of opinion that the British country had from two centuries before of Smith, hence the fame of founder of liberalist or liberal think, in economic sense is liberalist or laissez faire, is absolutely involuntary. Today for copies sold of his book and gain he certainly would attribute to herself this merit; but, sometime occurs, he is died. Anyway his fame is both involuntary because he has took from other, as one is Sir William Petty(1623-1687), that in years 1662, written A treatise of taxes and contributions, he describes the same obviousness, but the motive that we can’t apart is that economy is real matter, daily matter and therefore can tie alone to daily and to obviousness; whereby also the petty has told alone the obviousness, and if somebody after the this treatise want shoot him, we inform that he is already died. Some step of this treatise can gives to us a taste of this obviousness:     He Publick Charges of a State, are, that of its defence by land and Sea, of its peace at home and abroad, as also of its honourable vindication from the injuries of other States; all which we may. call the charge of the militia , which commonly is in ordinary as great -as any other branch of the whole ; but extraordinary,(that is, 1n time of War, or fear of War) is much the greatest. another branch of the public charge is, the Maintenance of the governors, chief and subordinate; I mean, such not only as spend their whole time in the Execution of their respective Offices, but also who spent much in sickness themselves as well with abilities to that' is end…”, these is the obviousness, and other obviousness is from Smith: “The job made during an year is found from where every nation takes everything that are necessary and comfort for the life that during a year it consumes and that are from the immediately job or that changed to other nations can be reached. It is the first lines of An inquiry into the nature and causes of the wealth of nations; this is the obviousness, and these two treatises are written for distance of 114 years one form other, and it is simple the tale of economic dynamic, hence the economy is obvious and very easy, because everyday we must consider it, and independently from social class everyman considers it; but the sake of this essay is one, I want demonstrate that the this economic dynamic already was present, and when Smith written its treatise the England was already a nation that, from half of 17^th century, was busied in free commerce; in fact a step of Michel Beaud(The birth of capitalism, p.43) is explicative for this wit: “The England is busy, from begin of 17^th century, in colonial expansion. The Oriental Indians Company is created in year 1600 through the direct aid of queen Elisabeth: fifteen years after it has twenty filial in India, in the isles of extreme orient…”; it is the liberal trade that the liberalism the England is from 17^th century; thereupon Smith told that is evident from 176 years, whereby he is the late of almost 2 centuries, compliment dear Smith; but he would say: “I have written a treatise about economy, if after some idiot had though that I have written the Holy Bible of liberal economy, I haven’t guilt”.

Alessandro Lusana          

 

 

The need of compensation

I must thank Aristotle because her has taught, involuntary, to me his method fit to study both living and died, through the books that read; he has taught to me a speculative method, and the very short life human that I know, fortunately, because I prefer the died, this is the authors that the history has left to us; anyway I have could ascertained, very often, that the marriages, friendships or engagements are a compensation, this is the integration of something that we haven’t, the vivacity is often compensated from a character of other that is very silent, the fond is often accomplished from a detached character, and the life comes for vague tries of involve in this passionate nature also other, his husband or wife; but everything is born from a necessity of compensation, because unconsciously we know perfectly our nature and therefore we search something that is different, hence a compensation. In external rapports we make same thing, and when somebody is as us, we justify the detachment through the antipathy or other banal motives, necessary to justify the lack of compensation, because the similar characters, in opinion of Aristotle tie between them perfectly, certainly it is true, because every man feels whose he need, whereby a strong man could choose a strong woman but also a weak woman, in this last case it is the compensation, because the man searches the side of his character that by now he doesn’t feel; instead the man or woman that want a man strong or weak character near need of compensation, this is find an equilibrium, because it is the compensation, an equilibrium that can gives to us lack side; if we think rationally it we can understand that it is alone an egoistic research; because the compensation is a need alone our, personal without other motive; thereupon it is egoism. We can reach the equilibrium also through other tools, the objects, for example; we are charm from some object and to it we can find our compensation; often who has a limited sexual life has very much erotic fantasies, the schizophrenic images other conditions and life, that after he tells, aware that these are alone lies, but important is alone the satisfy his wit, this is the necessary compensation because out he doesn’t find attention, and the compensation is in his brain, this is think and imagine something. The paranoic is same, he is searching constantly the attention of other and when it lacks consequently he believes that everybody want harms him; it is the compensation, the satisfaction of owner egocentrism, the schizotypal is a asocial guy that compensates his solitude through the discourse and offences to the word whole; it is the compensation and that is human or alone imaginary is always compensation.

Alessandro Lusana      

 

The culte of incompetence: Roland Freart de Chambray

I confess that this title isn’t mine but I have took it from Emile Faguet(1847-1916), French literary critic that describes very fit the incompetence of some critic, through a critical retrospectivity we can picked the incompetence and the absolutely ignorance of other French, Roland Freart de Chambray(1606-1676), a French treat writer author of Idea of perfection of painting, that would be laughable if he wasn’t serious, because, I think has studied very much to tell these cucks up, we can begin with these prophetic words and I advise that we must read very well, because it is a scientific proof of human intellectual degeneration: “I suppose that every art has his principle, and whose is necessary the acknowledge to whom want make the job of artist…”, because if somebody want be a surgeon can operate without acknowledges, same exercise to the architect, engineer and police man and other, and after these saint cuck up her followed: “…we can hope of some progress in art, without a perfect acknowledge of its principles, that are of a very sublime contemplation, above all the perspective and the geometry, because lacking it the painting can’t exists.”; sincerely more read this author and more I search a capital pain for this idiot, may thrown among crocodiles, but I am dread that they would throw back, because, rightly, would say; he is a human and you have made it, hence you must solve this problem, otherwise we have to call the PETA. Fréart de Chambray naturally follows with his fantasies: “Those ancient painters…”, what is mystery, a name and paintings is necessary, but we would be to ask too much, and following: “…that has brought the painting to highest level of its perfection…they followed in their painting five parts, that are its fundamental principles…”; evidently Fréart de Chambray has seen and studies these painting that we can’t see but he has seen, but the name of painting, it is too much? He mentioned the name of a treatise writer Francois Junius(1591-1677), author of De pictura veterum, a collection of poetical steps and the painting representation, absolutely useless, hence very sit to Fréart de Chambray, that regard to invention explain something that we would not understand without this author: “About the invention. The invention, of the genius of paint a history, and have a idea about the subject that we want paint, it is the natural talent, that we can’t reached neither fro study nor for work, it is the fire of intellect…”; some body should remember to Fréart that Michelangelo(1475 –1564), he being a sculptor had very scant experience with painting and in fact were moulds for frescos technical, therefore the experience is necessary, it is obvious, but among very much cocks up one more is a number alone. Other information on this painting exercise: “About the proportion. About the proportion, this is the symmetry, and correspondence of every part, it is very easy a every brain can make it…the man can learn it without toil but alone following the geometry…”, but I think that we can also follow the widow of kill that some body, after the read of Fréart de Chambray, has decided to kill him, with advise that he don’t will shoot to forehead, because it would a bullet useless. Anyway Fréart de Chambray is necessary to understand how we don’t must write a treat.

Alessandro Lusana 

 

 

Thomas More and William Morris: two times but similar idea

Thomas More(1478-1535) William Morris(1834-1896) are lived in different times and epochs, but their ideas are very similar and we can understand it through connection with times, but a short note can aid us to understand the influence of More on Morris; in fact More has printed the Utopia of More in year 1893, it is alone a scant notice that hasn’t relevance, but it is instead great importance, because he evidently has had read Utopian of More and when he published the New from nowhere, one of major romance he kept in memory the narrative of More, because the Utopia, is a town that not exists, and that More imagined and descripted with more particulars, that are very near to Morris, the civil living together in the city of Utopia, the absence of grudge and absence of envy, lack of steal and robber because everything is common, production is alone to necessary, the govern that is elected directly from people; today it is normal, but during More’s time, this is during the reign of Henry 8^th (1491-1547) the monarchy was absolutely, and this think that was republican in that time was a very risk, it is sufficient think that More was decapitated in year 1535, because he was refused to recognize the supremacy of Henry 8^th on the British Church, he was condemned to capital pain for treason. He has descripted a word, or a city, this is Utopia, that is an inn to republican govern and model; I personally don’t think that he believed to a republican govern, because he was Chancellor of crow, hence he was very distant from this model. The influence on Morris is evident in description of Hammond, a older man that describes the country where he is living, that is England because he, in a step of romance, suggests to foreign, that is man of 19^th century, to go beyond the Channel, that divides French from England, hence he is in England; and Hammond describes a society that is perfect, where everybody makes the job that want, and the gain is alone in the work, this is the pleasure of to work, but the monetary gain isn’t, the decisions are took from majority, and when the citizens are discord every decision is send again, because important is don’t determine or create enmity; after a exasperation of socialism think of Morris is in other step, when the stranger asks to Hammond what rapports there are to stranger countries and Hammond answers: “…the whole system of rival countries  and in fight one other, that has had major part in the civil word, is disappeared with inequality between man and man in the society…” but a hide polemic to British conformism, although hide but there is, because Hammond answers to ask of foreign that asked if the lack of inequality become the word very boring, he says: “You go beyond the Channel and you are going to see the differences, in the land, in built, in the eat, in the way to amuse…”,; the question is where is the hide polemic? Simple in the character that Morris describes but beyond the Channel, in French, and it contradiction, because the town descripted from Hammond if is perfect and isn’t inequality, that is attests that differences are, why don’t describes the British difference? Why beyond the Channel in French? He could suggest to stranger of go out of house of Hammond and see the difference in country of Hammond; evidently Morris known perfectly the British society, and the equality was a motive essential to some social class, and it is the polemic, that was hide, but for attentive reader it emerges. Anyway the influence was very important and Morris’s The news from nowhere is the new Utopia, that also in the title is corresponding, because utopia from ancient Greek οὐτόπος means nowhere, therefore from the title this romance is the homage to More.

Alessandro Lusana

 Two roles

Richard: husband

Brigitte: wife

The writer

Two roles

Richard: husband

Brigitte: wife

The writer

Richard a husband of middle age that has a job very repetitive in an office of White House, office also important because he was the chief of this office that have to cure the international relation, and after he have to refer to his Department, through relations and reports that he read to Secretary of State and other during the meetings; when something was very wrong in the word he searched soon the justification to inform directly the Secretary; his principal duty was of consider the actions in the politic word, above in foreign states and express his opinion to fit strategy, and he was in White House by years because he was a common people but with very great policy intelligence, and every Secretary of State has kept him in that roll. Brigitte his wife was a secretary in an investment agency, she as Richard was graduate also she was very considered in his job, a woman very beauty, they has the same age; they were a very happy couple, in conformity to the common opinion, they haven’t sons and they lived to their jobs, when could they eaten together in a restaurant, by now usual the argument of they discussion was Fury, their dog, and some gossip, and the Saturday and Sunday when they were in home Richard read the journal and Brigitte looked the television, but contacts were, as to every couple, very limited. Naturally they have also lovers, Richard a secretary of 24 years that in comparison with Brigitte she was younger but certainly not more beautiful, actually she was in the medias beauty, instead Brigitte was very beautiful woman, much high, blonde and charming, a woman very elegant and always grave, never she has given some sign of humanity, or weakness through a smile. The Saturday and Sunday were the days of phones called, Richard was called always from his lovers and same to Brigitte, twice to be on the phones to each lovers, but jealousy by now was disappeared; they were a normal disinterested couple, very common, but they have decided that for their meeting with lovers in house it is forgotten, alone in hotel; they have reached the absolutely harmony, they were marriage because for external function and morality or conformism; Richard has had, during much years in his office and political job, much lovers and Brigitte likewise, they have grasped the equilibrium both interior that external, everything was perfect, and for the essence the marriage was already ended after two months, but their job ordered that the image was all. During one summer Sunday, Richard called Brigitte and asked: “Can you say the public that the this comedy is finished, thank you”, and Brigitte: “You sometime could make it”, and Richard: “Yes but now I must go to bath”, and Brigitte: “What I must say?”, and Richard: “Say that if they want we can welcome them tomorrow”, and Brigitte, to the public: “Ladies and gentlemen this performance is finished, we are sure that we have interpreted also your marriages, hence your performance, and here we have interpreted that you don’t want confess, thank you very much”, and the curtains were closed.

 Alessandro Lusana