Socrate’s the egoism and the coherence

The title can refers to something that who is writing has noted in Socrates’s(b.Ch.469-399)  philosophy, and in fact it is so evident that as said Robert Musil(1880-1942) regard the monument: “The monument is so great that nobody sees it”; and it is the human reality, because the sometime something is more evident but nobody sees it, and what is the anomaly of Socrates? Simple the will of try his method on the other, nothing that could harm or to cause damn, not absolutely, but alone the wish of to ascertain is a philosophical method could be effective; it is easy understandable for his legendary refuse of the payment, when he said: “I can’t teach to somebody, because I know of don’t to know(ἒν οἶδα ὄτι οὑδἐν οἶδα ), he in fact said the truth; because he state experiment his method, but who experiment a method he not know the effectiveness of this, hence he must before experiment, and Socrates has experimented the question and the rationality, his rationality, that was logic, through the others, his “pupils”; hence when he said “Γνωθι σαυτόν”, he wanted try if this method was effective, this is if through the knowledge of himself could be through the logic question; inasmuch that can seem the altruism, for the formal exercise, it was the normal egoism, it is the anomaly of Socrates, this is what is altruist is very egoism, but an egoism very anomalous, because he could gain through the his lessons and stop, but he has always refused the money, because he didn’t know; but it is also coherence, because he not gain for my ignorance, because the first thing that I must know, if imagine him in the confession, is myself, but before I must know if this method is effective, otherwise I will can other method; the ignorance that Socrates said for herself is right and exact, because he not know herself and hence experimented on the other, the effectiveness of his method, that evidently was effective because more philosophers has told about Socrates, the first was Plato; but neither Plato has seen this anomaly; he followed Socrates always, but for the philosophic method he has state very long; and may Socrates when solicited the “pupils” to search the their truth, it is because he state searching his truth, and for the coherence he could not taught something, because he hasn’t again found the his truth, hence he could not tell a truth that he hasn’t, because he was searching it, therefore I can’t want the money for to teach what I am searching, this is : “I haven’t solution to this problem, thereupon I can’t teach to somebody it”, it is the supreme coherence of Socrates, that hasn’t the possibility of solve some problem, actually he was learning from the others through the questions, rational questions, hence Socrates has been the more master and pupil of other that the history can records, because through his tries he learned and after he could taught, therefore it is the egoism and coherence.

Alessandro Lusana

 Republican fairy tales:1798

The material for essays in the Roman republic is more than we can think, because ended a essay the cucks up solicit other essay, and the Rome republic certainly doesn’t lack of this; a discourse of Niccola Corona(1750-?), a Jacobin and layer that in Rome, during the Roman republic has uttered this discourse that is laughable and absurd, typical of political publicity: “It is the Roman this moment that is the more beauty of your history. Those heroes that have taught to every nation of word of set back to slavish they have became slave of the priests with crow, that undress the State for to enrich their families…”; these families certainly were rich but they guaranteed also the job and slavish donation to the people, and the second if these families could enriched them evidently somebody has let it, also because the proprieties then were above all the lands and fields, but somebody have to cultivate these fields, and the grangers were of people, the last class of society, that evidently was satisfied so, and this condition was present from the ancient Rome, hence a people to whom is told the liberty, and this people not knows minimal concept of liberty, these are alone empty words, and also erred, and above all the Roman people was habit to this social classism, hence these are alone words without following. Corona continued for his cucks up: “Awaked the wit of liberty and independence, that has made the history of your forefather, and the felicity and richness of free nations.”; it is umpteenth lie; because the unique revolution, in Europe, was that French, and after the Revolution the economic income was the same of the before the Revolution or even worse; hence it is alone the publicity, that certainly somebody has heard but whose has understood nothing, because to a people that was habit to this misery and presumed slavery, a discourse so propagandistic not could have effect, and in fact it hasn’t had effects; also because the people to whom this discourse was destined was illiterate and the ancient Rome did know something; and Corona continues: “Delete from your heads and in the your heart every memories of oppression, that degrade you, and more rises sublime this tree of liberty more you can destroy these signs of cruel tyranny…”; but if was has been a tyranny the people would has already rioted but it isn’t occurred in Rome, the following is ridiculous: “The Roman people bored from much time of monstrous despotism, that has oppressed it, has tried more times of free oneself of this oppression…An secret magic of opinions and of politic interest and a overcoming military strong, has invalided until now the good result…”; somebody should ask to Corona when occurred these tries, in what time, century and is these has occurred on the earth planet or in his fantasy. We can laugh of these very dingy publicity; but the exercise is to the confront to actual political discourses, that are very ridiculous, and as Corona says one truth and a thousand of lies; inasmuch or the political discourses has written Corona or the politic man uses the same method.

Alessandro Lusana        

    

 

                  

 

 

 

 

 The noble literature: Guy of Warwick

Guy of Warwick a British poem between 13th and 15th century, is a typical work of literature of his time, because the protagonist, Guy that after become the knight and faced much adventures for the love Phaelice, daughter of ear of Warwick; it is the typical tale of Medieval age, where the knight must be a superman, and naturally this superman must be also noble, it is important for the literary canon that in the Middle age was asked, hence: “I shall not trouble the reader with a long genealogy of the descent of our famous Guy of Warwick; it shall therefore suffice to tell the reader, that in the sixth year of the reign of king Edgard the Great, this our famous Guy, was born in the city of Warwick. His father was a gentleman of Northumberland, in which country he had been the possessor of a fair estate…”; the canon of noble literature is respected, because Guy is now a noble, that is going to marry a noble. But after this step is necessary that Guy falls in love of Phaelice, always through a fair behavior, inasmuch: “But by being at the earl’s house, he came to have a sight of fair Phaelice, his beautiful daughter, with whom he was so extremely taken, that nothing but she could satisfy him…”; and after the potential husband also the potential wife the qualities must be considered: “She was indeed so fair, that she could not be seen, without being loved.”, and a summary description of Phaelice and hers beautiful was necessary, thence: “She was so fair, Venus herself could never boast more beauty…”; thereby also a very synthetic description, but necessary to let to reader a general and ideal image of Phaelice, that beyond noble and fair must be also beauty. And other note, about the anonymous author, that certainly was a cultured man, and we can think also a religious or a poet of court, because during the Middle age these two personages has had the sufficient culture for these comparison: “…and had she but been present at the famous contest between Juno, Pallas, and Venus, about the golden apple…”; other proof of this culture is given from the following step: “…beauty could no where but in Phaelice’s face be found in its perfection; but these perfections were so many daggers, sticking poor Guy to the heart…”; it the god of love Eros, that shot the arrows directly to the heart of lovers; and the competition among the three goddess, Juno, Pallas and Venus, that were concurrent in the beautiful and Paris chosen Venus, and the more famous was the narration, that was from the ancient Greek, of Ovid(43 b.Ch-18 a.Ch.), that during the Middle age was more diffused also in the convent and in the courts; therefore the author was may a court poet; but the pilgrimage of Guy, in Holy land, was a motive merely religious and tied to penitence, and it let to us also to hypothesize also a century for the written, because the pilgrims were very frequent also before of the first crusade, in the 1096-1099, wanted from the pope Urban 2th, that has proclaimed it in the city of Clermont, France. These are alone the hypothesis that the writer want alone set for a think of reader, since the date and the author aren’t known; anyway the material from this poem is present, and we can again think about these hypothesis and deny them or confirmed.

Alessandro Lusana        

 

  

 

 

   

 Little nationalism: parochialism

The love for our nation is certainly noble and laudable , and the internationalism is a pure utopian as the anarchy because we should renounce to our habit, our language and our wit, that is impossible, hence it is mere utopian, the man can’t becomes the unhuman; everybody has in own wit the pride of owner birth, because it’s the natural human spirit; but this love  can also be given to owner city, that is more great love given to our proprieties because all the city isn’t our, but in the with can becomes our; we are proud of our birth and of our city, and it is always a motive officially the nationalism or parochialism, that is a little form of nationalism; we exalt, above in Italy and France our cities, and in fact our love for our cities almost excludes the love for the nation, because our love it to the our city, that can be beauty or ugly, but it is always the our city, and we consider it as our propriety, that we defend always because it is our, and we know its history and its wit, this is the wit of the city, this the wit of citizens, its language that can assume meaning different from other, idiomatic expressions that has a meaning in a city and other is other cities; also it is the wit of a city; I remember an judge of Stendhal(1783-1842), that has judged the city of Rome as a reign of passion, of liberty, of customs and of a vital energy, that is unique in Europe; Stendhal certainly could not be parochial because he was Frence, but evidently that was involved from the popular nature that Rome had then,  afield from the formality and customs of France, that can be also a motive of pride for every nation; for example the England citizens are very proud of their customs, because it is a motive for to be different, because the nationalism  and the parochialism  are two sides of a different wit, that is different from other nations and form other cities, hence it becomes motive of pride for to be different, because the own characteristics are fit for the comparison; usually it also used for an exaltation  of our nation or city, but this wit is determined  from the distinction from the difference, this is the possibility of can say: “I am other person, other custom, other nation, other culture and other city, that is the character of a person: the French are polite, the British are formal, the Italian are passionate and the German are disciplined; it is the distinction of a people that is also a character, that can be found also in a city. The parochialism is other side of nationalism an nationalism more little, that has the same characteristic, this is the owner and the same wit, this the possess of something that we have in our spirit, in our childhood, soothing that by now is our, and we want defender it always, also if it isn’t our propriety because a city can’t be whole our, but in our wit it is our, because it is our spirit that has determined our habits, our language and our culture, hence it is ourselves, this our wit because the characteristics are a side that cannot be set aside of our wit; hence our life, that is our propriety.

Alessandro Lusana                  

 The national egoism and egocentrism

Usually we consider the nationalism for the love of owner nation and for the love for everything is from owner nation: this is the habit, language, characteristic and other; this sentiment can be despised or lauded for the owner ideology, a stateless certainly would despise this feel, instead a nationalist would love it, and who is nationalist; but this feel can  be beloved or not but I want show that it is alone egoism, without judge , but it is egoism; and it is more clear if we think to our proprieties, because if somebody violate our propriety, we not let it if the criminal is of our nation or not, we would have a reaction independently  fore the nation of criminal, why? Because he has violated or propriety, hence this is our reaction because he has violated our owner, and not alone our nation, therefore he is a criminal because he wanted appropriate of something that is our and not of nation; it is true egoism, that is prevalent feel, and the same feel for the foreign, because to be nationalist is a harm to mine wit and not alone to our nation, because in the nation, also owner, we are very much, thence the harm can be to me or others because in the nation are very much citizens; in fact the reaction is when the offence touches the particular, our particular, and it is the egoism, that becomes the nationalism and pride for the official judge, but it is alone the egoism, that determines the reaction; in fact you are not offending something of aleatory, but you are offending me, this is my person through my nation, that is foreign country is mine, my propriety, whereby it is egoism, something that is mine and stop. Same feel for the parochialism that in Italy and above all in Tuscany is very life; the Florentine is a typical example of the pride, or Tuscan pride, because the Florentine is proud of his origin as every citizen of Siena, Pisa and other cities of Tuscany; it is the pure egoism because my city is mine alone, it is a my propriety and you are offending my city, you are violating my propriety; therefore my reaction is mechanical this is the to your offence trough the contrast with pride of to tell  the qualities of my nation as its history, its characteristics that are also our propriety, because we have these characteristics; whereby you are offending me and not my nation, but me alone, and the natural pride is normal. The nationalism is also a motive for the egocentrism; because a national characteristic  is motive for to be different, hence original, , that is egoism always because  the egocentric is prevalently an egoist, because he has necessity, for his weakness, og to be considered, it is a weakness that want the attention because he is fear  of not accepted, hence he searches constantly the praise of other, so that he can temperate  the his inferiority ; the nationalism  is other form , salutary or not, of egoism and egocentrism.

Alessandro Lusana         

   

 The formal politic and the social context: Roman Republic 1798-1799

The policy is always tied to the social context for every time, and in the Roman context, during the Roman republic break of the papal regime, that has had a very short time, but the collection of edicts, proclamations and the orders of the Roman Republic, is very explicative for this contextualization of the republican ideals, first the religion: “The cult will be religiously respected, hence every manifestation of the cult must continue without the change”; the French Revolution has respected the religion because the France of 1789 was deeply Catholic, therefore the prohibition of cult would has been very harmful for the Revolution; but a control was necessary also to the revolutionary, because the citizen was free but the control was indispensable, the trust to new man, this is the revolutionary, was an ideal principle but the policy want the control, inasmuch: “The ambassadors, ministers are invited to send to Major State the list of his compatriots that are in Rome now.”; a State must assure itself and its citizen, and in this context it was necessary for avoid the spies that could entered under cover; hence the ideal policy is much relative. Other proclamation is very contradictory, because in 9^th article it said: “It is expressly prohibit and for a pain of a tax, and a corporal pain to every citizens of Rome of diminution of their servant that they have now”, and: “For the citizen, that are emigrated, whosoever manage the owner goods, must pay and feed the same number of servants, that has had their masters, for the punition of confiscation of every goods; it is the supreme contradiction, because the Revolution had abolish the slavery in France, whereby in Rome it have to the same, why not? Simple, because the slavery was necessary to avoid the unemployment, and the future criminals, because then the food in Rome was low, in fact every province that depended from Rome, at last for the policy have to send the supplies to Rome; and the low food would not has been enough also for the unemployed, that without the salary of some lord would feed the criminality; hence the servant were necessary, beyond the ideal policy. The orders 4^th and 5^th for this supplies are very clear: “The orders given to Commands of French army, of to give the protection to the supplies that are sent to Rome, and it isn’t accepted nothing motive for the residents of the State of Church or of whomsoever that has slowed down the supplies”. These are alone some example of the practical policy that for every model, monarchic or republican must be attentive to the needs of the people, because the same people that yesterday has acclaimed today despise you, and the political man it knows perfectly. The last example, the article 10^th: “The home hospice, and the hospitals will be manage as to past…”; it can seems absolutely useless because it hasn’t importance, instead it has importance because during the 17^th century in Rome the hospitals and the home hospices were managed form the clergy; hence the religion was necessary also for the peace of soul and of the body; hence the laic ideal could now cast off, because the cures could be necessary also to the French soldiers, and the surgeries, then, aren’t, may in the clergy; whereby the practical policy was dominant.

Alessandro Lusana  

 

                 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 The valor of context: Gioberti

I have already treated about Vincenzo Gioberti(1801-1852), but now I want alone stress the valor of time and the context, that has given so emphasis to the narration that Gioberti has seen for the literature of Italy that, it isn’t for the nationalism, that I am and pride to be it, but alone for to stress the my essay on the context (The causes of history, this is: what is the context?), and the third book of Gioberti, The primate moral and civil of Italians, is necessary to justify and to show the validity of the knowledge of contest and its causes, that here are alone political; this book Gioberti has written during the 19^th century, when the morality, above all to the high class this is the middle class, has ordered, although silently, the love to nation; naturally very low were who has persecuted for his ideas; naturally our Risorgimento, it the name that the history has given to this period, has emphasized every episode but why? Simple because the Italian hasn’t never had the awareness of a State, differently from the French, because for the French the first is the State and after the France; the history of Italy that was always a nation divided for the small states, the conception of unique State never was present; hence during the Risorgimento, although uselessly because the Italian people was illiterate, the intellectuals tried to give a summary concept of a nation or State, Massimo d’Azelio(1798-1866), an Italian writer, written in a letter: “We have made the Italy, but can’t make the Italians”; this is we can’t give the awareness to them that they are Italian; but during the period of Gioberti this illusion was again possible, in fact somebody to me very dear said: “To govern the Italians isn’t impossible but alone useless”; anyway the context is very celebrative of a nation that then wasn’t: “The beauty being an idea identified from the fantasy, the ideal nation and owner of the first scientific elements must be imaginative…”; we should aske to Gioberti: “The nationalism is justified, but about what nation do you are speaking?”; because now Italy isn’t, hence your book is alone a phantasy, compliment! But every cock up of these words, must be useful for evidence that the writer is Gioberti, but the author is the context, because it has written The primate moral and civil. Gioberti continues: “The aesthetic primate of Italy is hence both chronological and logic in same time; because for a side it proceeded other peoples on occident, for use of letters and of noble arts…”; here Gioberti is very laughable because he aware of say od cuck up, said these lies for alone nationalism; because the ancient Greek has preceded Rome and Italy, and Egypt and Mesopotamia have preceded both Italy and ancient Greek for use of letters and arts; inasmuch Gioberti, that known these ancient civilities ignores it because the primate of Italy would not be, and he lacks of context, although he was right for the modern art: “…the literature is Italian art being among the modern that can equal the ancient…”; hence he known the ancient arts, but the emphasis continues: “…in this competition the Italians have to overcome themselves because the classicist ancient was alone work of their race, and in Italy has had their country…”. It is a judge of a nationalist that wanted alone a celebration od his nation but without consideration of reality.

Alessandro Lusana            

          

 

 

 The causes of history, this is: what is the context?

Usually, above all from who is writing the word “context” is used from the political men, historical men and the economic men to explain a phenomenal, and it is very necessary for to understand a cause and the consequential effects; the word is explicative, at last for its origin or etymology,  because it is from the Latin “contextere”, this is sew together, this the tie more things together, and it is the first motive for follow the root of word and its original meaning, also to semiotic meaning, because the sew together more things is the origin of the practical of the word, that we can understand better by the linguistic matter, because it in linguistic has the total valor, in fact: the context is the together of words and concepts that surround the word in a written or discourse, and that aids to understand the valor and the meaning; every context encloses different motives: economy, culture, moral, social and above all political, that every takes part to the context, for example: the capital condemn of Templar, in year 1314, in Paris, France, the official motive for the heresy, and it is was valid motive? Not certainly because pope Clemens 5^th discharged the order, why the condemn? Because Philip 4^th, king of France, has had very need  of money of Templar, because the France was very poor, and the same Philip and his court have to escaped from an attack of Paris of people that hasn’t the food, in year 1302,, and he was saved from the Templar order in the castle of this order in Paris, where now is the Louvre museum, then this castle was very small, anyway Philip was welcomed, and the treasurer of Templar showed the treasure of order to the king, certainly trough  the pride, and Philip has remembered this treasure when he has condemned the order through the false document, this condemn I have took for example for to show the validity of etymology of the word; because the context, this is the sew together is the truth; in fact for this condemn we not can, but we must tie different facts: the first is the merely economic, this is the France of Philip 4^th lacks of infrastructures as the roads, service and other for the economic develop, but to Philip were necessary the money, and the order of Templar has had it; hence two factors have intervened , the first the economic and the second political, in fact Dante Alighieri(1265-1321), mentioned this robber from Philip through the following words: “To bring the avid sails to the temple”; this is the theft of money of Templar. Other political context, that is very explicative: Francis 1th, king of France, and Catholic, signed an alliance to the Muslims for contrast the power of Charles 5^th in Europe, in year 1536? Simple for the political context, France was been surrounded  from the empire of Charles 5^th : to north the Netherlands, to south the Spain and to east Germany, hence the France was a easy prey; the political context has wonted the alliance between Francis and the Muslims; it is the political context above all. The Reform of Luther has had so great success for the economic cause, the German princes wanted the proprieties of the Roman Church in Germany ; but also the popes has used the political strategy; because pope Clemens 5^th, that has undergone the attack to Rome of Charles 5^th, in year 1527, he has avoid to excommunicate the same Charles, but he has excommunicated Henry 8^th, king of England, , when Henry asked the cancellation of marry  to Catherine of Aragon, because he hasn’t had male sons, and he wanted marry Anne Bolsena; after this refuse and excommunication Henry founded the Anglican believe; two political contexts; because Catherine was aunt of Charles 5^th , protector of the Church in Europe, hence the England could become a possess of Charles 5^th, but the political context didn’t let it; these examples are necessary to understand the complexity of a contest, hence the Latin language was righ, the political and economic motives must be lied together.

Alessandro Lusana      

     

 

 A literatures confront. Poe, Manzoni, Dostoevskij, Byron

Poe

Dostoevskij

Manzoni

Byron

Manzoni: I think that we can begin from a your book, at last I think, but I accept your choose.

Poe: I would begin trough my History of Arthur Gordon Pym, and I would beg…

Dostoevskij: You want begin with nothing and there also finish and stop.

Poe: Why? Do you didn’t like my History?

Dostoevskij: certainly it is very great book, but I have read it two times and I have read about everything but the history I haven’t read; as Picasso that after visited a exposition of Impressionist painters said “I have seen the rain, the clouds and the sun, but the painting lacked”

Poe: Hence Gordon Pym isn’t you preferred.

Dostoevskij: No certainly.

Poe: Why?

Dostoevskij: because it is useless, it doesn’t tells nothing and the plot is very useless.

Poe: Also your Demons is long and boring, or not?

Dostoevskij: Yes, it is very long and boring and much boring.

Poe: But the editor has payed you?

Dostoevskij: Yes, he has payed me because I have written in Dresden, Germany.

Poe: And the editor has payed you.

Dostoevskij: I repeat, yes he has payed me, but why it is interesting for you?

Poe: Because it wasn’t useless, some sake it has had, although boring and long.

Dostoevskij: But the man of literature isn’t for the gain alone…

Poe(shutting up him): We have written for this too, the first was the passion but the passion doesn’t gives the food.

Dostoevskij: Yes but I haven’t begun to write because I have thought of gain, because I am Russian, and in my country very low know read; hence the writer can’t gain trough the romances.

Poe: In fact every man of literature has searched an employ for his matter, and when it wasn’t he has entered to court.

Dostoevskij: You are thinking to Italian Renaissance and we can ask it to Manzoni. Alexander the literature man in Italy have entered to the court?

Manzoni: Certainly, it is enough read the De commodis litterarum atque incommodes, where the author, Leon Battista Alberti, has told about the nobleness of knowledge and the hard life of the man of literature. And he has told about the poverty of men of literature that hasn’t a court.

Poe: Alexander do you like some my book, or do you have same opinion of Fëdor?

Manzoni: My think about your Gordon Pym is same of Fëdor, but the your novel the pendulum is very famous and it merits this success, because it is very involving, it take the interest and it is important for the writer, involve the interest; in fact the long romances are dispersive, and very soon the reader is going to be boring.

Dostoevskij: Do you have written a romance?

Manzoni: Yes, The promise bride and bridegroom.

Poe: And do you have been long?

Manzoni: Sometime yes, but my cultural tradition, and the Italy has very much, has taught to me that the history must be variegated, but a plot must be ever present because the writer, after a digression, he must turn to the principal history, that is fundament of the romance.

Dostoevskij: Inasmuch do you let that are digressions?

Manzoni: Certainly, but these digressions must be after that the writer has told  the principal history, otherwise the reader not understand where is the principal core, that must be explained trough more pages, and after are possible the digressions, but not certainly long, some page is enough. But other hostess is present, George Byron what is your opinion?

Byron: I was thinking to my Childhood memories: “When the slow infirmity with its series of worries freeze the blood in the veins; when the healthy stayed its wings and it escapes for the first breeze of spring, when it occurs not alone the body alone that suffers, but the atrocious tortures oppressive also the soul.

Poe: Very well.

Manzoni: can I ask what is it?

Byron: My Childhood memories!

Manzoni: I believe it but when do you explain it?

Dostoevskij: I have read your Childhood memories; I think that it is alone a poetical try but very modest.

Manzoni: Because that these are the your childhood memories is incomprehensible, may we can intuit, but not from your text.

Byron: It is written to poetical verses.

Manzoni Yes but it lacks the argument, and it is important so that the reader can understand what he is reading. It is important for the reader so that he doesn’t bore.

Poe: But The deformed transformed is rational or not Alexander what do you think?

Manzoni: Yes it is rational.

Byron: Why do you think it?

Manzoni: Because when the ghost appears to the Arnold, that wanted suicide, he says: “If I was the devil, as you believe, one alone moment and the your suicide would have to me soon; but I have stopped you hence I have save you”; it is rational think and I think that it is unique rational tragedy that you have written.

Byron: More than rational it is very sophisticated, because it means, trough the exhibition of souls, of heroes and other, that the man want be somebody that he isn’t; in fact to the following words is the truth: “But you my puppet, you would appear rather than to be a heroes”; it is celebration or appearance. The step when the ghost gone to body of Arnold and he says: “Clay not died, but without soul, although nobody has chosen you, and immortal accepts you…”.

Manzoni: But I don’t see nothing that can be important.

Byron: Instead something of important is present; because it the critic to a English society of 19^th century, the clay is the English man that can be shaped from the society, because his personality isn’t. Other of this tragedy is very low.

Manzoni: I am catholic and I want give to you my compliment for the defense of Catholic elected and your discourse “On the motion of count Donoughmore, and you have defended the Catholic.

Byron: Not precisely I have find the wit of my nation, this is England that is merchant wit hence about religion has disinterest absolute. 

 

Alessandro Lusana

 The political publicity

The memories of a painter, as Francesco Hayez(1791–1882), a Venetian painter that was much famous in Italy has left to us The my memories, that is alone his biography, and some thing can solicit the attention, both for the his art but in this essay for a note that he has told, that shows the validity of same method for two political think, the step of Hayez can help us to understand: “Other impression that has impressed my wit, was in the Maj 1797, this the coming of the soldier of the French Republic, tired dirty and laied in the Saint Mark place. They were alone some thousand. I remember that the presence of those soldiers determined a joy and other were worried…so she wanted stopped in this place for to see the tree of liberty, in the half of place around it the people acclaimed…”; this step is important because shows the acclamation toward a symbol that we has brought the freedom; we think automatically it and we are justified, without a historical reflection that in this case is important or fundamental: the first in Venice never, and stress never, was a dictatorship, Venice was an freedom island that protected the immoral poetry as Pietro Aretino(1492-1556) and Paolo Sarpi(1552-1623), polemical religious that attacked the Church, I mention alone these two cases but Venice was a merchant city, hence very much pragmatic, and for this it was disinterested, in fact after this memory the following step shows the practical wit of Venice: “I remember the departure of French Republican and the arrive of Austrian soldiers”, it is because the Napoleon was given the Venice to Austria through the accord of Campoformio in year 1797; Napoleon was a conquering hence he have to think the first thing to the France, in fact he made it; but important is that the merchant wit of Venice is in this step because that the conquering were French or Austrian it was same thing, because the parochialism emerges from the following words: “I will made the memories of this period through the celebration made in Saint George island, for the election of cardinal Chiaramonti to the papal throne with name of pope Pius 7th(1800-1823); it is can seem a useless step because it is alone a pope, that hasn’t tie to the political publicity, instead it has certainly a tie to political publicity, because the step of Hayez says: “…the celebration made in Saint George island, for the election of cardinal Chiaramonti…”; the celebration are comprehensible because the celebration for the parochialism, Italian typical, we can also consider for the USA citizens for the election of pope Leon 14^th; the parochialism, independent from the believe, is a motive always life; but I want stress other question that here is more important; it is the celebration of a Venetian to papal throne, the comments are: “It is normal”, yes but the same city, this is Venice, had celebrated also the tree of liberty, that excluded the religion in conformity to the ideology of French Revolution; hence the practical wit of Venice has certainly solicited also the presence of citizens that has celebrated the tree of liberty, but I want alone repeat that the method is same for the religion or laicism, both use the same method, hence I think that the celebration could also to be a Satanic holiday the way is same. Important for this essay is the narration of a witness that certainly could see these celebration, but we must also consider that these narrations are also imagined from the Hayez, because during the year 1797, he was 6 year old, hence it is impossible that he in years 1869-1875, years of write of Memories he could remembered the celebration of 72 years before; hence he has asked to somebody about these celebrations or he has imagined all; anyway the method is same and it is important. 

Alessandro Lusana     

      

 

 

 

 

 

 

 Byron continues

When Jordan had seated and he stared the white fleet, a discouragement involved him, and he raised the eyes and he seen Byron in his room, that looked Jordan, that has said: “I don’t know what write”, and Byron: “Take from your memory, from your reads, from your books and so I am going to correct you”, and Jordan: “Yes, usual you are right, I have thought to the romance Gorky park”, and Byron: “Yes! It is an excellent example, go for it; but you must copy the Gorky park so that I can explain the my the my advisements”, and Jordan took the romance of Smith from his library and he begun the read out loud: “All nights should be so dark, all winters so warm, all headlights so dazzling”, and Jordan: “Until now aren’t errors”, but he stared the eyes of Byron and: “But certainly some error is, hence the humankind is waiting you sentence!”, and Byron after looked around: “Where is the kitchen?” and Jordan pointed at, and Byron got up and he came to kitchen and he gone back with a knife and he asked: “Do you have something for to eat”, and Jordan looked him amazing: “I have…” Byron shut off him and: “A bitch od meat, fro example”, Jordan looked his clock and now, yes but now is the 16 meridian, do you have hangry?”, and Byron: “Yes! Hangry of a writer that is useless”; and Jordan understood the jokey hence: “Why, what I have said so wrong?”, and Byron: “The first where we are now in the romance?”, and Jordan: “In Moscow, it is evident”, and Byron: “Why it is evident?”, and Jordan browsed until the first page: “it is written here”, and Byron: “And the following words in that page what say?”, and Jordan: “Nothing here is alone the name of Moscow”, and Byron: “If a reader not read the name of Moscow on the page that you have read, he doesn’t know where the context, because it could be New York, Rome or Peking, you know it because you have read the name or not?”, and Jordan: “Yes”, and Byron but a reader that hasn’t read this page, doesn’t it; hence the town where the romance carry out is necessary”, and Jordan: “Yes!”, and Byron: After?”, and Jordan: “In this town all the nights should be so dark…”, and Byron: “In every town the nights are dark, otherwise they would not be nights”, and Jordan: “All winters so warm…”, and Byron shut up him: “In Moscow never has been a warm winter”, and Jordan: “All headlights so dazzling.”; and Byron: “Learn! What are the headlights, and what is the source of these?”, Byron stared  Jordan and he was waiting the answer, and Jordan read again the line and: “It isn’t here”, and Byron: “The headlights of cars or other?”, and Jordan: “it isn’t here”, and Byron: “What environment? Apartment or a basin? A palace? A hut?”, and he stared Jordan that answered: “I don’t know because here…”, Byron shut up him: “Here isn’t. These are errors that you are not to make never. The reader must know where is the environment, this city, or nation or continent, second the illogic warm winter, it means that in this town is sirocco, the warm winter is the sirocco, but after he speaks and he said that van Jacked, stalled and quit on a drift; this drift is snow or leafs”, and Jordan: “It is important?” and Byron: “Certainly because with sirocco it’s impossible that snows, and further he in describe of militia man mentioned a greatcoats, hence the temperature is low, but the sirocco with low temperature is impossible. It is the lesson because to particulars that you have mentioned before are important for the reality of history and the logic of history. Inasmuch now I think that you have learned something, continue alone.”, and he got up and disappeared.

Alessandro Lusana  

                    

 A romance: Byron has said

Jordan was a writer, historical writer, and he wanted write a romance, but as historic man he had difficult, because he could tell the history but the romance was other matter, he has thought of write a romance on the Charles 5^th, and after the Charles the Great, and Louis 14^th, but he thought them as historical man, hence he have to pass from the historical truth to imaginary, and this passage was very difficult; he was very acute for the hypothesize the true motive for a war and the political motives for an accord or pact; naturally he supposed but these think or hypothesizes were very charming, because much read were charmed from his read of history; but now the romance, was different because everything he have to imagine; he thought immediately to a historical romance, and it seems the right choose, in fact he begun to write something, but almost at once he reconsidered his choose, and he decided, that before of all a tea, to drink in the bar under his apartment; he gone out and in the bar, where he was usual, he greeted the bar man, and he seated on the chair and he asked a tea; he stared at the bar man and he was amazed because he recognize Charles 5^th, and not George, the bar man, he thought that it was alone a illusion, hence he turned over and he seen some famous writer, Poe and Byron and Mary Shelley, Byron was reading a book; inasmuch Jordan approached to him and asked: “What is the deal for to write a romance?”, and Byron stared at him and : “A romance is as a build, every part is indispensable, it is a history and you must describe every personage, also summary, but some indication to reader you must give because otherwise the reader doesn’t understand, he is going to ask who is and why is present a personage, he is going to ask it alone indirectly , but the reader isn’t a foolish and he has read the history whereby he want know who and why; hence the question is “Who is this personage and because he has disappeared so suddenly, because you have given the life to this personage and now isn’t?”; because every personage that is in the romance, the first must be much present, this is to some episode, also low relevant but he must participate, so that the reader can understand the motive of this personage, and the episode, also irrelevant, becomes here important, but he can’t appear now and after two lines he disappears, because otherwise his presence would be useless, instead he must be in the romance, also in other episode distant form the begin; but the reader know him because he can take again, in his memory, that personage is tied to that episode”, and Jordan asked: “Yes, but the particulars are important or not?”, and Byron: “Certainly they are important, but as a build, the cement is important if it is going to use, otherwise not; the history demands particulars that must be important, otherwise they are alone useless episode, instead to this episode must be tie a personage and other episode that shows the qualities of personage, after the description, the human and other qualities”, and Jordan: “Why?”, and Byron, that meanwhile has asked two tea: “Because the romance needs of a motive, and the personages must have a motive for to be in the romance; otherwise they are useless, and in the romance nothing can ne useless”; Jordan got up and he gone to the bathroom, and when he gone out, he looked around and recognized his apartment, and he smiled and seated on the chair, and he, while remembered the words of Byron, begun to write and the romance again isn’t ended, but may in the next tale its possible that he tell to us the novel plot.

Alessandro Lusana          

                

 The Hegelian concept of art: Emerson

Ralph Emerson(1803-1882) has took again Friedrich Nietzsche (1844-1900)fore his conception of morality that was determined from a morality that has involved also Nietzsche in his German society, the years of Belle Epoque, when the middle class was very principal factor of economy in Europe, and in nascent country, after the “revolution”, as the United States the same phenomenal was by now normal and determined; hence the two philosophers have had same reaction, Emerson was more precise in confront to Nietzsche because he explain, in his book The character and the human life, explication more precise and very much attentive, evidently he used the speculative method and he has not officially imposed, but in conformity to moral customs it was present; we must also consider that the reaction was the same because the middle class, very active in the merchant and business also in USA, has followed determined customs that were peer to the middle class of Europe, but behind this hypocrites moralism and respectability, was the growth of a country that hasn’t the owner models hence followed other models, as Emerson has followed both Nietzsche and for his think about the art has followed Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel (1770-1831) of Aesthetic, a step of the book of Emerson is indicative of this concept: “The with being progressive it never repeats itself, but to every act it tries the creation of a all new or beauty. It is manifest both for the works of beauty art, and in the useful art, for to use the popular distinction among the arts, that classified it on base to sake. In the beautiful art isn’t the imitation but the creation that is the sake”; it is the absolute wit of Hegel that in the Aesthetic is dominant, Hegel was also involved from the idealist wit and Emerson has followed the same conception, because he has expressed through other words the same concept; for Hegel the useful of art isn’t, instead for Emerson that has took the common scansion among the arts, this is useful and beauty, he has took Hegel and he has limited the presence of German philosopher to the beauty arts, and he continued with his hide Hegelianism: “In the landscape the painter must suggest to us the idea of a creation more beauty…”; it is the pure idealism of Hegel that in the Romantic art, this is the painter of 19^th century, he says that the image is the tool for the absolute spirit, this the knowledge of absolute spirit, that alone in the Romantic art can recognizes itself; inasmuch of Emerson is: “in the landscape the painter must suggest to us the creation more beauty…”; it is the Hegelian idealism in the Aesthetic, the spirit that can recognizes itself in the Romantic art; we must also consider that although the two philosophers not were contemporary but they lived the same romantic moment and they has took the same spirit, this is the opinion, the in 19^th century was dominant; thereby Emerson has followed the German culture, for a side he has took Nietzsche and for other side he has took Hegel.

Alessandro Lusana                

 

        

 

Historical superficiality: Burckhardt

Jacob Burckhardt (1818-1897) a Swiss historical man, famous for his book The civility of Renaissance in Italy, has given an interpretation of Renaissance in Italy, that very much generations have read much times, and it is certainly right, but also superficial; the first is that he spoke  and named the lords of city as tyrant, that in Greek meaning is a correspondent of manager of public things, hence the city or feud; I don’t think that Burckhardt has used this name for this sense, he wanted meant the more common meaning, so that he could stress the Renaissance change. The “tyrant” have to contrast the attacks from every side, because then Italian cities that have had fought sometime one against other, they become friends very soon and allies in conformity of political strategy, both then as today; in fact the taxes that Burckhardt  has written, were necessary to weapon and soldiers, that could betray to every moment  for a better offer; the shame of betray then there wasn’t; also because the major part of soldiers were mercenary ; inasmuch it isn’t tyranny but simple survival. The taxes were, in opinion of Burckhardt  established on the a land register, that in Middle age there wasn’t , and the major incomes was for the proprieties of lords, that were necessary to given the food to citizens that were in war, but in the city, the families of soldiers busied have to be feed, this are childes and women, that the lords have to rescue to his castle, hence the food was necessary to this duty that was alone of lord; there the taxes not paid alone the soldiers but also the common people. Other note of Burckhardt regard the office of passport, this is the pass, that today is same, this is the passport is controlled , but the difference from the Middle age today the nations are united, instead the Italy then was a gather of small states without strong; Burckhardt uses this confront for stress that then the control on the citizen was very close, but also today every state want know who is received, and the motive is same : the security of the State; it is normal management of policy. The legends are took by Burckhardt , the legendries that he has took from historical men, and they has took it from other sources that often were enemy to lords; as Bernabò Visconti(1323-1385); that was a lover of hunting and he has had  5.000 dogs, it is absolutely false, because 5.000 dogs would be impossible to keep and they would been useless, because the hunting would be in Italy and not in Africa. The celebration of Renaissance begins in chapter about the tyranny in 15th century; when the tyranny has had a human  character; a power that has consolidated on the tyranny it continues so fro keep the power; but if Burckhardt has said the celebration of Renaissance so would be failed everything.

Alessandro Lusana      

 

         

 Aristotelian Catholic: Gioberti

Vincenzo Gioberti(1801-1852)a Catholic intellectual and political man that has tied his name to the principal literary work, The moral and civil primate of Italian, that is a catalog of virtue that he has seen during the history of Italy, that certainly were but that haven’t guaranteed nothing to unification of Italy, in 1861. He spoke as Catholic and in fact he sees to God the principal motive of this primate; We must also consider that he was a monk, and he has followed the religious schools, hence the philosophy in his Primate can’t lacks; in fact he spoke about the autonomy of creatures: “Although the creatures can joy of relative autonomy, as the second cause is image of the first cause…”; and he following: “Everything id a strength, and every force enclose potentially every way of to be and every perfecting that to it are going to be present, through the duration of time, and the external condition for their improvement. The potency is given from the first cause and that has created…”; this discourse has the Aristotelian rationality, and Gioberti used this comparison for stress that God has given to Italian qualities that during the centuries have developed; certainly, and it isn’t nationalism, the Italy has had great geniuses during his history, but because the Italy is born before, except the Greek, of other European nations, inasmuch we has had very much time, and other historical factors, as the Catholic center, as Rome, that has guaranteed to much intellectuals a constant possibility of live; beyond the lords that has got profit of intellectuals in every side of Italy. Anyway it is I repeat a logic step of Aristotle(b.Ch.384-322) , that has useful for demonstrate the Primate of Italian, laughable Primate, because the our history is very full also of treason, that Gioberti hasn’t considered; it is the opportunism or intellectual dishonesty? For me dishonesty and stop, for a historical man can be alone opportunism. The Aristotelian influence is fro the adjective that Gioberti used in this step and for other before: “…and as the first cause are also the second cause and so we must admit a secondary creation that express the action of factors finished…”; this last adjective is took directly from the τέλειος, this the ended act of Aristotle. The Aristotelian logic is present also in this step, and this step attests the employ of Gioberti of natural logic of Aristotle: “…because the production without the conservation would be useless. And the conservation uses the restoration, when it is necessary; that is a second creation, as the conservative action is a continued creation…”; it is the philosophical think that has unified the Aristotelian and Socratic logic and has used for explication. The Catholic nature or think of Gioberti is in the following step: “Only God, as the first cause and essentially creator, he is the perfect conservator and restorer of his factures. He has given a part of this qualities to the creatures…”. Hence Gioberti has took from Aristotelian and Socratic logic, and he hasn’t forgotten Saint Thomas from Acquino(1225-1274), although the logic is alone Pagan, this from two Socrates(b.Ch.469-399) and Aristotle.

Alessandro Lusana