Past and future

A man was arrested by policemen and brought him to police department, he seen around and, above all he seen cloth of policemen and other persons, he seen policemen, junkies, pusher and other; but he seen whit much interest. Policeman brought him to interview room, and he seen with very much black astonishment a policeman, and this policeman was astonish because it seems that this arrested didn’t see a black. Inspector given some questions: “Are you from?” and arrested answered: “Sparta”, and inspector tough that this city was in Tennessee, and he asked again: “Where do you live?”, and arrested answered: “To my home to Sparta”, and he continuously seen around, then inspector: “Hi mate, you all right?”, and arrested: “This is strange town, where are we here?”, and inspector: “You are in police department, and we are policemen”, and arrested: “Are you Spartited?”, inspector seen other policeman and: “What’s your name?” and arrested: “Leonidas, king of Sparta”. Inspector seen astonish policeman and he commented: “He is crazy”, and inspector, that known same historical data, continued others questions: “When are you king of Sparta?” and arrested: “From 490 to 480, and my father was  Anassandrida”, and inspector: “Do you have fought at Thermopiles, and you are died there”, and Leonidas: “I am here and don’t seem myself died”, and inspector: “Can you tell history of fight of Thermopiles”, and Leonidas: “Yes, I can. Magistia seer told that we are going to die after, and I have sent back very much men, and I have made it because I seen to their eyes very fear; but I have kept warriors of Taspia; Persians came forward and we came versus to us, and we came for a wide gorge, and Persians came versus and very much men and warriors died, and two brothers of Xerxes died”, then he got up and opened the door, and inspector asked: “Where are you going”, and Leonidas: “To future, instead you are in the past”, Leonidas got out from district, and inspector followed him, but when he was out door, he seen an army with swords and shields, he seen them and asked: “Where am I? And a soldier approached to him answered: “Thermopylae, and we want you order Leonidas”.

Alessandro Lusana     

                                                                     

 

 

Difficulty of nothing

This concept has got much times and as much thought\; I follow think of Plato swears that nothing is no be, and it is very true, also Gorgias said that no be is an entity; in fact also no be is an name and rational concept, for example: we must consider that nothing is against all or everything, but all exists, with common exception, because there is also nothing, good is present against evil, believer is against atheist, and other; then every concept has one contrary, and to be is philosophical entity also no be, but also no be is entity because it has one nature, a character, then is present, therefore is to be then it is an entity. Johannes Scotus Eriugena(815-877a.Ch.) thinks that nothing is God because he superior every essence then he we can’t consider as essence. Plotinus(205-270a.Ch.) thinks that nothing is the matter, because hasn’t soul, think and life, to Hegel(1770-1831) in every matter and other is present both to and nothing, this is positive and negative also to matter. These think about nothing perorates that nothing is existent, then it is not nothing, but it is entity, both real and philosophical; but where is and where do we can nothing; this is, can we find nothing to everything or no? Can we find nothing to everywhere or no? Other question, how do we consider nothing? I think that nothing is present but with very strong limits; because our think to nothing is or universal, God is nothing, in the opinion of Scotus or is with matter, in the opinion of Hegel; I think that nothing is very difficult to demonstrate because it is very limited, this is to everything is present matter, soul and life, also if it seems very absent, to tree we can’t see life, but it is present; then think nothing is difficult, because absence of matter isn’t nothing; for example, air isn’t matter but it is present, therefore it is present then is essence. In fact we can consider that Plato thinks that isn’t absolutely nothing, but absence of something that is nothing, shadow as absence of light, but he didn’t solve problem, because we can find all but no certainly nothing; then we can consider nothing as philosophical concept, but di difficult to demonstrate.

Alessandro Lusana

 

Revolutionary Hegel

This essay relates about Hegel and his young written about religion, where is present a very much important and evident influence of France revolution, and, above all, a lack of a government in Germany during these years. Hegel scolds Christian religion because it has deprived men of liberty and independence, and because it has positive character; but positive we must consider that, in conformity with hegelian meaning it is authoritarian power, that imposes his orders and his morality; this is perfect, certainly, but Hegel falls when he considers that pagan religion was very freedom, pity Hegel has forgotten that Socrates was condemned to capital sentence for alleged atheism. Therefore Hegel scolds also that instruction the state has given to religious institution, this central point of will of state of Hegel, the state must get instruction for every citizen, then this is a principle ground of France revolution; and other sign of this revolutionary spirit is in representation of miss that, in conformity with hegelian opinion, has scanned social classes between rich and poor. Other fall is in celebration of choice of leader during ancient age; but historical election of an imperator in Rome never was, and tyrannies, this is leader, neither is in Athena, people had has power, from 508-507 before Christ, with Cleisthenes when democracy allowed to people of vote for policy of Athena, but religion in this contest not was, on contrary state, or city state, as Athena and other of ancient Greek, could impose their law for religion presence, but religion of ancient Greek was pagan; then this judge of Hegel has alone arose by enthusiastic revolutionary spirit, and since during those years also religion has considered ground of monarchic power that, in opinion of France revolutionary, has deprived liberty to men, then Hegel, evidently, has considered religion motive for impose to men his law. But Hegel never condemns the state of Germany, if men haven’t liberty the state deprives it, and not certainly religion, but Hegel not could consider the state for motive of deprivation of liberty because in Germany, then, a central government and a state not were, then religion was only motive for consider deprivation of liberty.

Alessandro Lusana 

     

        

 

Praise of nothing

This essay about a north European writer, this is Knut Hamsung(1859-1952), that I think unknown to readers, and I invite them to read his tales, because he got all style of English literature, this is the modest action and the nothing history; during read of his tales is very difficult to find a history, but in return they see very much nature; some precisely about wood and field are very argument for distraction, because this read is very boring and some to every sales. Every work descripted is common and devoid of continuity, this seems a description of daily action and this tales are a diary alone, an example that I have got from The son of sun, a tales: “To night its snowed. He has thought how much birds are going to be cold in the wood, where the violets are very wrong on the field, before that they are dying” this is an examples alone but is very important because all tales is so; nothing is never motive for interest. I know that somebody could comment why to read this tales, I answer, because this literature document is a perfect example about you do not write a romance or tales. A romance has an action and storyline, some connection with habit but, above all, with storyline because the reader can understand what is motive of romance or tale; landscape and other very less important are literature gimmicks for a momentary distraction, or for continuity of action; but now for Hamsun are present and without action, without protagonist, dialogues and nonsense, but returning very much boredom. Therefore these tales are necessary for to understand way about don’t write a romance.

Alessandro Lusana

 

The whip of writers

The literary whip was a paper of literary criticism, built and wrote by Giuseppe Marco Antonio Baretti(1719-1789), and this paper was very famous for tones very strong and offensive; in fact author wrote judgement very offensive against books and Italian writers; he despises contemporary poetry of a society called Arcadia, for ancient Greek land, and we can consider that verses of poems of these poetry are very poor, and he considered them poetaster, and we can’t consider that he was right. But often emerge also personal motive, so some attack to poetry and playwright as Carlo Goldoni, a prolific Italian playwright of 18^th century, that wrote 200 comedies, and he has had also praise of Voltaire, that wrote a letter to Goldoni and he called himself as more great admirer in France; but very and very rightly Baretti asked how it is possible to admire a Italian comedy if the admirer not knows Italian language; anyway Baretti criticizes characters of some comedy, but he takes alone some inaccuracy, and stop, he sees alone errors, Goldoni is sometime is boring, very boring, but these critic motives are very poor, because he take alone some image and not all comedy. I think that he wanted alone fame and success that he tried to obtain with these strong judges, and he was also, I repeat, also offensive, but some verse of his poem, was as much poor and boring. Somebody would comment that is necessary to see first owner qualities and after to consider other, then Christ talked: “Why you see the straw in eyes of your brother and not see beam in your eyes?”. Therefore Baretti is boring when he is polemic, this is always, because he critics all and everybody but after he does not give nothing that merits very praise. Baretti is a critic, offensive, polemic and may useless.

Alessandro Lusana  

        

 

Anthony Tempesta in Sistine hall

The hall that I consider her is a hall that now isn’t, because between 1860 and 1887 this build was demolished and in this town was built actual station for train of Rome; this hall has had 6 kilometres and it was would for cardinal Peretti, after pope Sixtus 5^th at 1570, bought land for to build this hall, that was finished at 1581 on project of Domenico Fontana, very important Sistine architect(Figs.1-3). In this hall was painted a frieze with allegories of virtues and other, but painters of this frieze are today in majority unknown. Some published photos that I took let me identify very easily both Antonio Tempesta(1555-1630), painter that I have studied very much during my second thesis; usually we think that during Sistine pontificate Tempesta was excluded for commissions but for this frieze we must consider an exception; in fact for Felicitas stabilis, this Stable happiness(Fig.4), Tempesta anticipated some character of his style engravings that were after; we can consider very similarities between painting and engravings, the neck of this allegory is very specular to three figures on engravings of Tempesta(Figs. 5-7), toes are very specular to Europe kidnapped by Jupiter(Fig.6), the face(Fig.7) of this allegory is specular to Europe before mentioned, but she is very similarities to neck of Ciparissus, on other engraving of Tempesta(Fig.8), and last but it isn’t certainly less important than others the cloth, folds of fabrics are very specular to allegory, equally strong and heavy, that we can find both on this painting and on engraves(Figs.9-10); therefore after Geographical Maps Gallery in Vatican certainly Tempesta worked for this hall, and since painters in this Gallery of Tempesta and are very little he was busied to this Gallery for very little time, and he could painted this frieze.

Alessandro Lusana

Fig.1

Fig.2

Fig.3

Fig.4

Fig.5

Fig.6

Fig.7

Fig.8

Fig.9

Fig.10

Polybius, this is historical work

The read of think about policy of Polyibius(206 b.Ch-118 b.Ch), he was a Greek ancient historical and he told about much wars of Roman empire, and today we have alone five books of his Historias, this histories, about Punic wars; but interesting is that he in this book about method work of historical he expresses some concept that today should be normal for historical work, but often lack, this is truth about question more or less important, he says: “I let that historical can inclines to his town but no certainly that they make false tales for an own gain”, this question, very ancient and today actual again, shows how that historical lie is very ancient, and above all for same motive, favours or gain; this is important for to understand, and Polybius advises to reader about it, that: “Then readers must diligently to understand this lies and the historical must avoid it”; this is no certainly original advise, but simply a right historical work. This concept he repeated in other step of this book, and he says: “…and neither we must trust to historical that subordinates historical truth to own interest”, and “The history joins very much persons and future generations, while discourses are to present occasion alone, so historical must consider very much truth…”. Other advises he given, this is: “Two genders are about lie, one is for ignorance and other for will. We must forgive lie for ignorance but we must turn away who lies for will”. Certainly these advises are today normal behaviour, but we must consider that often these advises are forgotten because we have some interest so that this forgetfulness happens, therefore Polybius was right when he says that everyone has interest and because of this interest we forgotten; then Polybius is very nasty, because he says to man what are men.

Alessandro Lusana