Legitimation of the official

The world works in curious ways sometimes. I guess only the ones with open mind can see it. Each one can think whatever they want, but some things are perspective, others are reality, and to confuse perspective with reality is dangerous, very dangerous.

The title of this text is called legitimation of the official, because I have seen some acts that try to do just this. In art, there has always been tensions between the official and the non-official, being the non-official the bad. You can see this clearly in impressionism, for example. Are impressionists wrong about the way they paint?

Now I want to talk about something that I will never ever understand: why some people just repeat the same ideas other say without doubting about it for just a second, and not only repeat, but also defend and discriminate others that think different, because the other thought is "non-official". This is a way to legitimate the power of an object, may it be an institution, a politic power, whatever. And the funniest thing of that is when they do it without having any idea of what they are talking about, but not even that, but they ever question the knowledges of the "non-officials".

I'm sick of this shit, and I think I'm even starting to hate art history. Yes. I'm sick, tired of this shit, it will come the moment that I will never participate in nothing "official" just to be against that. Because it not only happens with teachers, but also with students.

It is okay when an student says "I don't know" when it is asked for something that you don't really have proofs, only by your experience and your perspective. What I don't think is okay is to just claim that the knowledges of "amateurs" are shit because they are not in the "official". And not only amateurs, I said that word because this is not a problem of only my career, it goes further.

I was called an ignorant for doubting about something they didn't give me any proof, I had to believe that yes or yes, without any explanation, because they are "the expert". And such experts even said me that for what I answered the pre-questions if I was not going to "accept what they are saying".

Yesterday a teacher said that amateurs should not be able to do serious researches because they are not official. That democratization of culture is stupid. This is literal.

And today, after years of studing out of university, because my career is very bad done, some students claim that my formation is bad because I use other sources, including "non-official" sources, may it be wikipedia, blogs, whatever (in various languages too, from english to russian). It is okay if the "officials" doubt of my "non-official" formation, but it is bad if the "non-officials" doubt of the "officials" information. And I remember, I'm inside the university. Just imagine a total amateur.

I had a teacher in bachelor that when I researched for myself, before starting the career, I showed him my work. It was a very big book, with information taken from a book of an author called Azcárate, and various internet pages, including wikipedia. It was a very big book. I printed it, I showed it to him, and what he said after taking a look? You are ready for oppositions. Not kidding. In university I have advantage due to that. Yes, I still have to study, but I have advantage. And now it is wrong because it is taken from "non-official" sources.

I'm sick of "officiality". For them, "non-official" are lies. Other example, you see I'm writing in english. I may have some gramatical errors, fine. But you can understand me pretty well. For the "official", I don't know english, because I have not a title. For the "official", I don't know music, because I haven't a title, although I can compose and produce music. For the "official", I can't play guitar, because I haven't a title. For the "official", I can't play erhu, because I haven't a title, even if I can't even get it in the country I live. It is not "official", and because of that, it is a lie.

Some people should remember the impressionists once more. They were "not officials". And now they study it. Fucking non-sense.

Random reflections after around two weeks without facebook

This may seem stupid but I've realized of many things lately due to what the title says. Not only facebook, I must, say, all that has to do with socializing through internet. I guess it has also to do the fact of the bad experiences, but after all, I think that with time, it is going to turn positive.

These days have been days of self-reflections, thinking about myself, my future and what I like to do. At the beginning it was painful, because the bad experiences, but as I say, I feel each day it is getting a little little bit better.

I want to talk specifically about facebook (I guess it can apply to all social networks but as I mainly used facebook, I'll talk about that only) and other online thing I used to do: play MMORPGs.

First, talking about facebook, despite the good things, I only have thoughts for bad things. Yes, there are some good things, but as I feel them now, they are very tiny compared with the bad things. I've met some of the worst persons in my life there, I discovered that people is up to ruin you if that can make them grow, even indirectly. If not, how the fuck do you explain that someone talks bad about something you do and then he says "I didn't try it, I didn't read the information". Just WTF. That scapes from my understanding. I have tons of these things, and I don't want to extend it, but summarizing, I got 99% shit and 1% good things. I won't lie, I've met amazing persons there, but facebook is full of shit.

Talking about MMORPGs, this is a videogame genre I used to like a lot. I say used to, because although I still consider I like it, it is not the same, or at least I don't think I can feel it the same way as before, at least until I play my own-created MMORPG... There have been 2 MMOs in my life: Lord of the Rings Online (5 years playing it) and more recently, Asta (some months playing it). I love both, for different things. I love LotRO because the enviroment (damn, it's LotR!) and because the quests (best is till Gondor, my favourite expansions are Moria and East Rohan, but all quests are good, epic books are totally amazing, instances are fine and I really enjoyed big battles). About Asta, I just love all except questing. Enviroment is awesome,  graphics are incredible, system of battle is fine, treasure hunter, bounty hunter... very good. Now the bad things, again, not because the game itself, but because people. In LotRO, pvp is VERY bad balanced. As a good creep I am (spidey and warg!), I am underpowered. One time, we were 24vs1 (creep raid vs 1 minstrel, that is, healing class). Well, that minstrel survived. If it is 24vs1 (24 freeps vs 1 defiler, that is, the evil healing class), the defiler would die in a few seconds maximum. I posted in the forums the experience, because I recorded it. What did I got? Of course, insults of the freeps. And finally, the devs closed the post because "it is not allowed to share that" and because insults. That's fine for me, I won't spend a single euro in that game anymore. Then I moved to Asta, trying to find another MMO because at that moment I really hated LotRO. Asta (in spanish) was fantastic, I even got a couple costumes from the store. Until things got very rare. It seems the company is not very good, they banned a lot of people claiming they cheated in something (no idea about that), and then I saw a new that another company was going to release Asta in steam (in english). It would not be too bad if not because I already had bought a couple costumes with real money... so... shit... I am too lazy to go to the steam version and do all again (I prefer english games and community after all) and of course I will not buy again the same costumes... So... I am done with MMOs. Now I'll just enjoy those two until they are closed with what I can do without spending any more money, and done.

Well, this post is going to be long but I'm bored, want to write something and if I was a youtuber I would record myself telling this but as I don't like to be recorded, I'll write.

I've noticed how much time I was losing with all that shit. Too much concentration in promoting my art just to find shit people who dislike it without even see it, too much time lost in eternal dailies in MMOs for nothing after all, because a bad experience can ruin it completely. In these days being nearly all the time alone (because it is very very hard to be 100% time alone, even more when you have to go to class...) I've got much more skill playing my erhu and I've been working in new projects relating with art history. The art blogs have been updated and will continue, I am closing that part of my life and I think I will feel satisfied. I also want to try some new things, I don't know if that will be good or bad, but at this moment, I don't care. I feel I've lost too much time. It's time to spend it of the best way possible.

Enough for now. There will be more the next time.

Life is boring, April 2017

After deciding to quit facebook for some time to have a rest of social networks, and to focus in the art history videos to study (only 1 month away for exams), I've realized how boring is life without social interaction. That even makes life more boring. I wanted to keep the mobile off too, but sometimes while exporting videos, I just don't know what to do. When I had facebook opened, I just entered and check the new posts, but without fb, I can't. So it is pointless, but... Two weeks working all day studying and making videos, the last days with zero social interaction beyond The Lord of the Rings Online (social interaction there is near zero but still I count it...). I always say I prefer to be alone, away from civilization, but I never realized how boring is life without that. But I don't know, I'm just a couple days with zero social interaction. Maybe I find it funny at some point. You never know until you try... And you may ask, why am I posting here something then? Well, I don't expect readings, but if someone reads it and it is in the same position as me, good luck :)

The Death of Illusion

How can someone feel when everything for what has been fighting for years became pointless, just because the way the world is built? I've always said that I would love to live far from society, in a small wooden house, not caring about anything. At the beginning I thought that it would be cool to be remembered. A musician I admire a lot is Ludwig Van Beethoven, and I love the way he is remembered. But at the end... all is pointless. Humanity won't live too much anyway. And even so, who consider what is worth to be remembered? Certainly not the people I consider great. The desire of leaving society and have a self-sustained life is great, although I think it is impossible in current world, or near impossible.

The Death of Illusion... yes, it's fine, too much shit. Everything I've fought over many years is pointless to be able to even survive. People think there is no much differences between social classes as there was in middle ages... wrong. I would probably be famous by now if my family had a very good income, maybe not rich, but let's say a very good income. Yes, you can scalate in the social class, but it is as difficult as it was a century ago. If you are born in a rich family, you'll have success. If not, it doesn't matter how much you fight: or you have luck getting a rich friend, or you can just better abandon it.

I've not worked in just one thing over years. I've always thought that it is better to know about a lot but little, than about one thing too much. I wanna do a reflection of my skills and what is the obstacle or shit or whatever that makes pointless to continue. The next things have been happening for years.

I gave everything in university to be the best... I met horrible teachers who don't valuate your work

I put my art history content in internet because I want to spread knowledge... I get stolen by my own university companions

I wanted to be a professional musical composer... I get ignored, and if not, bad comments about everything, even if the ones who do it don't listen to the content really, and I also can't afford to get original licenses of the libraries, if I get that shit without original licenses, it's stupid to even try to be professional

I propose a cool and unique idea to a music store hoping they could take me to do it... they steal my idea and then try to sell me the products

If I answer a bad comment/talking with a defensive tone... I am the evil guy, even if I'm who has the reason or the one who was damaged

I try to contact magazines, youtubers, publishing houses... at the beginning it may be good, but soon I simply get ignored, by the face

I try to support scientific art, more specifically astronomical art, by writting about it and sharing... I get warned to be sued for even write about it, without even earning a single euro for my time

I spend tons of hours creating content, like music, writting my book, anything... I just need to enter facebook to see the next shit that has become viral

I've created a legendarium, open world, many cultures, complex history... best-seller books are usually infinitely simpler than mine

What am I doing with my life?

Why do I say wikipedia is better than my university career?

I've been saying through years that wikipedia is better than my university, but I want to point that. I'm studying art history in the university of Murcia, Spain. Yes, wikipedia is better, much better. But I don't know about other careers. Probably history would be the same, but I don't think careers as laws or any science careers would be worse than wikipedia (or I don't want to think it). Well, I think any science career could be worse than wikipedia, but all is possible I guess. I think the career I am is worse than wikipedia because it is a very visual and interpretative career. Teachers try to be objective but it is impossible. Not even history is objective, history is written by the victorious elites. And wikipedia also reflects that anyway, but... okay okay, let me continue! We could be discussing this forever, so I will focus in my experience. I repeat, a last time: wikipedia is better than the art history career of university of Murcia in Spain. Do you want to know why?

In first year, I started thinking university was going to be the best, in the sense that I would learn a lot. Let me explain this: I thought I would learn about ALL. I learnt with the subjects of Ancient Egypt/Mesopotamia and Ancient Greece/Rome that it was impossible due to time. I don't blame that teacher, he did the best he could (he is my all-times favourite teacher due to various reasons), but that's a fact. We couldn't see almost nothing of Ancient Rome. Can you believe that? Well, it's true. But it's okay. The first semester was fantastic anyway.

At second semester, happened the first truly impossible subject: Art of High Middle Ages (I guess it is translated so, it is the art since paleochristian to romanesque included - that is, paleochristian, byzantine, prerromanesque (MANY LITTLE STYLES) and romanesque (VERY LONG). Of course, it was impossible, we didn't see anything of romanesque (what a joke!). But the fun doesn't end here. I always studied using internet since first semester to ampliate my knowledges, because I wanted to get a high calification too. I studied very hard for that subject, I studied prerromanesque and romanesque too and ampliated a lot. What did I get in the final calification? A damn 6,5/10, just because some stupid subjective descriptions (yes, I had to put what the teacher wanted to read). Since that moment, I don't care about califications above 5/10. I study for myself completely. But this leads to the next step.

The use of wikipedia began to be more usual due to laziness. I've always been using wikipedia, but also other sources. But the information is the same everywhere (yes, IT IS THE DAMN SAME EVERYWHERE). Teachers saying that "wikipedia is bad", I think it is because they don't want that we access information easily and don't go to class, or maybe because they could lose the job in the future? It's ridicoulus. Say that to a science student but to an art history student like me, say me that wikipedia is bad and I'll just say "please, I got 9/10 in Italian Renaissance studying 95% wikipedia".

Yes, I got 9/10 in that subject by studying 95% wikipedia. That's legit. Since that time, I have no faith in this career. Of course, there are some subjects that I couldn't study from wikipedia (Philosophy in art, Theory of art history...). Those subjects were fantastic in the classes. But those subjects could be counted with the fingers of 1 hand. For nearly all others: wikipedia. I'm sorry. Sometimes is not the teacher, it is how the subject is planned. I think it is ridicoulus, but if I can get more knowledge in wikipedia than in class, why should I go to class?

If a teacher is reading this, I just can say something: make the subject interesting and people will go to class. There will always be complaints, but it is better to show many artworks with no much talking than to talk about a single artwork for two months (that also happened with a subject but that's another story). The best teachers are the ones that can teach much content of the best way possible. When classes become boring, it's time to go to wikipedia. It is faster and with more information.

WIKIPEDIA RULES!

The Death of Art

Welcome to my blog. Here I will just write random things, mostly about art and personal experiences. As artist (musical composer) and art historian (still studying but wikipedia is better than university so who cares), sometimes I have seen many stupid things and injustices in this suposedly modern world.

Let me explain why I have called it "The Death of Art". It is something the philosopher Hegel said in the Romanticism. As I'm lazy to explain it again, I'll just copy-paste a text I wrote some years ago about Philosophy in Art. Just the fragment of Hegel that explains this concept.

He speaks of the history of art. Depending on the time, the work will have the same consciousness that one has. Thus he distinguishes three stages. The first is the symbolic art (Eastern, Indian, Persian, Egyptian ...) dominated by lack of unity in the expression, between content and form. The spirit has no awareness that it is he who builds the story, and is incapable of ordering nature. They are dominated by gods who are the forces of nature. Architecture dominates. The second stage is classical art, Greek-Roman, especially Greek. Self-awareness. The spirit is taking shape. The Greek gods have human form, and expressed values. Polytheism. Nature dominated, harmonious, perfect, beautiful art. Domina sculpture. The weakness of this art is given when they appear as complex ideas that can not be represented. Christian and Romantic art, or, which is the theological stage arises. a symbolism because there is no way appropriate to the spirit material is given. Art is superador in theology and philosophy. Dominate the painting, music and poetry, which is nearly philosophy. Finally, modern society can only explain things with philosophy and science, and religion and art serves. "The symbolic art is still in search of the ideal, classical art has found, and the romantic art has passed."
       That is why Hegel speaks of the end of art. "Art is, as to its ultimate destination, thing of the past". The art exists, but not with the function that has had in antiquity, as his supreme destiny was to express idea of thought, but it can not hope to do with the need of the past, now only philosophy can express the true knowledge. Now art production shall be free to enjoy and reflect on the art itself. Anesthetic society geared toward the general and the utility. Theoretical attitude toward art. He loses its necessity, but gains freedom.

Summarizing, he refers as "death of art" to the fact that art cannot be the way to express the ideas, because the ideas are too complex. The instrument to express these complex ideas is philosophy, or science. But what are the consequences of this? Also I must remember something: there is a man called Walter Benjamin that talked about the reproductibility of art. That is, we live in a current era where everyone can enjoy art, but not only that, everyone can produce art since industrial revolution.

Consequences? As everything, there is a good thing and a bad thing about this. The good thing is that everyone can create art, and that is wonderful. The bad thing... well, I'll let that for my rage posts ;)

Art is dead, will it resurrect someday?