Tag: Art

Philosophy – “Why Abstraction is the Destruction of Art” – 3/11/2022

“The creation of art is just as it is, before destroyed. When it is destroyed, the destruction is not another creation because creation cannot follow a domino effect without it becoming mass production. A routine, according to a domino effect, is therefore not creative. Creativity is spontaneous inspiration, the effect of lust, or the willingness to create without desire for its purpose or utility. Creation simply exists, not to any specific end, though will create of its own without the routine-driven energies that drive what repetition does, being to deaden meaning.”

– Modern Romanticism

What gets destroyed? Meaning. Meaning is non-existent with death, because to the grieving individual lost without meaning for what had existed, is ignorant to know that love does not die, does not lose all meaning. In life, there is truth. In death, there seems for grieving individuals the absence of all meaning. That is depression.

It is because of loss that within all things dark, void, or non-existent of truth, there is death, though also the denial for what does not die. Love cannot die, because memories are unable to meet death at their end. Then, why does an artist’s works live on, when death meets the life of the artist? That is because of the presence of love given to what goes on, being the works that like children to a mother, are there to carry the flame of memory. When death is what corrupts the grieving individual’s heart to see no meaning in life, there is meant to be understanding to the perfection of love in how it perfects meaning. We cannot destroy love, cannot declare God to be truly dead, without sheer denial in question to the meaning of life.

Life holds meaning. Death lacks all meaning in its place of absence. If art can be abstract, then abstraction is a murderer. If someone can believe the mass-produced artwork is meaningful, then they’ve contradicted themselves on their supposed understandings of art. Art is, not ever something specific, though is. Art simply is, because it cannot be subjective. Objective, as art is, to meanings that are not specific, because specifics follow the numerical. If a numerical is ever meaningful, then we have found meaning in death.

If there is meaning in death, then we can state to the grieving individual to remain in grief, out of our cruelty within such words, because that is same to believe they should find healing within their depression. As one cannot fell a building without stating the building was once created, the felled building is an example of chaos. Who says to the earthquake that destroys a village that what is viewed of suffering and loss of shelter is something beautiful and meant to be admired? In the belief that a person who is homeless is beautiful, as homeless, is perhaps to mean that their conditions of life should never be improved. This person, in viewing death or loss or poverty to be beautiful would not ever lift a finger to aid those in distress.

Chaos is not the creation, as abstraction is not. Abstraction or chaos is the absence of order, as things such as order, life, or truth are creations. Life depicts itself as truthful, for every individual is able to create their own stories to tell out of experiences. If abstract art is ever truthful, then what was created to begin with? As in, what of abstract art is the creation, if its intention is to break the rules and boundaries of art? And if those boundaries are broken without the rules being first learned, then what has been broken? In the same sense, can a building be destroyed before it was created? It cannot. Since it cannot, then no abstraction can be itself without the acknowledgement that life, truth, and all manner of creation is being destroyed. This is the same mindset as someone who would find a bloodbath or bloody massacre to be beautiful, with the luxury of not knowing those who died. It is that luxury, because those who know the pain of loss are those who crave to understand what is still meaningful.

Philosophy – “On the Connection of Prejudice with the Celebration of Diversity” – 1/16/2022

“What else is different, other than what we can notice, at first glance? Upon the surface, there lies the difference. Beyond the surface, we notice something else. We notice ourselves.”

– Modern Romanticism

There is nothing diverse between humans, other than what we see, at first glance. The way a person who is familiar with art can tell the difference between styles is the same in one person telling the same kind of difference, always existent upon the surface. Upon the surface, there lies the difference. If an experienced artist also knowledgeable of differing art styles can read, at first glance, a Van Gogh painting from a Rembrandt painting, it is not the same in understanding the art. When an artist wants to be understood, they cannot without specific trials from the viewer. For how a person, not an artist, wants to be understood, there will be involvement of those same trials from another, who is a viewer, to get past both prejudice and the surface.

Diversity believes in the celebration of what is different, though what is different is always noticed at first glance. We see difference, immediately. We are also instantly hesitant to approach, to understand someone, soon when we see that difference. Then, to celebrate diversity among peoples is to perhaps unknowingly feed into prejudice.

Cultures are different, though it is the same as art. A style. If we can notice Mexican culture from a simple detail as a sombrero, to French cuisine in another spot of their life as the breakfast crepe, we can tell what is different from the surface. We walk into another country to see the lives among it, though again, these differences are only upon the surface. When we, as humans, are willing to see beyond the surface, this becomes both a negative and a positive. First, we would no longer notice what is different among culture and art forms. Second, we would no longer be prejudiced, because we always exhibit this trait whenever we are fearful to come closer to understand something other than what is instantly recognized.

For what is different, that is the surface. For what is the same, that is beyond the exterior to where a person can say to another, “We are the alike.”

While an artist would like to be understood, they have no choice other than to reveal their art style, being the identity of themselves, upon the surface of their work. The same as a race to a person, this art style will be immediately recognized. However, that is all that is recognized, when a person sees the exterior. Should a viewer examine closer, they will see something else. They’ll notice themselves. How many restaurants does a person pass, within their vehicle in some other direction? Had they seen the culture that creates the food, within the cuisine. All these are the differences of art. However, to know the cook to such meals, in those restaurants, and then to befriend them, one sees themselves. One sees what is the same, of both. There is then neither the difference in art, nor the difference in background. There are only humans.

Humans comprehend each other in seeing something that has always been there. What is different, for the surfaces, exists only to conceal what is the same.

Philosophy Series – “Of Art” – On Eternity – Pt. 1 – 12/15/2021

“Not in the moment, though in the past. A direction is the same as a reflection into something indiscernible and blurred, though made comprehensive and clear when drawn for the future.”

– Modern Romanticism

There is never something so beautiful as what a person can forgive. Then, each angle is not so much needed to be plain for view. Every crease and angle, among other imperfections, were always there. We comprehend now that we had simply been blinded to them. History takes us into places that could be dark, though are merely the most misunderstood realms. Art is the intrusion upon our illusions, of what holds history encased in a frame. An intrusion, that is, upon what we wanted to stay as peace, though was always a momentary sliver of escapism. A person escapes, not from the future, though from the past. The one who is unwilling to face what is before them is in fear that what will arise from their actions will only repeat their past mistakes.

Eternity is not to the future, though to the past. Art is eternal, in this description. Art conveys what we did not wish to know. That is, truth. All humans resist the truth, since it is a far easier method to see deception as the clarity. From ease to complication, there is a singular difference between deceit and truth. The difference is that the truth will be complex to accept, though will clear the life and mind of its complications. Whereas deceit will be easiest to accept, though will cause within both life and mind innumerable complexities.

Deceit is the spiderweb, indeed meant for the fly to become tangled. What is art, for all this? Art is the place of memory. Again, art is the truth that a person resists, due to the common feeling that history should be ignored. However, when history is embraced, we forgive its troubles that had caused us to live only in the moment, apart from fearing our mistake’s own repetition.

There are our roots. Art acknowledges this. All dark places within history tell us something to be forgiven. Why would the abstraction of an artwork need to place a mote of directness upon what is imperfect, when the art, itself, is already so? Art is imperfect, thus it will be changed when discontent, to the artist, wishes there to be something new. Though, the act of replacement cannot be for the space of what will remain, until it receives such forgiveness. When we forgive, we comprehend another person or thing as fragile as ourselves. Forgiveness allows someone to see rigidness, brokenness, and edges that had existed, though along with a person ignoring truth, they have resisted noticing it.

In the eternity being of art, the past is never more certain than what is ordered within the painting or other work. The artist has ordered their personal history into the piece. Otherwise, the artist has ordered what is believed by themselves to not be understood of the past, then turning it apart from its chaotic place among another’s perceptions. Although, their so-called version of order cannot put directness upon the understanding of imperfection. To imperfection, it is not meant to be direct. We do not notice it, because it is beneath the flesh. That is, it is beneath what a person first notices. If art counteracts a person’s blindness to imperfection by making it direct in the artwork, then the artist has misunderstood that all judgmental humans have seen the flaw, before. To see it, again, would cause them to ignore it, once again. The only option left to the artist is to force understanding into the judgmental person by changing the world to appear directly imperfect. Instead, what should occur to reveal, upon the art, is something far more intrinsic and subtle for the viewer. This is to stage the allowance for the viewer to see truth, as though it was not seen before. As human imperfection is their truth or personal history, forgiveness is the more likely outcome when the art can tell a story. Since subtlety is opposite from being direct, then it will not be a simple reminder. It will be, for the judgmental viewer, something relatable to themselves.

What art or what world can cure the process of a person being deceived by their own limited perceptions, if not through the creations that would allow a person to think for a second time? If at the first time, truth had been to a judgmental human as something to only think on, per those judgements, then the second time will allow them to think again, in not being the simple reminder to what they have always judged. Art is true, when it can clarify the past for unity between one viewer to the next. Each reflection will notice the same thing.

Quote – “What Makes Art Eternal?” – 12/1/2021

“Art, the past. Art, the memory. Love, the art, because art cannot be forgotten. That art will bring the memories, painful and despairing, a deserved soft peace. Led into comfort, through art. Led into Heaven, through art. Art is eternal, because a memory cannot be forgotten. No, it can only be accepted. What changes the past? Nothing does. What changes something so beautiful, as what is meant to be art? Nothing should. A change upon beauty would erode it, damage it. Are we always accepting of such damages? We are not. But those damages will be seen in the art, nevertheless. Those imperfections had been sculpted, and they had made us notice ourselves, of what history did to hurt us. If nothing should change beauty, then improvement or healing will require knowing ourselves. To know ourselves as wounded and pained, and then to see the art that is the mirror. Art is eternal in what reflects.”

– Modern Romanticism

Quote – “What is Art?” – 11/22/2021

“Art cannot be said to reference chaos, because chaos is not a creation. If specific art is said to be a representation of chaos, though was also created, then this is contradictory. Art is a creation, though chaos is not. Chaos is merely the absence of creation, because one cannot create what is chaotic. Order is created, though chaos is merely the absence of order. If it is the artist’s task to make sense or order of themselves through the piece, then they will create. If it is a mother’s belief that she sees herself in her child, then it was because her child is a creation. It is then that the art is not deceptive, though truthful. It is then that art is not the chaos of death or absence, though of life and presence.”

– Modern Romanticism

Philosophy Series – “Of Art” – Pt. 2 – 8/21/2021

“It is unity that portrays the repetition of educational experiences. Wisdom must be passed in the direction of creation, so as not to end order into chaos. It is unity that then portrays itself in what should not be distorted of either portrait or landscape into something less than recognizable. A face that can be mirrored by a reality or the landscape that were always one’s surroundings should not be mutilated nor burned for the simple sake of the ignorance that is against unity.”

– Modern Romanticism

While art can be said to be anything, it is with ease that this could be told. If art, an anything, then it is a deceptive nothingness. If to be “any” could be similar to what is “any” source for perhaps the essay, then it may as well be deception. Any and all, the references to deception, are so in that nothing specific could come by this.

Continue reading “Philosophy Series – “Of Art” – Pt. 2 – 8/21/2021″

Philosophy Series – “Of Art” – Pt. 1 – 7/30/2021

“Art can be recognized as truthful. If not art so visually appealing, then its role becomes one of function. Function, by itself, cannot be sustained, as it eventually dies alongside the artist. Would art be eternal, then it remains truthful. Would art be truthful, then its creator, its artist, its mother can die, with much ease, that the creation will live on.”

– Modern Romanticism

Recognize art as truthful, not deceitful. To perceive art as subjective, as interpretable to the viewer of “any”, it becomes broken down. Breaking down meaning will conform itself to “any” source of judgement, that could be nothing in reference to truth. Since “any” source would not be questioned, it becomes then the interpretation unable to be subjected. What means to subject, is same to deconstruct. The interpretation to the art, therefore, cannot be dismantled. Though, the art was, rendering the miniature piece, the interpretation, as the deception.

Corruption is compelled to be witnessed as the act of uplifting poverty. It is not poverty that should be raised, though the impoverished. Those individuals so impoverished, as it is truthful art that would elevate them. To elevate poverty is to call ugliness as beautiful. This is corruption, much as how artwork so diminished of quality is a mere function to monetary gain. Would one find ugliness as beautiful, then the same individual could perhaps find contentment in spending an ungodly sum on table scraps for their meal.

It is untruthful art, deceitful works, that were subjected to the rule of an opinion. Would just any viewer interpret it, mostly from the uneducated mind, a breakdown process to the objectivism within truthful art causes the chaos. Would an impoverished individual recognize themselves in it, then their awareness to their world to the artwork’s own becomes matched.

Creation unto causation, is the act of disordering order into chaos. If order is among creation, then chaos is among causation, making what is beautiful as ordered and truthful. Beauty is ordered, because it cannot be destroyed. It is protected, much like how a mother guards her children.

Chaos is caused, as it cannot be created. None can create what is chaotic, meaning that untruthful art cannot be art.

What is meant as a function is not art, since eternity cannot be subjected into limitation. It is then an impossible feat to subject the eternity of art, without replacing it with what art is not.

Art is the eternal. The artist dies to just then be recognized for their creations, in the same manner as wisdom is passed down to offspring.

Philosophy – “Why Post-Modernism Causes Poverty” – 4/15/2021

“That which is beautiful cannot be seen for the grime in what is impoverished. An abstraction can be to such a word, in being impoverished, though to be simply lacking. As poverty has its meaning upon what is lost, then beauty will be for what is gained.”

– Modern Romanticism

Post-Modernism has comprehended one thing: that the greater to be practical overcomes what is ever only deemed as beautiful. Yet, it is never the preservation of a creation, relating so much to life and to truth, that whatever is hideous will ever be. To the things only ever deemed as useful, their preservation shall come as limited. Would we treat life this way? Are we to treat all creation in this manner, even of art to the abandoned child?

We cannot treat art as any different than life. Both are creations. To either’s preservation, we are not meant to comprehend the useful or practical as needed for its extension. How do we preserve the food? We do, until it is eaten. How do we preserve life? It is by sacrificing what is meant to disappear, being the material.

From the immaterial to the material, there is art or creation for the former and there is the useful or the practical for the latter. Neither art, nor life, nor truth is meant to be confused as material. It is forever. If buried, then it is alive beneath the figurative earth.

It is the beautiful that is meant to be preserved, relating to life. Beautiful life does not compare to hideous death, nor the trampled impoverished. The impoverished are hideous, as that is just one bitter truth. No matter the taste, one must swallow all meaning to truth. For that is because it is the sweet sort of medicines that resonate as deception, not truth.

Being beautiful, one has lived. One has ascended past poverty. In truth, a comprehension for life not being among the dust, and then one has made themselves beautiful and whole in awareness.

If not Post-Modernism, then love.

If Post-Modernism, then let decay.

Philosophy – “Of Art, Realism versus the Artistic” – 12/29/2020

“Some might repeat that art should remain as is, and they’d be right, if no artist was ever deceived by the idea that ‘realism’ should take more prominence on the canvas, over their surroundings.”

– Modern Romanticism

Hyper-realism, in art, possesses no “art” of itself, due to that such paintings of such realism attempt to mimic reality. Even a photograph can only become so “realistic” to the point where a limit is soon discovered. This makes the “artistic” become something so unlimited in its diversity. It makes the “realistic” become limited in what can be created from it. In fact, realism is limited to being a singular in style. Realism cannot be diversified.

An artist is the perfection, as a creator to art, though imperfect with what they’ve personally perceived, or understood, can be mimicked or replicated upon the canvas.

Individualism represents the artist, making nothing of itself able to be criticized nor corrected. How can one better their style of art, to even one’s own comprehension to who they are at their core, without all crumbling?

One can only step into another style of art, so that empathy is lived through the artist to understand another walk of life. To reveal the most realism upon the canvas would never compete with neither the photograph, nor the other artist’s hyper-realism upon their own canvas. How can realism compete with realism, if not becoming one entire painting, or one entire depiction?

As an artist steps into another style of art, they jump into another skin, and thus, become not something more, though something else. Their depiction for what is empathized with, soon becomes the portrayal upon the canvas. In this case, the “canvas” represents the repeated process of imperfection, in the same sense as a child is born.

This is an artist’s way of empathizing with something not so realistic, being of others, revealed as distortion upon the canvas. Mimicking something imperfect is a way for an artist to understand all that is possible to be perceived, or taken in direct relation. Though, it is never to the direct relation for the artist, being perfect, as much as it is more for an artist to simply replicate the distortion of what is understood. This is how an artist understands art, as art. It is a way for an artist to mimic what is seen of others, of surroundings, being of people’s imperfections, and their creation’s imperfections. As individualism cannot be corrected, it is then through unification that an artist has another color upon their palette.

And, as an artist gains inspiration from other art, it is all the same. Though, is it ever possible for an artist to become inspired at something depicted as “hyper-realistic” for the canvas?

Even of the world, of creations done by human hands, such are the imperfections than an artist mimics through a variation of styles. Though, what style is perfection? There is none, by that simply mimicking what is realistic, will halt the empathy for any imperfection meant to be repeated. Such only ever dries the cycle of empathy unto art. It is due to perfection being unable to be perceived nor understood, that any hint of it will not allow the empathy from an artist to see any “depth” to such realism.

Philosophy – “Why Certain Sorts Praise Hitler… beyond the Grave” – 12/20/2020

“Why does any artist receive their fame, soon as they’ve escaped this world, through the grave, now dead? It is in us always considering creation, before causation, that we say to even an evil artist, that when they’re dead, they can no longer cause others to be dead. It is to creation, that makes the living person a shocking symptom of truth, because when they die, truth is all to be seen.”

– Modern Romanticism

Art.

Creation.

And, causation.

Art is only ever creation, as creation is from the artist and is also themselves. Upon the death of life, of creation, we see only what was made, by the once-living, by the artist. Sculpted about us in varying intricacies, being only what is able to become seen by remaining life, by the remaining viewers.

Art objectively does not stand for chaos, unless materialism is to the living artist’s motto, and never to the soul of themselves depicted in their work.

Under chaos, art works as numbers, praising the death of others, praising the death of life, of objectivism in truth. By this, art that causes, or speaks for itself on causation, kills originalism by way of the roots. Therefore, art that cites itself on numbers, kills the universal away.

Hitler, having killed, was an artist of the latter sort. Yet, by his death, we see only his very creations. It is by the death of anything, that we see the good of what died, by our remembrances to their once-living selves. We forgive the life that died, knowing our criticism cannot extend to the death of a life to become better, for it is now too late.

Forgiveness acts upon faith, comprehending to life that it will be better, keeping our trust up in that regard. If Hitler is said to be a genius, it was only due to an inevitability of life’s psychological understanding of itself, of life understanding life, and of life comprehending truth. Each thing of truth, is life, is what decays, and soon to become the enemy of chaos. For chaos is against life. Chaos is for death. Chaos is for the decay of truth, into sheer deception, that the garden of Eden might appear autumnal so that everything falls, with beginnings into endings.

We forgive the life that died, inevitably so, that we understand Hitler to have been the evil artist, becoming forgiven for the sake of our awareness to truth. That truth? It is the truth of what remaining life metaphysically pulls from the metaphysical realm, being of goodness, no matter how small. Even of the monster, we pull from memories, never the badness that would equate to chaos or causation. We simply do not remember death, by death. We remember life, by death. Therefore, we do not remember what Hitler caused, though by what he created, simply by recognizing humanity that it was buried under the pressure of its own guilt.

It is there to be known for why we remember life, being the same reason that we remember art. It is that we remember what remains, being of surrounding life, being of the once-living’s existence that still lingers. In this, we grieve even for monsters.

Philosophy – “Why Art should Touch on the Internal, over the External” – 12/6/2020

“There are many ways to look at the world, to perceive through various arrangements the differing colors we behold. Though, when does a person ever look within themselves, to pull out some embedded pain that they rarely wish to see?”

– Modern Romanticism

Of the world, it is in what we have created or caused. Like the world, ourselves show a reflection in a mirror, where we may or may not, or simply not wish to see something too hideous to understand. It is not something we should share love to, for that comes easy. We should share trust to it, for those demons within would become beautiful, when placed upon the canvas, or the page, or anything else, as art.

All hideousness that grows within ourselves, can become the most beautiful spectacles, when released into the expression. For that is how we peacefully empty loads. To make something another person could connect to, extinguishes the burning flame of loneliness. For when we make that kind of art, we are no longer hiding in the darkness of such pain. We have moved ourselves, in the inspiration it took to create it, as we move another person, out of what courage for them it took to look upon it.

There are people who would be proud for their pain, proud for their scars, though these are the sorts who are never able to drop their pride, to release that past into the expression. Into tears, or into a simple artwork, requires no special skill. As it is, love is a talent, making this innate part of ourselves meant to come forth, into the open arms of another individual, for their understanding to it.

Love does not die. Though, trust can. When trust receives the noose, there is distance both from ourselves, then from other people. If art can be that which a person normally does not look upon, due to fear, it can be pure.

Artists will make art based on what is around them. Though, such often enters the realms of the political, the social, and the environmental. Were a human, as an artist, or an artist, as a human, to see within, they’d find something long buried. Looking within, a person can be “deep” with their expression, allowing the embrace to another person, as the viewer or appreciator, to enter a comfort that is, as well, deep. Deep, as to be sunken in the bedsheets after a day’s worth of labor.

Humans hide things, do not reveal their flaws, and conceal their sorrows. We are never beautiful, when we are enclosed. Though, the artist who hides, is not a one, at all. We can make art all about the political, though without creativity nor imagination, involved. Such things, we see every day. Though, when is the day a person will look within, to drag out something they do not wish to see?

It is a coward’s way to follow the word of a politician. It is bravery’s way to follow the word of mouth, as an individual. Having a voice, as an artist, is the only way a person will never separate themselves from another, by means of that external stimuli. They can, in fact, be motivated and inspired by someone to trust, because they’ve closed the gap of their distance to them.