Plaidoyer pour l'art

Three years earlier born than Maurice Ravel, on March 7th, 1872 his fate was to become a painter: Piet Mondrian.

Do I (particularly) 'love' this kind of art?

No.

Why would I mention him then?

To attract your attention to an impressive post by A Doubtful Egg.

He's written a wonderful plaidoyer pour l'art.

Take your time. You'll regret rien. :)

Snail's Dream

Had I followed my intention you would now read a short story, afterwards watch a short film and then ...

Anticipating the then :) I decided to not manipulate your thoughts and feelings with my writing, but leave you alone with the film.

Voilà.

On Harold Pinter in Every-Man's Land

Nobel Lecture: Arts, Truth & Politics Warning: The above is nothing for contemporaries who 'have no(t 46 minutes) time for such things'. Brief personal note, especially for those ... experts who got het up when Harold Pinter in 2005 was awarded the Nobelprize: Once in the 70th of the past millennium two outstanding performances of No-Man's Land made me curious to read Pinter's plays: One in the Old Vic (London) with (Sir) John Gielgud as Spooner and Ralph Richardson as Hirst, the other in Schloßpark Theater (Berlin) with Martin Held (Hirst) and Bernhard Minetti (Spooner). If any ... expert had asked me then, f.e. 'Who's better - Nobel Laureate Thomas Mann or Harold Pinter?' - my answer had not been 'Thomas Mann'. Well, the two gentlemen may discuss this in 'Every-Man's Land'. D.i.P. [Discuss in Peace]

Sometimes one has to be cruel

Yesterday, watching an interview with Marlene Dumas on her exhibition Measuring Your Own Grave, the last sentence read:

"You have to be cruel - against yourself ... and others."

And I thought by myself: Hm. Yes. Sometimes.

Natural Arts

Click to enlarge

A Pook is Here

Death needs time for what it kills to grow in.*

With thanks to the Doubtful Egg who posted this on Master Flann's birthday which is probably why I'd have felt reminded of Sweeney when the Pook appeared sitting in the tree.


Note:
Similarities to persons living or dead is purely incidental.
Those feeling offended are meant. :)

Shhh ...

My thoughts are with you, Janice.


Sometimes words are shallow, however deep from the bottom of one's heart they may come.

And therefore, I have been hesitating.

However, one title, one picture, a poem and some added lines have touched me so deeply that I wish you may also see them and - who knows? - ponder about ... share my thoughts and feelings and ... gain a bit new strength ... for life.

Yes!

Cage as Cage could

As everyone knows July 5th was 'Changing of the Tone' in Halberstadt. Just in case you happened not to be amongst those round about 1.000 connoisseurs in St Burchardi who all excitedly earwitnessed the thrilling moment, and therefore feel inconsolable: the spheric sound will not change until - remember, remember! - the 5th of November.
So when arriving on November 4th you will be able to kill two b ... ahem ... to hear two tones of the John-Cage-project ORGAN² ASLSP within 24 hours.

Well, and in cage case you can't get enough, what about booking one of the remaining 631 years? Personally, I intended to book the year 2525, but then I thought I should retreat in favour of Zager and Evans. Since I have been ranging between 2632 and 2320, the more as 2639 is already sold, but right now I think I shall ask them to offer 2640. I'd really like listening to the silence, after 639 years.



PS:
In honour of John Cage I have been writing this post though not as slowly as possible, but at least very very slowly.
And I am quite sure that not only those amongst you who can't read fast will appreciate my gesture.

PPS: For those who wish to buy one or more of the words above: There will soon be a price-list available.

PPPS: Solvent Omnium-lovers who wish to book one or more posts to be published from October onwards, with immediate effect can offer their bids. Just don't be shy - bid high.

Achtung!

There's an essay to be found at God-Free-Morals.
Read it, and dare you not to have your say.





May I ask for your kind attention, please.

Although my esteemed reader latest on reading the title, will easily have detected this is not my style I want to assure:

Only in order to have some piece and quiet I followed ... hm ... an advice - mind you, not obeyed a command) in the comment section to the previous post.

Is 'Finnegans Wake' a Novel?

- Which was said by whem to whom?

- It wham. But whim I can't whumember.

- Fantasy! funtasy on fantasy, amnaes fintasies! And there is nihil nuder under the clothing moon. When Ota, weewahrwificle of Torquells, bumpsed her dumpsydiddle down in her woolsark she mode our heuteyleutey girlery of peerlesses to set up in all bombossities of feudal fiertey, fanned, flounced and frangipenned, while the massstab whereby Ephialtes has exceeded is the measure, simplex mendaciis, by which our Outis cuts his truth. Arkaway now!

- Yerds and nudes say ayes and noes. Vide! Vide!

- Let Eivin bemember for Gates of Gold for their fadeless suns berayed her. Irise, Osirises! By thy mouth given unto thee! For why do you lack a link ...

More according the link later. :)

The passage above you'd find on page 493 when - as I did - randomly opening the Faber edition from 1975, which I typed to give those amongst you who would not read Finnegans Wake once a week a glimpse of what it's about.

Now being a Joyce expert, what's your answer to the question which is heading this post?

Careful, though.
Of course, for those contemporaries delectating themselves with mocking that poor Joyce would have written like Flann O'Brien had he not been completely ding-dong, the answer is easy.
However, is it? What will be the likely criteria to say or even enthusiastically shout 'Yes, it is!' or after a demonstrative yawn to groan in agony: 'No!' ?

Whatever the answer will be, it is a matter of taste. An excellent taste, of course. :)

And either one says 'Yes' or 'No', (s)he will claim to be in possession of the most exquisite taste.

Now, this could create one of those brainteasing and riddling conundrums, the more as ... what did Oscar say? About taste you can't argue; either you have it, or you have it not.

Who is right, then?

End of the beforegoing.

Let me rather create the above mentioned link.

Chris, philosopher and poet at Godfree-Morals has posted a - to my taste :) - remarkable essay. Indeed, it's an essay that I could not have written, not even if I did not happen to be ding-dong.

In the hope to create a vivid exchange of ideas, both a suggestion and a request: The discussion should take place at Chris' site, so that one can read it in one piece.


PS: For those finding this subject as interesting as the breaking news that there has been a cucumber glass detonation in Caracas: Do as if you had never read this post.
After all, it's a matter of taste, isn't it. :)

All others: Enjoy.

Spreading Mr. O'Donnell's delight

Oh dear.

Just in time I remembered that only yesterday I came to learn that long posts put most people off, and hence one should try to keep it to three or four paragraphs, and thus deleted the 69 paragraphs I had composed in order to give you a brief introduction why I'd spread Mr. O'Donnell's delight.

Alright then: Herewith it's done.



Ah, 'or four'. This offers me the opportunity to wish my esteemed readers a most pleasant weekend. :)

Impression, soleil levant

This work painted by Claude Monet in 1872, or rather the first word of its title - Impression, soleil levant / Impression, sunrise -, arrogance demonstrated by the French Academy of Arts, the decison of artists such as Cézanne, Degas, Monet, Pissaro and Renoir to exhibit their works in a Paris salon on April 15th, 1874 plus a mocking critic - and born was the Impressionism.

Great art ... is preeminently and finally
the expression of the spirits of great men.
[Martha Graham]

... and may I add: women. :)