russellmoreton.blogspot.com

 

Spatial Bodies : Visual Art Materialisms~Processual Workings - Russell Moreton 2012

  

Let's step back from materialism ruling the world. Look over the wall.

 

 

(more) PENGUINS in the grass

This is the Visitor Center and Gift shop windchimes are sold.

 

I first visited Cosanti in 1968. There was nothing around it in this part of Paradise Valley and it was still being built. Things sure have changed. Paolo Soleri would probably be appalled by what grew up around his vision that is the compete antithesis of his vision.

 

I live about 2 miles north of here, but I had never made time to photograph it. I made time.

 

www.arcosanti.org/cosanti-foundation/

Founded in 1965, The Cosanti Foundation is an Arizona-based 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization.

Our mission is to inspire a reimagined urbanism that builds resilient and equitable communities sustainably integrated with the natural world.

Our vision is a world of equitable communities which improve earth/life balance and do better with less.

We pursue this mission and vision at our two flagship locations, Cosanti (in Paradise Valley near Phoenix) and Arcosanti (near Mayer in central Arizona), as well as with projects, programs, and partnerships that hundreds of thousands of people have participated in over the last 57 years.

The word “cosanti” is a combination of the Italians words “cosa” (meaning “things”) and “anti” (meaning “against” or “before”). It signifies The Cosanti Foundation’s commitment to a way of living, working, and building that is oriented away from consumption and materialism, and is respectful of our planet’s natural rhythms and resources. Through ongoing experimentation with and application of the principles of arcology (a combination of the words architecture and ecology), we seek to demonstrate a kind of construction and community that offers an alternative to sprawl development and a solution to modern social and environmental crises.

The Cosanti Foundation also owns and operates the for-profit Cosanti Originals, where we make our world-famous bronze and ceramic windbells and other artisan items.

 

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paolo_Soleri

Paolo Soleri (21 June 1919 – 9 April 2013)[1] was an Italian-born American architect. He established the educational Cosanti Foundation and Arcosanti. Soleri was a lecturer in the College of Architecture at Arizona State University and a National Design Award recipient in 2006. He coined the concept of 'arcology' – a synthesis of architecture and ecology as the philosophy of democratic society.[2] He died at home of natural causes on 9 April 2013 at the age of 93.[3]

Soleri authored several books, including The Bridge Between Matter & Spirit is Matter Becoming Spirit and Arcology – City In the Image of Man.[4]

Soleri was born in Turin, Italy, Europe. He was awarded his "laurea" (master's degree) in architecture from the Politecnico di Torino in 1946. He visited the United States in December 1946 and spent a year and a half in fellowship with Frank Lloyd Wright at Taliesin West in Arizona, and at Taliesin in Spring Green, Wisconsin. During this time, he gained international recognition for a bridge design that was displayed at the Museum of Modern Art.[5]

Paolo and Colly Soleri made a lifelong commitment to research and experimentation in urban planning. They established the Cosanti Foundation, a not-for-profit 501(c)(3) educational non-profit foundation. Soleri's philosophy and works were strongly influenced by the Jesuit paleontologist and philosopher Pierre Teilhard de Chardin.[citation needed]

 

DSC04114-HDR acd

15 mar 2020

portraits - Type 4

 

optical materialism paintograph with household materials

 

Camera: Pentax K-50 16 Mpixel Digital SLR + Carl Zeiss Jenna 2.8/ 50mm via extension tube

The lotus (Sanskrit and Tibetan padma) is one of the most poignant representations of Buddhist teaching.

 

It's been said in esoteric Buddhism, the heart of a being is like an unopened lotus: when the virtues of the Buddha develop therein, the lotus blossoms; that is why the Buddha sits on a lotus bloom.

 

The roots of a lotus are in the mud, the stem grows up through the water, and the heavily scented flower lies pristinely above the water, basking in the sunlight. This pattern of growth signifies the progress of the soul from the primeval mud of materialism, through the waters of experience, and into the bright sunshine of enlightenment.

 

For more on Lotus symbolism, reference:

www.vagabondjourney.com/90-ch-005-lotus-flower-symbolism....

 

For more of my images, please see:

www.garygrossmanphotography.com

Digital photograph mosaic on canvas (2008)

 

125 cm X 90 cm Limited edition prints (18 + 2 AP)

 

From a series of works entitled “Illusional Reality and Dependent Origination”.

 

Below is an excerpt of an explanation for this series by the artist as translated from the Chinese original:

 

"A portrait of ‘Lei Feng’, who was held up as a social role model in China during the 1950’s and 1960’s, alternatively may be composed of innumerable photos of the covers of ‘VISION’, a model magazine for leading trends in fashion, so as to juxtapose the value orientations of two different eras and contexts within the same two-dimensional picture - entering into a wholly new quadrant resulting from the disintegration of time and space. In fact, it possesses an utter ‘virtuality’. " --- Wang Lang

I first visited Cosanti in 1968. There was nothing around it in this part of Paradise Valley and it was still being built. Things sure have changed. Paolo Soleri would probably be appalled by what grew up around his vision that is the compete antithesis of his vision.

 

I live about 2 miles north of here, but I had never made time to photograph it. I made time.

 

www.arcosanti.org/cosanti-foundation/

Founded in 1965, The Cosanti Foundation is an Arizona-based 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization.

Our mission is to inspire a reimagined urbanism that builds resilient and equitable communities sustainably integrated with the natural world.

Our vision is a world of equitable communities which improve earth/life balance and do better with less.

We pursue this mission and vision at our two flagship locations, Cosanti (in Paradise Valley near Phoenix) and Arcosanti (near Mayer in central Arizona), as well as with projects, programs, and partnerships that hundreds of thousands of people have participated in over the last 57 years.

The word “cosanti” is a combination of the Italians words “cosa” (meaning “things”) and “anti” (meaning “against” or “before”). It signifies The Cosanti Foundation’s commitment to a way of living, working, and building that is oriented away from consumption and materialism, and is respectful of our planet’s natural rhythms and resources. Through ongoing experimentation with and application of the principles of arcology (a combination of the words architecture and ecology), we seek to demonstrate a kind of construction and community that offers an alternative to sprawl development and a solution to modern social and environmental crises.

The Cosanti Foundation also owns and operates the for-profit Cosanti Originals, where we make our world-famous bronze and ceramic windbells and other artisan items.

 

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paolo_Soleri

Paolo Soleri (21 June 1919 – 9 April 2013)[1] was an Italian-born American architect. He established the educational Cosanti Foundation and Arcosanti. Soleri was a lecturer in the College of Architecture at Arizona State University and a National Design Award recipient in 2006. He coined the concept of 'arcology' – a synthesis of architecture and ecology as the philosophy of democratic society.[2] He died at home of natural causes on 9 April 2013 at the age of 93.[3]

Soleri authored several books, including The Bridge Between Matter & Spirit is Matter Becoming Spirit and Arcology – City In the Image of Man.[4]

Soleri was born in Turin, Italy, Europe. He was awarded his "laurea" (master's degree) in architecture from the Politecnico di Torino in 1946. He visited the United States in December 1946 and spent a year and a half in fellowship with Frank Lloyd Wright at Taliesin West in Arizona, and at Taliesin in Spring Green, Wisconsin. During this time, he gained international recognition for a bridge design that was displayed at the Museum of Modern Art.[5]

Paolo and Colly Soleri made a lifelong commitment to research and experimentation in urban planning. They established the Cosanti Foundation, a not-for-profit 501(c)(3) educational non-profit foundation. Soleri's philosophy and works were strongly influenced by the Jesuit paleontologist and philosopher Pierre Teilhard de Chardin.[citation needed]

 

DSC04053-HDR acd

canvas print optical-materialism macropaintograph 'stranger than fiction' (2020} to be no. 1/25 for delivery to customer for Christmas present to her boyfriend. Not printed it to canvas before. This took some time to arrive which was today some 3 weeks after order. Happy with the ready stretch-framed print may use them again but will make sure enough personal delivery i.d. info is sent with the order next time to get speedier delivery via DHL. Although a UK company i didn't realise it was to print in Italy and shipped from there. Was with DHL-GB Denied Parties for 2 weeks until i managed to send them some passport i.d. with first MIDDLE and surnames. Because of Brexit perhaps crossing borders somehow meant it triggered some sort of 'Denied Parties' list that deals with possible cross-border crime/terrorism due to my name... Jamal Ibrahim. . Maybe. who knows.

 

camera - Pentax K-50 + 3.5/28mm Supermulticoated Takumar M42 lens

 

jAm

oxford UK 16 dec 2021

"Contrived by the corporations, we are hung. We hang limp and poised, to be moved again on that dank hook. We search thoughtlessly, with no mind of our own, for the pinnacle of our cultures ways. No one will reach it. We are all hung. Our legs do not swing and writhe for independent movement, but jolt down the incessant road of overconsumption. We bathe in our ignorance, oblivious to our tempered steps, and wallow in our juggernaut of materialism. We are hung, strung and tied to this way, and that is our way. That is our personal hook." Jonathan David

Indre By (Inner City) in Copenhagen, Denmark.

 

Copenhagen was founded in 1167 by Bishop Absalon, who erected a fortress on Slotsholmen Island, fortifying a small and previously unprotected harbourside village. After the fortification was built, the harbourside village grew in importance and took on the name Kømandshavn (Merchant’s Port), which was later condensed to København. Absalon’s fortress stood until 1369, when it was destroyed in an attack on the town by the powerful Hanseatic states.

 

In 1376 construction began on a new Slotsholmen fortification, Copenhagen Castle, and in 1416 King Erik of Pomerania took up residence at the site, marking the beginning of Cop-enhagen’s role as the capital of Denmark.

 

Still, it wasn’t until the reign of Christian IV, in the first half of the 17th century, that the city was endowed with much of its splendour. A lofty Renaissance designer, Christian IV began an ambitious construction scheme, building two new castles and many other grand edifices, including the Rundetårn observatory and the glorious Børsen, Europe’s first stock exchange.

 

In 1711 the bubonic plague reduced Cop-enhagen’s population of 60, 000 by one-third. Tragic fires, one in 1728 and the other in 1795, wiped out large tracts of the city, including most of its timber buildings. However, the worst scourge in the city’s history is generally regarded as the unprovoked British bombardment of Copenhagen in 1807, during the Napoleonic Wars. The attack targeted the heart of the city, inflicting numerous civilian casualties and setting hundreds of homes, churches and public buildings on fire.

 

Copenhagen flourished in the 19th and 20th centuries, expanding beyond its old city walls and establishing a reputation as a centre for culture, liberal politics and the arts. Dark times were experienced with the Nazi occupation of the city during WWII, although the city managed to emerge relatively unscathed.

 

During the war and in the economic depression that had preceded it, many Copenhagen neighbourhoods had deteriorated into slums. In 1948 an ambitious urban renewal policy called the ‘Finger Plan’ was adopted; this redeveloped much of the city, creating new housing projects interspaced with green areas of parks and recreational facilities that spread out like fingers from the city centre.

 

A rebellion by young people disillusioned with growing materialism, the nuclear arms race and an authoritarian educational system took hold in Copenhagen in the 1960s. Student protests broke out on the university campus and squatters occupied vacant buildings around the city. It came to a head in 1971 when protesters tore down the fence of an abandoned military camp at the east side of Christianshavn and began an occupation of the 41-hectare site, naming this settlement Christiania.

 

Information Source:

www.lonelyplanet.com/denmark/copenhagen/history

 

Some finished artwork at Cosanti.

 

I first visited Cosanti in 1968. There was nothing around it in this part of Paradise Valley and it was still being built. Things sure have changed. Paolo Soleri would probably be appalled by what grew up around his vision that is the compete antithesis of his vision.

 

I live about 2 miles north of here, but I had never made time to photograph it. I made time.

 

www.arcosanti.org/cosanti-foundation/

Founded in 1965, The Cosanti Foundation is an Arizona-based 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization.

Our mission is to inspire a reimagined urbanism that builds resilient and equitable communities sustainably integrated with the natural world.

Our vision is a world of equitable communities which improve earth/life balance and do better with less.

We pursue this mission and vision at our two flagship locations, Cosanti (in Paradise Valley near Phoenix) and Arcosanti (near Mayer in central Arizona), as well as with projects, programs, and partnerships that hundreds of thousands of people have participated in over the last 57 years.

The word “cosanti” is a combination of the Italians words “cosa” (meaning “things”) and “anti” (meaning “against” or “before”). It signifies The Cosanti Foundation’s commitment to a way of living, working, and building that is oriented away from consumption and materialism, and is respectful of our planet’s natural rhythms and resources. Through ongoing experimentation with and application of the principles of arcology (a combination of the words architecture and ecology), we seek to demonstrate a kind of construction and community that offers an alternative to sprawl development and a solution to modern social and environmental crises.

The Cosanti Foundation also owns and operates the for-profit Cosanti Originals, where we make our world-famous bronze and ceramic windbells and other artisan items.

 

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paolo_Soleri

Paolo Soleri (21 June 1919 – 9 April 2013)[1] was an Italian-born American architect. He established the educational Cosanti Foundation and Arcosanti. Soleri was a lecturer in the College of Architecture at Arizona State University and a National Design Award recipient in 2006. He coined the concept of 'arcology' – a synthesis of architecture and ecology as the philosophy of democratic society.[2] He died at home of natural causes on 9 April 2013 at the age of 93.[3]

Soleri authored several books, including The Bridge Between Matter & Spirit is Matter Becoming Spirit and Arcology – City In the Image of Man.[4]

Soleri was born in Turin, Italy, Europe. He was awarded his "laurea" (master's degree) in architecture from the Politecnico di Torino in 1946. He visited the United States in December 1946 and spent a year and a half in fellowship with Frank Lloyd Wright at Taliesin West in Arizona, and at Taliesin in Spring Green, Wisconsin. During this time, he gained international recognition for a bridge design that was displayed at the Museum of Modern Art.[5]

Paolo and Colly Soleri made a lifelong commitment to research and experimentation in urban planning. They established the Cosanti Foundation, a not-for-profit 501(c)(3) educational non-profit foundation. Soleri's philosophy and works were strongly influenced by the Jesuit paleontologist and philosopher Pierre Teilhard de Chardin.[citation needed]

DSC04106-HDR acd

Cathedral Basilica of St. Francis of Assisi, New Mexico, USA

From the exhibition catalogue:

"During a trip to Europe, Liu Ruowang bought a Pinocchio toy as a gift to his child. After telling the story of Pinocchio, the words "puppet" and "lie" continued to torment him. In 2019, he began the sculpture group "Mr Pinocchio". The artist uses extraordinary spatial scale, full of symbolism and metaphors, to express problematic relationships in our modern society. With Pinocchio's character at the centre and a group of contemporaries marching unaware in the endless circle,

the manipulator and manipulated reverse their conventional roles. The soulless "people" have lost control over the soulless "thing". It is becoming impossible to jump out of the strange circle of control and manipulation by "things" in modern society where materialism and money worship prevail. The artist warns people about the seamless lies that encourage material desires, to shake off the shackles of materialism and return to the authentic state of life. Liu hopes to inspire people to think about the origin and nature of lies. Who is the puppeteer? Can manipulated people recognize the lies and, if they do, have they got the will to withstand the puppet's manipulation?"

pilgrimage church, maria königin des friedens, neviges, germany 1963-1972.

architect: gottfried böhm, b.1920.

 

this photo was uploaded with a CC license and may be used free of charge and in any way you see fit.

if possible, please name photographer "SEIER+SEIER". if not, don't.

 

climbing the stairs and galleries that surround the cavernous main space, I found that böhm himself had not settled with accommodating the masses for the pilgrimage which was once a mass event - he had made room for those who must observe things at a distance, in private or within an intimate group of people: he had made room for the individual. and he had done so by offering several priviliged positions from which to witness the ceremonies, the most dramatic of which reminded me of caspar david friedrich's Wanderer über dem Nebelmeer, the portrait of a lone mountaineer or artist pondering the sublime.

 

böhm so clearly connected postwar modernity with german romanticism, not just expressionism.

 

german spirituality is a thing largely forgotten today. the production of cars have taken its place. the cruel parody of german philosophy and culture which served as a justification of nazism saw to that. after 1945, everybody wanted a materialist germany, not least the germans.

 

somehow, you cannot think about german culture without returning to the wars.

 

gottfried böhm's father, dominikus, had been the leading catholic church architect of the reconstruction following WWI. his works are extremely diverse, spanning expressionism, stark romanesque historicism and the most clearheaded modernist sachlichkeit.

 

gottfried himself, in turn, became a leading church architect of the reconstruction after WWII, his works even more diverse, harder to pin down, than those of his father. but he only came that far after serving on the eastern front early in the war. he was injured and returned to germany where he studied sculpture and architecture, nazi style, in münchen.

 

today, his sons are talented church architects, even if their production is considerably smaller than that of the two previous generations, no doubt owing to the delay in the arrival of WWIII...

 

the paradox which is gottfried böhm - politically conservative, religious, yet radically modern - was born out of this: the continuity of the bourgeois dynasty, the family of religious architects, and the inescapable and violent reaction to his war time experiences, be they on the battlefield or in the nazi controlled classrooms of the academy in münchen.

 

there can be no doubt that he felt a new language of building had to be developed after the collapse - and not least moral collapse - of german culture. but the new language was used to insist that a church was a spiritual building and not some embarrassed, abstract construct presented by the atheist architect to the ignorant masses; it was used to uphold the idea that german postwar culture could not be reduced to the materialism of the wirtschaftswunder.

 

being an atheist materialist myself with no talent for community and little trust in institutions, I have to say this: böhm's position was not self-evident. it was at heart, I believe, a position of opposition; a quixotic critique of modernity coming from the right; an insistence on continuity conducted with modernist means.

 

and what means...

 

for what we might term böhm's heroic period from the late 50's to the early 70's, he was surely a member of that other tradition of modern architecture we usually connect with people like aalto, erskine, utzon in the north and häring and scharoun in germany - equally for the experimenting compositions and constructions as for his sensitivity to use, to site, and to the relationship between the individual and the institutions his buildings represent.

 

but for böhm, the language of architecture remained in a state of flux. to the onlooker, the diversity of his oeuvre can be bewildering. böhm frustrates our need for the recognizable which may be one of the reasons for the waning interest in his work outside germany. at heart an instinctive architect, he has never subscribed to any theory, nor presented any of his own.

 

my gottfried böhm set so far.

more words, yada, yada, yada.

i was tagged by MO0nL4NDER to write 16 things about myself.

 

1) i was born in new york city in 1966 as the youngest and only son having two older sisters - today happens to be my birthday and i currently live in greenpoint, brooklyn.

 

2) i was raised in a european thinking household. my parents did not like flying so we traveled to france, italy and britain by ship some summers. later in life, work brought me to venezuela, argentina, and south africa and vacations brought me all over europe, mexico and the carribean. although i love japanese, vietnamese and thai food i never once considered traveling to asia. this changed about two years ago when i fell in love with a vietnamese woman i met in the new york city subway. i visited her in saigon and realized that i had never felt so at home as i did there. she's long gone but my love for asia and it's people and culture has stuck. it's never too late to have all of your understanding of the world turned upside down and to begin all over like a curious child.

 

3) no one believes that i have (or once had) red hair but they also can't seem to name the color it is now. i was very proud of the fact that as a child when someone called me "carrot top" i replied "carrot tops are green!"

 

4) i grew up in a house of artists. my parents wrote and illustrated childrens books together, painted, sculpted, printed, etc... although my father died in 1988, my mother still carries on with the books and now my sister does as well. i have a nephew and niece in art school and a brother-in-law who is a cartoonist. oddly i was a math major in college - i have a BS and an MFA.

 

5) my best friend growing up was killed when he was fifteen in a freak boating accident. i was a teen and felt cool and aloof and saw this as something that did not need to affect my life. at the funeral his mother, a very strong woman, looked me in the eye and said "my god. you're the only one who will have ever really known him." these words have always stuck with me and they make me aware that we exist more in the memories and thoughts of others we touch than we ever can in our own shoes. i am the keeper of the memory of my friend and all the people i have known and loved. this is why we live a richer life when we can touch and be touched by other people's lives.

 

6) i am allergic to cats but have never been in a relationship with a woman who did not have cats . i grew up with and love dogs but have not owned one of my own as an adult.

 

7) although i was married for over ten years, i don't let being divorced define me in any way. i am actually proud to have resurfaced as a person who despises and will not tolerate ignorance, materialism or self-importance in others as i did in my marriage. it's been a real gift to have the chance at a new life and to see the world in this way.

 

8) i do not own a digital camera. i started shooting medium format film in the summer of 2007. i am never lonely when i have a camera with me. ironically, as i have begun to live a more solitary life - just me and my camera - i have at the same time been lead on all sorts of adventures around the world like i never could have dreamed of. i have met some amazing people through flickr and my travels - both virtually and physically.

 

9) i had a previous career in visual effects, computer animation and commercial directing for over a decade before realizing that i was not actually passionate about the work which was sucking 80 hours of my life from me every week. i changed careers and settled into web publishing technology - something i am good at and that does not have crazy hours. now i have time and money for cameras, film, traveling, designing furniture and writing. essentially when i come home from work i still have all my creative juice intact... i love this feeling.

 

10) i am a terrible editor. i am proud of the moments when i take a photo but i have a terrible time choosing the ones that *work*. flickr is perfect for me because it instills discipline to go out and shoot and live up to my goal of two medium format images per day. one day i will make a portfolio site to focus on the more important pieces i have created. i apologize to those of you have taken interest in my work and have to wade through the good and bad days or weeks of my stream. i am deeply appreciative of any comment on an old photo because i know it took work to get there.

 

11) my full name is oliver penn rockwell. although rockwell sounds english it is actually a french name. in the 1600s when many huguenots were fleeing the catholics in france my relatives arrived in britain from la rochelle and were given the anglicized name rockwell from rochelle. shortly thereafter the came to america. growing up i was called olly. after college most people who only heard my name assumed i was muslim - they thought i was ali. to avoid confusion i allow my friends to call me anything they want but they introduce me and refer to me as oliver. penn is a family name on my mother's side. she had a relative named penn moss - i love this name.

 

12) famous people i have been told i resemble include tom waits, hugh grant, matthew broderick, hugh laurie, and tom hulce. my favorite author is henry miller. i love the films of john cassevetes, wong kar wai, antonioni, wim wenders, bertelucci to name a few. i have not owned a TV in over 5 years. i am a very mediocre guitarist but i love to play.

 

13) i believe in what i call honest photography. once you are familiar with your equipment you should always take the photo you can take without thought or planning. these photos show us quite literally what our point of view is. i found it incredible that i was not sure how i saw the world around me until i looked at my own photographs - it's something important to know. this also has taught me that we can tell a lot about a person by seeing his or her honest photography and i believe this is why so many of us have found strong and lasting friendships through flickr.

 

14) i have been gradually reducing my footprint in this world. i now rent just a room in an apartment and have been getting rid of most by belongings gradually from storage. i want to live a life that encourages me to get outside for exploration - a very comfortable home to me says "stay inside, don't go, relax". sometimes i travel during the time between housing arrangements and often just move from sublet to sublet which has established my motto "if you're not moving, you're not living." i hope to move to asia in the next year or two.

 

15) i love to cook and i am very good at it. four times a year i fast for 10-15 days - i am planning a 12 day fast to begin tomorrow. despite what i see as the health benefits of a cleansing fast i also crave the philosophical side of facing and overcoming hunger and how it teaches us that we really don't need much in this world to survive. as i mentioned i despise materialism and i am afraid of it sneaking up on me - fasting keeps many important aspects of me in check.

 

16) i have been diagnosed as having attention deficit disorder. for me this simply means that i am never thinking about only one thing at a time. it can be distracting when i have something that has to get done that requires no thought but, then again,when i need to think i have so many options at my finger tips. i find that it is worth it. i am sure tomorrow i will regret what i included on this list and the many things i forgot. but like my photo stream, once it is here it will stay for better or worse.... anyway, i'm done.

 

without too much thought i am tagging maybe too many... here's the list:

Capturing moods, bobby stokes, iCyclops, Jan Bakker, major deegan, doksands, www.flickr.com/photos/maihuyenchi, Zenith Phuong, toune, Miyuki., Seu Joao, Imnotblue, www.flickr.com/photos/trangbee, and blacknarcissus

oh and also pigneguy*michael

and also bernadetteRtorres

 

[ EDIT ]

 

here are their results

www.flickr.com/photos/maihuyenchi/3218566321, Capturing moods, bobby stokes, Miyuki., Jan Bakker, imnotblue, www.flickr.com/photos/trangbee/3251109258

 

View On Black

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soon_Valley

  

The 'Soon Valley' (Urdu: [‎[‎وادئ سون)]] or Soon Sakesar is one of the famous valleys of Pakistan situated in the central Punjab province. The Valley is situated in the north west of Khushab. Naushera is the main town of the Valley. The Valley starts from Padhrar village and end to Sakesar that is the highest peak of Salt Range. The length of Soon Valley is 35 miles (56 km) and average width is 9 miles (14 km). The area of Soon Valley is 300-square-mile (780 km2). Although not as coold as the valleys up north, Soon valley consists of beautiful lakes, waterfalls, jungles, natural pools and ponds. Soon valley is also blessed with ancient civilization , natural resources, and fertile farms. There are some special features of this valley that distinguish it from other areas, without knowing about them it is very hard to understand its importance. Sabhral, Khoora, Naushera, Kufri, Anga, Ugali, Uchali and Bagh Shams-ud-Din are important towns in soon valley. Kanhatti Garden, Sodhi Garden, Da'ep and Sakesar are resorts to visit. Awan[1] tribe is settled in Soon Valley.[2]

Located at a height of 5,010 feet (1,530 m) above sea level, Sakesar was once the summer headquarters for the Deputy Commissioners of three districts - Campbelpur (now Attock), Mianwali and Shahpur (now Sargodha). It is the only mountain in this part of the Punjab which receives snow fall in winters. In view of Sakesar's ideal location and height, the PAF selected it in the late-50s as the site for a high powered radar which would provide air defence cover for the northeastern part of the western wing. Pakistan Television's re-broadcasting center has been installed to provide terrestrial transmissions coverage to adjoining areas.

  

Har do sodhi

(sodhi bala and sodhi zarien), Naushahra, Jabbah ,Ugalisharif, Kotli, Mukrumi,Kaamrh,Dhadhar, Mardwal, Kufri, Uchali, Chitta, Khoora,Anga,Khabbaki, kuradhi, Uchhala, Mustafaabad (Bhukhi), Sodhi Jai Wali, Sabhral, Shakarkot, Sirhal, Manawan, Surraki, Jahlar, Anga, Ahmadabad

•Distance from Islamabad: 290 km

•Distance from Sargodha: 110 km

•Lakes : Uchali, Khabbaki, Jahlar, Khura

•Shrines :Sultan Mehdi sahb, sultan Haji Ahmed sahb in Uchhala, Baba Shikh AkbarDin Ugalisharif, Pir Baba Sakhi Muhammad Khushhaal in Khabbaki, Amb Shareef, Baba beri Wala in Naushera, Abul Hameed & Aziz Ahmedabad

  

People

The main tribe of the area is the Awan of ancient repute. This tribe came in this area with Qutab Shah and settled in the Soon valley. The other sub branches and small tribes are Shehal, Ardaal, Mirwal, Adriyal, Shenaal in Kufri, Latifal, Jurwal, Radhnal, Sheraal in Naushehra, Pirkal in Jallay wali, Majhial in Mardwal,Bazral, Chhatal,Ghadhyal,Phatal,Yakial, Maswal in Ugalisharif, Phatwal and Bhojo khail, Sheral, Mianwaddal , Alyaral, Sher Shahal in Khabbaki and so on. In the valley Awan's are known by their clans. In old time the head of clan in each village was known as Raees, and the head of a tribe was known as Raees-Azam. The most famous Raees Azam were Pir Naubahar Shah of Pail,Malik Ameer Haider of Kufri, Qazi Mazhar Qayyum of Naushera and Lumberdar Syed Gul peer Shah of Sodhi,Baba Hafiz Ilyas of Chitta.

A majority of the people are serving in the armed forces of Pakistan. Many loyal brave soldiers and officers belong to this land who even laid down their lives for their homeland.[4]

Other professions like education, business, transportation and agricultural are also adopted by the locals. The people are hard working and agriculture used to be the main profession. Per person square footage of land decreased, as population increased. Consequently the people have migrated to large cities for jobs.

There are famous writers[5] like Ahmad Nadeem Qasimi, and journalist[6] from this area. Famous Physicians and Surgeons like Dr. Muzaffar-ul-Haq, Dr. Ghaus Malik neurosurgen (USA), Dr. Javaid Malik (USA), Dr. Nazir Ahmed Malik (Child Specialist) and Hafiz Habib Sultan (Eye Specialist) and Shaukat Memud Awan, general secretary Adara Tehqiqul Awan pakistan also belong to this land.

FARMING: Our farmers are also not behind to make their real contribution in agricultural growing corps like wheat , dalls , jawar and bajra including makaee crops .In this way our farmer is also playing a remarkable roll to full fill the local food requirement at large level , i remember that our local production of wheat including other eatable plus abandant quantity of vegitable for our local use with addition we are meeting the requirement demand of vegitable up to Lahore , Gujranwala , Sargodha , Talagang and Rawalpindi Districts for their people at large quiantiy hence our small population is never dependant on any one else . We are self sufficient .

Review on “My celestial Dreams” written by Abdul Ghaffar Aamir Ghufri Valley Soon Sakaser khushab AAMIR’S POETRY AND MONTOMERY

By Allama Muhammad Yousuf Gabriel

I opened the book, here and there, and my cursory glance met with certain spurts of genius. There was before me the vision of a bud that could blossom one day into fascinating flower to adorn the garden of English poetry. To reach that pinnacle, however, sincerity, purity, fortitude, patience, perseverance and learning, besides the general pre-requisites, such as imagination, wit, faculty of expression and command over language were necessary. The first two poems are hymns about the omnipresence of God. Quite naturally my thought went to a poem “The Omnipresence of Lord”, written by Montgomery. My acquaintance with this poem was due to its review written by Lord Macaulay in 1830. Literary Essay of Lord Macaulay) the review indeed was horrible. Shaking his fierce trident, the enraged critic fell upon the author with deadliest attack and would not cause till the victim lay dead. This was the work of blind fury; we have seen only such part of poem which were exhibited by the critic and faulty. Yet despite Macaulay’s total condemnation of the work, we think that criticism as a preplanned act of cruel murder. We are not in a position to challenge of defy the points raised by Macaulay, yet we cannot hesitate to assert that the work after all was not so bad and also, that besides flaws. It contained point of merit, for example it’s them, which Macaulay had internationally refuse to see. This certainly meant the violence of the rule of criticism. On the whole we think this Macaulay’s criticism as a tragedy in the annals of criticism itself. It is the blemish on the name of both of the critic and the criticism. Montgomery fell as the victim of illuck before the trident of Macaulay, who himself tells us in his article, that the practice of puffing of worthless literary works was the vogue in England. Macaulay called upon every one who was anxious for the purity of the national taste or for the honour of the literary character to join in this discountenancing the practice that of puffing which according to him was then so shamefully and so successfully carried on in the country. It was on this point that Montgomery appeared as the target, because Montgomery’s work had run into eleven editions. It is thus in his effort to discountenancing the practice of puffing that Macaulay fell headlong upon a poet whose work despite flaws had certain points of merit and was purchased and read with rapture in eleventh edition by the public of England. The whole article of Macaulay is interesting, but due to the considering of space, we shall have to be content with only one instance of Macaulay’s criticism. Say, he: “The all pervading influence of the Supreme being is then described in a few tolerable lines borrowed from Pope and a great many intolerable of Mr. Robert Montgomery’s own. The following may stand as a specimen.”. : Upon thy Mirror earths majestic view, : To paint thy presence and to feel it too, These last two lines contain and excellent specimen of Mr. Robert Montgomery’s Turkey carpet style of writing. The Majestic view of the earth is the mirror of God’s presence. And on this mirror Mr. Robert Montgomery paints God’s presence. The use of a mirror submit is not to be painted upon”. Says Macaulay:

We do not mean that this couplet is the specimen of high class English poetry, but the word paint of the mirror put easily be some substituted by the word canvas and show. We, however, want to make it clear that we are not going to judge the work of our point. Aamir on the standard of poet like Montgomery. Our poet shows the signs of genius that could rise to the highest of high class poetry in English.

Now before we leave Macaulay and Montgomery to rest in their graves, we intend to show some identity of thought and view between Montgomery and Aamir and not at all with a view to evaluating their works in comparison. Monitory’s work can stand no comparison. His verse is slow, sluggish, unwidely and lacks the qualities of high class poetry. While the works of Aamir is brist, precise, to the point and expressed with strong effect. Aamir’s thought a beginner in a language which is quite foreign to him, yet he shows the sign of rising to highest maintain while the great English poet. Montgomery says : : There is not a blossom fondled by the breeze, : There is not a fruit that beautify the trees, : There is not a particle in sea or air, : But nature own thy plastic influence there” Aamir says: : I feel your hand wherever I look in every flower, tree or brook, Montgomery says : : Yet not alone created realm engage, : Thy faultless wisdom, grand primeval sage: For all the thronging woes of life allied, Thy Mercy Tempers and Thy cares provide” Aamir says:- All kingdoms are yours, all crowns for you, You are the greatest, perfect and true When we suffers sorrow and decay, Your blessings see us through all the way: Montgomery says: : The dew that on the violet lies, Mocks the dark luster of thine eyes” Aamir says:- : All this beauty, charms and grace, Is just a lovely glimpse of your face”. We have given the above-quoted verse to see the identity of the views of the two poets, and to see also the difference between the rim odes of expression. Surely the verses of Aamir taken from his Hymn must be his earliest, yet his styles who was sort of precision which lacks in Montgomery’s verse. But Aamir has to be judged by the second part of his work, “My Celestial Dreams”. Therein we can have the audacity to show his work in comparison to greatest English poets. And he is as yet so young. As for as Montgomery’s work is concerned we can agree with Macaulay when he says:

His writing bears the same relation to poetry which a Turkey carpet bears to a picture. There are colours in the Turkey carpet out of which a picture might be made. There are words in Mr. Montgomery’s writing which, when disposed in certain corders and combinations, have made, and will again make, good poetry:

Yet our complaint is that Macaulay’s treatment of Montgomery was ruthless. Ruthless beyond any bounds, Montgomery was taken as a scrape-goat. As far as Aamir’s work is concerned, he himself says:

This humble effort of mine is not meant to stir your imagination towards the poetic proness of my pen, but just to apprise you of the fact that I have drunk deeply at he fountain of God’s love for human souls”.

While reading the work of Aamir, “My celestial dreams”, novice though he is, the eye meets everywhere some expression which sounds like the voice of some great English poet, such as Keats, Shelly, Wordsworth etc. to reach the pinnacle, however, means constant flight. Aamir is not so unfortunate as Montgomery was. He is in better times, and in a better environment. The world now sick of materialism, has begun to take interest in religion. And thus the product of his mind has every probability acceptance and appreciation all over the world. His work, “My celestial Dream” could a well be divined into two distinct parts, that is before the poem. “Hero of the land”, and after that to etched end. The second part has distinctive superiority over the first. The poet appears to be blossoming fast and has reached a remarkable standard of efficiency. His thought share sacred. His expression is origin and sublime. He certainly does not appear like a foreigner who has learned English languages. He rather composes his poetry like the aboriginal English poet. His themes are simple yet deeply touching and indeed great. Judging by this religious trend, he might be taken by some European critic as a bigot, which he certainly is not. Milton and Bunyan both poets of Christianity have long since been thrown into oblivion due to surging waves of modern materialism. Whereas Aamir stands a real chance to make his mark in the world as poet of Islam. The credit of eulogizing the Holy Prophet (Peace be Upon Him) in English poetry goes to him. He has emerged as a pioneer in that field. We will now quote some of his waves to see and urge the prowess of his pen. He might deny it, yet his pen is impressive beyond expectations:-

“O! Crescent star flag! I pray you fly, With honour so high, Above this world, And azure sky, “Sons of Turkey, the tigers of Kamal Brave courageous handsome and tall “In sweet sleeps of night I see your dreams, My love for your flows like rivers and streams. O! Father come back Wipe my eyes Kiss me. Come and grace my beautiful world, Which I made for you, And be my love Part of eternity. For my love is true and eternal Born in heaven, reared an earth, Pulling you from the burning sun. It will fill you with joy and mirth. So my love, now we separate, Let time and fate on love operate, With flaming passion we shall meet, Our souls, then pure rejoice, for ever greet, Today it is corpse But yesterday it was, A paragon Wistfully recalled the golden day’s When I was like a flower, Like a delightful nightingale, I felt as if truly, I had come to what I was again You shall be forever sought, By the one who shall not? See you again Your sketch I adored it, In the temple of my soul, And worshipped it, All my life. These are some examples of Aamir’s verse which we have quoted. And we wish him good and good speed. May he blossom one day into and an eminent literacy figure, and be our pride. Dated: 14th January 1986.

Allama Muhammad Yousuf Gabriel C/O Khalid General Strores, Main Bazar, Nawababad, Wah Cantt. Distt. Rawalpindi, Pakistan.

www.oqasa.org www. soonvalley.com www.soonvalley.pakistan www.alturka.com www.likedone.pakistan

 

Martial Race

 

The Awans of the Soon Valley were also amongst those the British considered to be "martial race".[7] The British recruited army heavily from Soon Valley for service in the colonial army, and as such, the Awans of this area also formed an important part of the British Indian Army, serving with distinction during World Wars I and II. Of all the Muslim groups recruited by the British, proportionally, the Awans produced the greatest number of recruits during the First and Second World Wars. Contemporary historians, namely Professor Ian Talbot and Professor Tan Tai Yong, have authored works that cite the Awans (amongst other tribes) as being looked upon as a martial race by not only the British, but neighbouring tribes as well. The army of Pakistan also heavily recruits Awans from this area. Awans occupy the highest ranks of the Pakistani Army.[8] DHAHDHAR :- This is one of the most important village of this soon valley , which is producing wheat and vegitable at large quantity for offording local population as well as upto the range of Lahore , Gujranwala, Sargodha , Talagang & Rawalpindi Districts .

LIVE STOCK :- Our village is producing live stock breeding at large scal hence contributing a major roll for production of various type of animal like bufaloos , cow' , oxen, sheep and goats to full fill the requirement of general publc in case of meet , milk and skins for manufecturing of leather shoes and leather garments .

 

Lakes

There are two well-renowned Uchhali Lake and Khabikki Lake lakes in Soon valley. Uchhali is a salt water lake in the southern Salt Range area in Pakistan. This lake is formed due to the absence of drainage in the range. Sakaser, the highest mountain in the Salt Range, looms over the lake. Due to its brackish water the lake is lifeless. But it offers a picturesque scenery. Khabikki Lake is a salt water lake in the southern Salt Range area in Pakistan. This lake is formed due to the absence of drainage in the range. The lake is one kilometer wide and two kilometres long. Khabikki is also the name of a neighbouring village. Boats are also available and there is a rest house beside the lake. A hill gently ascended on the right side of the lake. The lake and the green area around provide a good scenery. These lakes attract thousands of migratory birds each year and are ideal haven for the bird watchers.

Tucked in the southern periphery of the Salt Range and hemmed in by its higher cliffs, is a cluster of natural lakes — Ucchali, Khabbeki and Jhallar in district Khushab. These lakes are said to be 400 years old, maybe more. The lakes are a prime sanctuary for the migratory birds and were declared a protected sanctuary for the native and migratory avifauna on the appeal of World Wildlife Fund. Nestled at about 800 meters above the sea, lakes have some marsh vegetation and are mostly surrounded by cultivated land, which is picturesquely intersected by hillocks. The lakes are fed by the spring, seepage from adjacent areas, and run off from the neighbouring hills of the historic Salt Range. The lakes are one of the most important wintering areas for the rare white-headed ducks (Oxyura leucocephala) in Pakistan that comes here from Central Asia. Locals believe that there is a volcano hidden beneath the surface of the Ucchali Lake due to which the colour of the water keeps changing. The appearance of a vert broad and brightly coloured rainbow in 1982 for consecutive 15 days is also attributed to this analogy. in 1982, a strange phenomenon was observed in the villages Ucchali and Dhadhar. The lakes’ water is also said to cure gout and skin diseases. People have been taking the water from the lakes as far as Lahore and Karachi. People think that a pure white winged creature called Great egret, from Grus family, found in the area is a symbol of longevity.

  

Town and Villages

•Naushera

•Sakesar

•Jabbah

•Uchalla

•Pail-Piran

•Sodhi

•Kalial

•Sirhal

•Shakar Kot

•Unga

•Khabbaki

•Dhadhar

•Mardawal

•Khewra

•Kufri (now its name is sadiq abad so called with this new name)

•Sabhral

•Koradhi

•Uchhali

•Shakarkot

•Anngah

•Ugalisharif

•Makrumi

•Kamrah

•Dhadar

•Ahmadabad

har do sodhi soon become union consil

Different Villages Location

Villages west of Naushehra are Sabhral, Kufri, Koradhi,Uchhali, and Chitta before reaching the Pakistan Air Force Base of Sakesar.

Villages to the north west of Naushehra are Sirhal, Shakarkot Anngah and Ugalisharif.

Villages to the north east of Naushehra are Mardowal, Makrumi,Kamrah,Dhadar, Ahmadabad, Khabakki and Jabah.

Villages to the south west of Naushehra are har do sodhi , Surraki and Jahlar.

Villages to the south of Naushehra are Chamraki and Sodhian villages.

Villages to the east of Naushehra are Dhakah, Mirokah Dhakah, Jalay Wali, (Uchhalah is not on the main road), Sodhi Jai Wali, Kaliyal, Khurrah, and Kathwai.

Padhrar and Pail-Piran are not the part of soon valley but these villages are in the same election area and fall on Chakwal-Khushab road.

There are scattered colonies of certain families which are called Dhok. Usually at each Dhoke there are two to ten houses.

  

Historical Places

•Lakes: Ugalisharif & Uchalli Lake, Khabikki Lake and Jahlar Lake.

•Waterfalls at Kufri.

•Ambh Sharif is a historical place in Hinduism.

•Kanahti Garden, Sodhi Garden, Khabakki Jheel,Ugalisharif & Uchali Jheel, Sakesar and Daip Shareef and the hiking experiences of hills

•Anga, an important village.

•Sodhi village has waterfalls, a Rest House, and wild animals like Cheetah, Rabbit, Deer, Teetar (Urdu name of a bird).

•Shrines of Babashikh Akbar Din Darbar-e- aaliah Chishtiah Akbariah UGALISHRIF, Makan Sharif Kufri sajadh nashin Sahibzadh Muhammad Hamid Aziz Hamidi, Pir Khawja Noori and Pir Sahib Acha (Hacha)- descendents of Baha Ud Din Zakkariyya Multani(Hazrat Baha Ul Haq)in Pail-Piran

•Ganji Pahari, Baba shikh Akbar Din Darbar-e- aaliah Chishtiah Akbariah UGALISHRIF. Baba Sewu Beri Wala and Baba Mari Wala in Naushera.

•Baba shikh Akbar Din Darbar-e- aaliah Chishtiah Akbariah Ugli Sharif and Pir Khawaja Noori in Pail jant

•Mahala Jurwal, is the biggest and most densed street of Naushahra. Malik Sultan Mubaraz, a well knw transporter of last dacade belongs to this street

•Mahala Qazian Wallah, is also a famous street of Naushera, where the famous qadis of Naushera used to live.

•Graveyard of qadi family

•Sodhi Jai Wali is also famous for its natural Water falls and Garden as well. The Garden is located near a Historical Rest House, It is said that this Rest House was gifted by Syed Family of Sodhi Jai wali to the British Rulers.

    

Some finished artwork at Cosanti.

 

I first visited Cosanti in 1968. There was nothing around it in this part of Paradise Valley and it was still being built. Things sure have changed. Paolo Soleri would probably be appalled by what grew up around his vision that is the compete antithesis of his vision.

 

I live about 2 miles north of here, but I had never made time to photograph it. I made time.

 

www.arcosanti.org/cosanti-foundation/

Founded in 1965, The Cosanti Foundation is an Arizona-based 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization.

Our mission is to inspire a reimagined urbanism that builds resilient and equitable communities sustainably integrated with the natural world.

Our vision is a world of equitable communities which improve earth/life balance and do better with less.

We pursue this mission and vision at our two flagship locations, Cosanti (in Paradise Valley near Phoenix) and Arcosanti (near Mayer in central Arizona), as well as with projects, programs, and partnerships that hundreds of thousands of people have participated in over the last 57 years.

The word “cosanti” is a combination of the Italians words “cosa” (meaning “things”) and “anti” (meaning “against” or “before”). It signifies The Cosanti Foundation’s commitment to a way of living, working, and building that is oriented away from consumption and materialism, and is respectful of our planet’s natural rhythms and resources. Through ongoing experimentation with and application of the principles of arcology (a combination of the words architecture and ecology), we seek to demonstrate a kind of construction and community that offers an alternative to sprawl development and a solution to modern social and environmental crises.

The Cosanti Foundation also owns and operates the for-profit Cosanti Originals, where we make our world-famous bronze and ceramic windbells and other artisan items.

 

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paolo_Soleri

Paolo Soleri (21 June 1919 – 9 April 2013)[1] was an Italian-born American architect. He established the educational Cosanti Foundation and Arcosanti. Soleri was a lecturer in the College of Architecture at Arizona State University and a National Design Award recipient in 2006. He coined the concept of 'arcology' – a synthesis of architecture and ecology as the philosophy of democratic society.[2] He died at home of natural causes on 9 April 2013 at the age of 93.[3]

Soleri authored several books, including The Bridge Between Matter & Spirit is Matter Becoming Spirit and Arcology – City In the Image of Man.[4]

Soleri was born in Turin, Italy, Europe. He was awarded his "laurea" (master's degree) in architecture from the Politecnico di Torino in 1946. He visited the United States in December 1946 and spent a year and a half in fellowship with Frank Lloyd Wright at Taliesin West in Arizona, and at Taliesin in Spring Green, Wisconsin. During this time, he gained international recognition for a bridge design that was displayed at the Museum of Modern Art.[5]

Paolo and Colly Soleri made a lifelong commitment to research and experimentation in urban planning. They established the Cosanti Foundation, a not-for-profit 501(c)(3) educational non-profit foundation. Soleri's philosophy and works were strongly influenced by the Jesuit paleontologist and philosopher Pierre Teilhard de Chardin.[citation needed]

 

DSC04091-HDR acd

I don’t have rights of this picture. But to make the story more interesting it needs good visual. I don't think my white sandy beach shot matches the stories/ infos I'd like to share this time. But , I will take this down if I received complaint from the copyright owner. I suspect this shot must be from a movie set. I have seen various films this actor was in . I got this photo from the same news site at link below . I don't like my photo stream , but I don't think the links about Alien stories are compatible if I post accompanying picture of a nice white sand beach lined with palm trees . I could illustrate a bit but that takes so much of my time, I like something quick and no sweat for this time being. I may some imaginative drawings but that'll be at later time.

 

* University of California Scientists: 'Camouflaged' Aliens Live Among Us

 

* Space Alien Worked for U.S. Government?

 

*Does Rh Negative Blood Type Equal Alien Heritage ?

  

Steve Quayle elaborates Genesis 6

*Fallen Angels, Demons and Giants by Steve Quayle

  

*Dr. Joye Jeffries Pugh ( BEGUILED Eden To Armageddon } on LNM

 

Now Satanist even got their platform of blasphemies. If you love this world, you'll remain here.

*Satanists set up display of Snaketivity Scene in Michigan Capitol

 

*Satans Alter Ego | As Above So Below: The Giver & Ultimate Transhumanist Superheroe

  

Stories about Aliens living among us or their offspring of hybrids are not way in contrast from Biblical teachings. In fact they are the reason of the Biblical flood, as the pure human genetics was in real danger during those days before the flood. Genesis 6 speaks about the Angelic watchers finding human women beautiful and had intercourse with them, and having babies with women. The Apocrypha book of Enoch has more the the story of Genesis 6. No wonder these descriptive Apocrypha books were removed from the Bible. Guess what, because it exposes the lies and deception through the ages .

 

Ever thought why some old historic churches and buildings across Europe and UK have scary looking gargoyles in their architectures ? You think those are heavenly beings ? Those gargoyles look like demons. I even wonder why even statues across are of the gods and goddess and never any characters of the Bible. I have no doubt they all point back to the hybrids . It all spread across the world, and across cultures.

The Bible says "they are people of reknown " , they are mighty men. My thoughts are , in fact very intelligent , perhaps even good looking of today's standards, very wealthy.

 

I'm personally convinced the Anti- Christ whoever he is, is a hybridized being, not a full human DNA being.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

My imaginations of the Armageddon isn't about human flesh and blood soldiers shooting each other, few nukes blowing, but it's more than that. It's like war of the worlds , a cosmic war with Alien beings of Lucifer including the earthly hybrid camp against Almighty creator God and human redeemed soldiers in glorified bodies, call them aliens as well, whatever .... The Bible said if you are with the Lord and living with the Lord Jesus, you are not of this world, and should not set our hearts of this world. And true, as we know the Lord we should not conform to the ways of this world, as we are aliens of this world.

 

As knowing more the Lord Jesus, I'm growingly desliking this world and everything in here. Anybody with relationship with God would have look forward to be taken away soon, and me too :) I feel so uneasy and uncomfortable of the idea of parties and jamming around with worldly people, social drinking. Even hearing blasphemies on local TV my spirit boils ! Seeing the explosion of materialism in people, the wags , those who just live for fame and money alone flash on TV often : example like the Kardashians, I get sick of it. The Made in Chelsea , TV series are made role models of children. As if these people live forever , no death, a false notion of life. Most people I see around have no reverence of God of even have slightest idea who God is. Which is exactly the point of Biblical description of our generation today , the last day generation.

  

I realize we’re halfway through the music festival season so I should have posted this sooner but here in Chicago where I’m from, we’re gearing up for Pitchfork Music Festival to start tomorrow and in less than a month Lollapooza will also be happening. This is my third summer shooting music festivals including Pitchfork Music Festival, Lollapalooza, Hideout Block Party, and Coachella. I wish someone had told me a few things three years ago to help prepare me. I thought I’d share the love.

 

First, a disclaimer….you know that part in Say Anything where John Cusack/Lloyd Dobler proclaims: “I don't want to sell anything, buy anything, or process anything as a career. I don't want to sell anything bought or processed, or buy anything sold or processed, or process anything sold, bought, or processed, or repair anything sold, bought, or processed. You know, as a career, I don't want to do that.” Well, I sort of loved him for that even more than when he was holding a large boombox over his head. That said, I’m going to recommend some products here not because I want to encourage materialism and consumerism but because these are the things that have worked for me. The reality is that there are a lot of products out there that are not well made or will let you down and ultimately waste your hard earned cash. As most of us are just scraping by and not making $1000 a photo, very few of us can afford to waste our money on stuff that doesn’t work or is poorly made and will cost us a great deal more overall.

 

Some obvious things first:

 

1.Unless you are meticulous and not scatter brained in the least, you will need some extras of everything. I recommend bringing extra lens caps, lens cleaning cloths, memory cards, batteries, and a couple extra pairs of ear plugs. You are going to be exposing your ears to some really massive amounts of input. I don’t find the foamy earplugs to be very helpful for me. First, it distorts the music so that it feels like you are sort of just listening under water. Second, it’s usually not enough protection when you are up against huge amps. I highly recommend: earlove.net/. They are worth the extra cost, trust me!

2.You know those pseudo benches in a lot of larger photopits where you can take a rest, especially if the stage/band you’re shooting is running behind schedule? You’re going to really want to do it but do NOT set your bag down while you’re shooting unless everything of any value is around your neck. Fans steal bags and (I hate to say it) other photographers steal bags. I know your bag is heavy and, in this case, my only recommendation is this: suck it up! I’m so sorry but no amount of temporary shoulder relief is worth thousands of dollars. Also, I recommend using these Chrome Messenger backpack bags: www.chromebagsstore.com/messenger-packs-ranchero.html Yes, it’s a bag that costs nearly $200 after taxes, shipping, etc. but the good news is that you will never have to buy another bag again. I cannot tell you how much I’ve pretty much beat the heck out of mine and there are no signs of wear and tear whatsoever. It has two nice shoulder pads, a cell phone holster, and is extremely waterproof. Basically, it’s worth the investment. Did I mention you’ll never have to buy another bag to haul all your stuff around again? That’s important.

3.Drink water, not beer. Oh wouldn’t the beer just take the edge off? Make you feel relaxed, etc.? Don’t do it!!! Take all the money you would have spent on overpriced festival beer throughout the weekend and put it aside. When you’re finally finished with all photoediting on that Sunday night or Monday morning, buy yourself a nice bottle of champagne or Belgian and drink up to celebrate surviving. Also, I highly recommend bringing your own more durable water bottle. Most music festivals have stopped giving out free water to press OR they will have one tent set up that’s destined to be far away from whatever bands you are assigned in the media area which is not very helpful. However, quite a few festivals have fountains or opportunities for free water of some sort. I also recommend supplementing your water with electrolytes. This one works quite well: www.rei.com/product/779683. Also, don’t forget your Ibuprofen/Aspirin and vitamins!

4.Sorry to be gross, but you should bring some tissue or toilet paper and a little bottle of hand sanitizer. You should not count on the porta potties to have these things in full supply, though I’ve been happily surprised the last couple of festivals I’ve gone to.

5.Have you ever sat around and wondered how China became such a national super power? It’s probably because of this: www.tigerbalm.com/. Buy yourself a jar of it and rub it into your shoulders, neck, and any other part of your body that aches every single night. Trust me, you’ll feel so much better the next day. It stings a little and there’s an after effect that goes on as it sinks into your muscle tissue that might actually hurt a bit but let it work it’s magic.

6.You need suncreen (duh!) I am so pale I’m ghostly. If I’m out in the sun for even a half hour without sunscreen, I burn. That said, I highly recommend this Kiss My Face spray SPF30 product: kissmyfacewebstore.com/detail/KMF+1800403 You can pick it up at some Whole Foods but, because it’s a natural product, it isn’t usually available commonly at most grocery or convenience stores in the US, which means you might end up having to order it online. Why I love this product is simple…it works! Also, it is a lot less greasy, you can spray it on your back (for your facial areas, spray it on your hands then rub on your face.) and you should be able to get away with spraying it on once in the morning before you leave and not having to worry about re-spraying for the rest of the day. That’s really important because the last thing you’ll be thinking about when you’re photographing beautiful Karen O doing a backbend is re-applying your sunscreen, trust me. On occasion, I have gotten minorly burned around my shoulder straps as the suncreen has rubbed off in those areas. However, I burn excessively easily so if you’re like 99% of the rest of the population, you don’t have to be worried.

7. If it’s going to be especially sunny, consider bringing a small compact umbrella to shield you while you’re waiting in the photopit or photopit line. ( I learned that one from excessively wise and experienced Robert Loerzel: www.flickr.com/photos/robertloerzel/ who graciously held one over our heads during the two hour wait for Iggy Pop when we were suffering through Amy Winehouse at Lolla 2007)

8.I recommend you start every day of the festival by having a large mocha with an extra shot of espresso and one-two bagels (depending on your metabolism.) You want a complex carbohydrate that your body is going to have to break down over time through the course of the day. Make sure to obviously give yourself enough time in the bathroom after eating before taking off to minimize porta potty usage..besides, you don’t have time to go to the bathroom…you have bands to shoot! For quick sugar intake when you’re running on low, pack a couple of energy or granola bars. Plan on eating more after you’re done and waiting for your 4,000 photos to transfer from your memory card to your hard drive. Did I mention to make sure to take your vitamins?

9.If you are traveling to this music festival, I would recommend the following portable external drive: Smartdisk 160GB FireWire Portable Hard Drive …it worked very well for me when I went to Coachella. Don’t forget to bring your battery charger!

10. As Margarita Gonzalez stated below, make sure you wear your most comfortable pair of shoes! As Paige K. Parsons below added: Remember there's a BIG difference between shoes that are comfortable to stand in for eight hours vs shoes that are comfortable to walk four miles in. Most likely you will need the latter at a festival.

11.)Also by Paige K. Parsons: www.flickr.com/photos/paigekparsons/ Know not just the distances between stages, but the time it takes to move between them with large crowds of people about. You've got to plan your schedule with plenty of tolerances for travel.

12.)Also by Paige K. Parsons: www.flickr.com/photos/paigekparsons/ Scope out *all* the stages early. Talk with the security guys and/or festival coordinators and confirm which side has access to the photopit. Often it's different from stage to stage, sometimes it's different than you were told in your media info. If you arrive on the wrong side it can take an entire song to get from one side to the other if the crowd is large.

13.If you are lucky enough to have “scored” your pass without actually knowing anything about photography because your dad’s a CEO of a company sponsoring the festival or something, do us all a favor and actually try to learn as much as you can on your own. There are photographers who would give up alot for this opportunity so take it as a serious gift. Besides, the last thing I want to hear in the pit five minute before Daft Punk take the stage is “Hey, you have the same camera as me! Can you teach me how to use mine?” And yes, that actually did happen to me at Lolla 2007.

   

Now, some non-obvious things…..

  

1.Camera gear recommendations: I can only recommend what I know and I’m a Canon vs. Nikon user..that doesn’t mean Nikon is inferior at all, though! I use the 5dMkII with the Canon IS 2.8 70-200mm lens most often during music festivals. If this lens is too expensive, consider renting one, especially if you are planning on photographing bands you may never have the opportunity to photograph again (i.e. Leonard Cohen.) I should warn that this lens is excessively heavy. I actually prepared myself after its purchase by lifting weights while jogging on the treadmill. The Canon 15mm fisheye lens is also great for smaller stages and crowd shots. Paige K. Parsons has some great fisheye crowd shots with her Nikon D700 as well. Here’s a good example: www.flickr.com/photos/paigekparsons/3620173399/ If possible, bring an extra base as backup. Nikon recommendations by NickD: www.flickr.com/photos/_nickd/ : As nikon goes i'd recommend a d300 or (if you want full-frame) d700 with a 70-200 f/2.8 vr if you can get it, and a 50 f/1.4 for smaller intimate venues.

2.We’re unfortunately in a troublesome age in terms of photographer’s rights and what that means is that you may not be given full information about what restrictions bands are giving until the day of, even if you received a press release from the festival organizers detailing these restrictions…it doesn’t matter. Artists/musicians change their minds at the last minute about photography and unfortunately festival organizers don’t consider the idea that some photogs have actually made a huge financial investment to shoot that particular band on the basis that they’d *gasp* be allowed to. (Such was the case last year when Kanye West decided on the same day of his performance he wouldn’t allow photography from the pit even though the concert was taking place in his own city and he had allowed it previously at Lolla.) In addition, some bands/musicians may limit the photopit to only Wire service photographers. However, the trend I have seen (with Pearl Jam and Radiohead specifically) is to not allow any Wire service photographers into the pits. Another thing I have seen is a band decided to only let his buddy, a barely competent photographer, to shoot and bars every other photographer. It completely sucks and it’s extremely difficult to get a good shot from the crowd. The only thing you can do to prepare yourself for this is to read all press information and check in at the media tent of the festival every single day.

3.If you absolutely have to sign a contract that takes away all your copyrights, sign and date it so that you can argue it was signed under duress. Also, give your publication the exact number of photos requested and keep the others private/friends only if you use them. If you are not assigned that band and do not have to take photos but want to, strongly consider not signing because your rights as a photographer are way more important, trust me.

4.Some festivals, particularly Lollapalooza have “caps” on their photopits. In other words, they won’t allow past a certain number (in Lolla’s case, 50) of photographers to be in the pit. What that means is, for the larger bands, make sure to keep an eye on the pit and make practical decisions about time management. It’s a lot better to be #3 in a photopit for a larger band and miss out on shooting a smaller band you can easily photograph again than to shoot the smaller band, be #51 and not get into the pit for the larger band. Also, be aware for that more aggressive bands where there is an issue with crowd control, the festival could potentially lower the amount of photographers they are going to allow in the pit. Arrive extra early if you are assigned these bands. By extra early, I mean, check in atleast 2 hours in advance. Yes, I’m serious.

5.Make a special effort to photograph bands that typically play in darker conditions. (Pretty much every band I love fits this description.) If you know this may only be the only time you’ll ever be able to shoot this band without them being behind a heavy gush of smoke playing in what looks like the pit of despair, go for it! Also, make an extra effort to photograph international bands you know won’t come around very often.

6.If you’re like me, your deadlines are pretty immediate and you have to bike home like mad and start photo-editing as soon as possible so that you’re up until 4am or 5am working on your assignment. You are bound to grow really tired doing this and be all sleepy. What usually helps me stay up is re-watching the ending of Twin Peaks: (If you can fall asleep right after watching this, you’re a much braver soul than I am!) www.youtube.com/watch?v=GZ0qHLAsS2w

7.Feel free to run like mad and shoot as many bands as your body and time will allow. If you have limited time to get across a crowded park and you are exhausted with way less adrenalin than you’d expected, it might be helpful to use a visualization technique. Usually, I picture a younger version of Hannibal Lecter in a sweaty Kings of Leon shirt running after me with a vicious look in his eyes…that often does the trick! However, with age I am realizing more and more it’s also important to listen to your body. Take rest breaks when possible and keep hydrated. Have I mentioned vitamins yet? ;)

8.Make friends! It is great to have a few people you can trust to update you when you are across the field to know how fast a photopit line is growing or if a band cancels or is running late. Texting is amazing in these cases and make sure to return the favor to your friend as well. In this age of concert photography when we are slowly losing our rights, it’s important to really stick together with the people who won’t let you down. I've been lucky to have a few good friends on my side at music festivals, like Sei Jin who texted me when he saw Tim Harrington of Les Savy Fav was cutting hair at last year's Pitchfork Music Festival.

9.Play nice! Be fair! Everyone knows of that 300 pound behemoth (usually male, sorry men!) that always cuts everyone off in line and tends to have about 42 elbows while in the photopit. Shooting a festival with strict deadlines is stressful enough without these types of people but you’re bound to run into a couple. Feel free to be extra snarky when they hit on you later. I usually find, “I don’t have a name” does the trick.

10.Be nice to your security guards! They are working long hours in the hot sun for probably about as much pay as you are. The ones that seem the strictest are also the ones most on the ball that are going to end up protecting you if the fans get crazy and out of control.

11.Have you ever been at a music festival when it started to rain? I’ll exercise the words of legendary author Douglas Adams with this one: Don’t Panic! Especially if you have a waterproof bag! It’s good to keep some heavy duty plastic bags to wrap around your camera base and the contacts with the lens when this happens. Just exercise good common sense…shoot as little as possible in these cases in the rain with some heavier duty plastic bags wrapped around your camera then put your camera back safely in your bag. This is one reason, however, that I would recommend buying camera equipments with warranties. I usually request, “I would like the kind of warranty where I could basically go fishing with my camera and as long as I can pull it out of the water and return it, it will be replaced.” That said, I treat my camera bases and lenses with huge amounts of respect and don’t do anything stupid but it’s great when you don’t have that sense of anxiety over a freak accident or storm looming over you. Also, I know there are a lot of rain gear protections out on the market…this is one thing I have yet to try so if someone has a good recommendation, feel free to put that in the comments section.

12. Don’t forget to shoot the drummer! They really like it when you remember them! ☺

 

Above: the drummer for Ariel Pink’s Haunted Graffiti, Aaron Sperske, at Coachella 2009.

 

www.myspace.com/arielpink

 

High Altar. The tapestries were designed by Amy Lady Chilston in 1933, as a substitute for the massive reredos originally planned. Woven on the great loom at Merton Abbey, and completed in 1937.

 

Lancing College was founded by Nathaniel Woodard, curate at Shoreham-by-Sea, in 1848. He went on to establish what is now the Woodard Corporation of schools and academies.

In his 'Plea for the Middle Classes' Woodard had argued the need for more, and less exclusive, independent schools. In these 'the teaching and practice of the Catholic faith, as it is expressed in the Book of Common Prayer', was to be central. Dedicated to Saints Mary and Nicholas, after the beautiful ancient churches of Shoreham, the school moved to its present positon in 1857. The Founder believed in the educational value of 'correct buildings' and employed RC Carpenter as architect of the College. It was his son RH (Herbert) Carpenter and his partner William Slater who completed the design for the Chapel as the place of worship for Lancing College and the Central Minster of all the schools founded by Woodard or associated with his foundation. It is intended as a symbol of faith and a challenge to materialism.

The style of the Chapel was described by Sir George Oatley as 'a perfect blend between the lightness and elegance of the early French Gothic and the strength and muscularity added to it on the soil of England'. The foundation stone was laid in 1868 and the building was done by resident masons. Foundations up to 21m (70ft) deep hold the Chapel on its spectacularly eminent site. It is built of Sussex sandstone from Scaynes Hill. From its completion in 1875 the Crypt was used by the school, until the upper chapel was consecrated on 18 July 1911. Even then, the tower, originally planned to be 107m (350ft) high, and the west end were not built. Between 1921 and 1937 the War Memorial Cloister was built and the interior sumptuously furnished. In 1947 the Friends of Lancing Chapel commissioned a new design for the west end from Stephen Dykes Bower. His west wall and rose window were dedicated on 13 May 1978, but again this remarkable building was left unfinished. At last, on 23 April 2022 a west porch, designed by Michael Drury and constructed of Somerset limestone, was dedicated to complete the Chapel after nearly 154 years.

© Ben Heine || Facebook || Twitter || www.benheine.com

_______________________________________________

 

Freeganism is an anti-consumerist lifestyle whereby people employ alternative living strategies based on "limited participation in the conventional economy and minimal consumption of resources". Freegans "embrace community, generosity, social concern, freedom, cooperation, and sharing in opposition to a society based on materialism, moral apathy, competition, conformity, and greed." The lifestyle involves salvaging discarded, unspoiled food from supermarket dumpsters, known as dumpster diving. Freegans salvage the food for political reasons, rather than out of need.

 

The word "freegan" is a portmanteau of "free" and "vegan". Freeganism started in the mid 1990s, out of the antiglobalization and environmentalist movements. The movement also has elements of Diggers, an anarchist street theater group based in Haight-Ashbury in San Francisco in the 1960s, that gave away rescued food. (Text's source: Wikipedia)

 

More on Freeganism: freegan.info

_______________________________________________

 

For more information about my art: info@benheine.com

_______________________________________________

Generalsvilla - Marten Kuilman, inspired by Gabriele Münter (1877-1962).

Gabriele Münter (1877-1962) - Generalsvilla with the Nachlass stamp (on the reverse) oil on board 12 7/8 x 16 1/8 in. (32.7 x 41 cm.) Painted circa 1910.

Christie - Price realised GBP 217,250

Estimate GBP 180,000 - GBP 240,000

Closed: 5 Feb 2009.

---

During her years in Murnau, Gabriele Münter's artistic ambitions were primarily focused on landscape painting which provided the forum for her most daring painterly innovations. The present work is a powerful distillation of the lessons and influences she had absorbed during her time working with Kandinsky and Jawlensky in Murnau in 1908. The deliberately simplistic nature of the composition reflects Münter's interest in traditional Bavarian glass painting, whilst the heightened colouration and compressed spatial perspective indicate her familiarity with the work of the French Fauves. Münter transforms the landscape into irregular horizontal bands which seem to shimmer against each other as they interact, but also subjugates the landscape so that the composition is secondary to the contrasts and harmonies of her broad, flat areas of colour. Through this flatness and distillation of form, Münter sought to capture in her paintings not the mere representation of the scene as it appears to the viewer's eyes, but rather the spirituality of nature and the artist's own subjective emotions when confronted by it. For Münter, the depiction of a simple, dignified existence of a life led close to the land was assimilated into her conception of nature, which, in Richard Heller's analysis of her work, was 'a refuge, a place to which to escape from modern civilization, its turmoil, its social and political problems, its cities and industry, its materialism and its alienation' (R. Heller, Gabriele Münter. The Years of Expressionism, 1903-1920, Munich, 1997, p. 146). By placing the red house in Generalsvilla high on the horizon so that it contrasts sharply with the intense blue of the mountains, Münter creates an arrestingly powerful and vibrant depiction of the unity between humanity and nature.

 

Lancing College was founded by Nathaniel Woodard, curate at Shoreham-by-Sea, in 1848. He went on to establish what is now the Woodard Corporation of schools and academies.

In his 'Plea for the Middle Classes' Woodard had argued the need for more, and less exclusive, independent schools. In these 'the teaching and practice of the Catholic faith, as it is expressed in the Book of Common Prayer', was to be central. Dedicated to Saints Mary and Nicholas, after the beautiful ancient churches of Shoreham, the school moved to its present positon in 1857. The Founder believed in the educational value of 'correct buildings' and employed RC Carpenter as architect of the College. It was his son RH (Herbert) Carpenter and his partner William Slater who completed the design for the Chapel as the place of worship for Lancing College and the Central Minster of all the schools founded by Woodard or associated with his foundation. It is intended as a symbol of faith and a challenge to materialism.

The style of the Chapel was described by Sir George Oatley as 'a perfect blend between the lightness and elegance of the early French Gothic and the strength and muscularity added to it on the soil of England'. The foundation stone was laid in 1868 and the building was done by resident masons. Foundations up to 21m (70ft) deep hold the Chapel on its spectacularly eminent site. It is built of Sussex sandstone from Scaynes Hill. From its completion in 1875 the Crypt was used by the school, until the upper chapel was consecrated on 18 July 1911. Even then, the tower, originally planned to be 107m (350ft) high, and the west end were not built. Between 1921 and 1937 the War Memorial Cloister was built and the interior sumptuously furnished. In 1947 the Friends of Lancing Chapel commissioned a new design for the west end from Stephen Dykes Bower. His west wall and rose window were dedicated on 13 May 1978, but again this remarkable building was left unfinished. At last, on 23 April 2022 a west porch, designed by Michael Drury and constructed of Somerset limestone, was dedicated to complete the Chapel after nearly 154 years.

Follow me @ Tumblr | Twitter | 500px

  

If you are interested in my works, they are available on Getty Images.

 

.

Am I to blame for being a Romantic and a dreamer in a life that is all materialism and stupidity? Am I to blame for having a heart, and for having been born among people interested only in comfort and in money? What stigma has passion placed on my brow? I would like to pass by sighing, and not have anyone even notice me. For when others look at me with their superior smiles, their glances sully me. For my heart and my spirit are very high, and my eyes flee from theirs to contemplate the water, the clouds, or to look into my own heart.

 

~ Hello, Lovely. It’s me.: Federico Garcia Lorca

〰〰〰〰〰〰〰〰〰〰〰〰〰〰〰〰〰〰〰〰〰〰〰〰〰〰〰

● Non-HDR-processed / Non-GND/ND-filtered

● Black Card Technique 黑卡作品

 

.

..............IF YOU WANT TO INVITE ME,

..............PLEASE READ MY PROFILE FIRST!

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immaterialism

 

Subjective idealism, or empirical idealism, is the monistic metaphysical doctrine that only minds and mental contents exist. It entails and is generally identified or associated with immaterialism, the doctrine that material things do not exist.

 

It is the contrary of eliminative materialism, the doctrine that only material things, and no mental things, exist.

 

Subjective idealism: This form of idealism is "subjective" not because it denies that there is an objective reality, but because it asserts that this reality is completely dependent upon the minds of the subjects that perceive it.

 

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immanuel_Kant

Kant believed that the concepts of space and time are integral to all human experience, as are our concepts of cause and effect. One important consequence of this view is that one never hasdirect experience of things, the so-called noumenalworld, and that what we do experience is thephenomenal world as conveyed by our senses.

  

Kant aimed to resolve disputes between empirical andrationalist approaches. The former asserted that all knowledge comes through experience; the latter maintained that reason and innate ideas were prior. Kant argued that experience is purely subjective without first being processed by pure reason. He also said that using reason without applying it to experience only leads to theoretical illusions.

  

The notion of the "thing in itself" was much discussed by those who came after Kant. It was argued that since the "thing in itself" was unknowable its existence could not simply be assumed. Rather than arbitrarily switching to an account that was ungrounded in anything supposed to be the "real," as did the German Idealists, another group arose to ask how our (presumably reliable) accounts of a coherent and rule-abiding universe were actually grounded. This new kind of philosophy became known as Phenomenology, and its founder was Edmund Husserl.

  

Kant, however, contests this: he claims that elementary mathematics, like arithmetic, is synthetic a priori, in that its statements provide new knowledge, but knowledge that is not derived from experience. This becomes part of his over-all argument for transcendental idealism. That is, he argues that the possibility of experience depends on certain necessary conditions — which he calls a priori forms — and that these conditions structure and hold true of the world of experience. In so doing, his main claims in the "Transcendental Aesthetic" are that mathematic judgments are synthetic a priori and in addition, that Space and Time are not derived from experience but rather are its preconditions.

  

Kant asserts that experience is based both upon the perception of external objects and a priori knowledge.[39] The external world, he writes, provides those things that we sense. It is our mind, though, that processes this information about the world and gives it order, allowing us to comprehend it. Our mind supplies the conditions of space and time to experience objects. According to the "transcendental unity of apperception", the concepts of the mind (Understanding) and the perceptions or intuitions that garner information from phenomena (Sensibility) are synthesized by comprehension. Without the concepts, intuitions are nondescript; without the intuitions, concepts are meaningless — thus the famous statement, "Thoughts without content are empty, intuitions without concepts are blind."

Judgments are, for Kant, the preconditions of any thought. Man thinks via judgments, so all possible judgments must be listed and the perceptions connected within them put aside, so as to make it possible to examine the moments when the understanding is engaged in constructing judgments.

Kant ran into a problem with his theory that the mind plays a part in producing objective knowledge. Intuitions and categories are entirely disparate, so how can they interact? Kant's solution is the schema: a priori principles by which the transcendental imagination connects concepts with intuitions through time. All the principles are temporally bound, for if a concept is purely a priori, as the categories are, then they must apply for all times. Hence there are principles such as substance is that which endures through time, and the cause must always be prior to the effect

Transcendental idealism is a doctrine founded by German philosopher Immanuel Kant in the 18th century. Kant's doctrine maintains that human experience of things is similar to the way they appear to us — implying a fundamentally subject-based component, rather than being an activity that directly (and therefore without any obvious causal link) comprehends the things as they are in and of themselves.

Xenophanes of Colophon in 530 BC anticipated Kant's epistemology in his reflections on certainty. "And as for certain truth, no man has seen it, nor will there ever be a man who knows about the gods and about all the things I mention.

Briefly, Schopenhauer described transcendental idealism as a "distinction between the phenomenon and the thing in itself, and a recognition that only the phenomenon is accessible to us because "we do not know either ourselves or things as they are in themselves, but merely as they appear."[4] Some of Schopenhauer's comments on the definition of the word "transcendental" are as follows:

Transcendental is the philosophy that makes us aware of the fact that the first and essential laws of this world that are presented to us are rooted in our brain and are therefore known a priori. It is called transcendental because it goes beyond the whole given phantasmagoria to the origin thereof. Therefore, as I have said, only the Critique of Pure Reason and generally the critical (that is to say, Kantian) philosophy are transcendental.

Realism can also be promoted in an unqualified sense, in which case it asserts the mind-independent existence of a visible world, as opposed to skepticism and solipsism. Philosophers who profess realism state that truth consists in the mind's correspondence to reality.[1]

Realists tend to believe that whatever we believe now is only an approximation of reality and that every new observation brings us closer to understanding reality.[2] In its Kantian sense, realism is contrasted with idealism. In a contemporary sense, realism is contrasted with anti-realism, primarily in the philosophy of science.

Naïve realism[edit]

Naïve realism, also known as direct realism, is a philosophy of mind rooted in a common sense theory of perception that claims that the senses provide us with direct awareness of the external world. In contrast, some forms of idealism assert that no world exists apart from mind-dependent ideas and some forms of skepticism say we cannot trust our senses. The realist view is that objects are composed of matter, occupy space and have properties, such as size, shape, texture, smell, taste and colour, that are usually perceived correctly. We perceive them as they really are. Objects obey the laws of physics and retain all their properties whether or not there is anyone to observe them

  

Stuckists claim that conceptual art is justified by the work of Marcel Duchamp, but that Duchamp's work is "anti-art by intent and effect". The Stuckists feel that "Duchamp's work was a protest against the stale, unthinking artistic establishment of his day", while "the great (but wholly unintentional) irony of postmodernism is that it is a direct equivalent of the conformist, unoriginal establishment that Duchamp attacked in the first place"

  

Obscurantism (French: obscurantisme, from the Latin obscurans, "darkening") is the practice of deliberately preventing the facts or the full details of some matter from becoming known. There are two common historical and intellectual denotations to Obscurantism: (1) deliberately restricting knowledge—opposition to the spread of knowledge, a policy of withholding knowledge from the public; and, (2) deliberate obscurity—an abstruse style (as in literature and art) characterized by deliberate vagueness.

On Monday April 4th at 5:30 at the steps of SF City Hall the San Francisco friends Meeting organized a public reading of Dr. Martin Luther King’s last speech “Beyond Vietnam. A time to Break Silence” which denounces the triple evils of racism, materialism, and militarism sponsored by The People’s Campaign as a statewide effort in multiple locations. Speakers took turns reading the speech for one hour. It coincided with my an art exhibit inside on the 2nd floor in room #279 of district #9 paintings and photos by Art Koch in Supervisor Hillary Ronen’s office. District #9 consists of the Mission, Bernal heights, and the Portola.

Vladimir Ilyich Lenin, 1870 - 1924, founder of the USSR, lived here in 1908.

Marchmont Association

Lenin stayed at 36 Tavistock Place, London (formerly numbered 21) in 1908 whilst reading at the British Museum and writing 'Materialism and Empirio-criticism'.

The Best Christian Testimony | Christian Movie | "The Exchange Account of an Interrogation"

 

www.holyspiritspeaks.org/videos/the-exchange-account-of-a...

 

Jiang Xinyi is a regional leader of The Church of Almighty God in a particular area in China. She loves the truth and has a sense of righteousness. She has received Almighty God's work of the last days for more than ten years. She understands that only Christ is the truth, the way and the life and that only Christ of the last days, Almighty God can save mankind, free them from sin and guide them onto the right path of human life. As a result, she follows God steadfastly, spreads the gospeland bears witness to God. However, the Chinese Communist government persistently captures and persecutes Christians. Jiang Xinyi and a few co-workers had been monitored and followed by the CCP police for three months. At one of the gatherings, the police captured them. In order to seize the church's financial resources and capture more church leaders, the Chinese Communist government brutally tortured Jiang Xinyi and the others. Their goal was to capture all Christians from the local Church of Almighty God in one fell swoop. Yet, while facing police brutality, Jiang Xinyi and other Christians were firm and persistent. They stood firm and bore witness for God in the face of Satan. However, the Chinese Communist government was not resigned to defeat. They mobilized the president of a brainwashing school and religious pastors. They used evil and fallacious doctrines such as atheism, materialism and patriotism as well as despicable methods such as the enticement of fame and gain and family influence to sway them. Jiang Xinyi and people like her had been subjected to repeated attempts at brainwashing. However, they relied on God and prayed to God. Under the guidance of Almighty God's words, they saw through Satan's ruse. Utilizing the truth, they were in an intense battle against the Chinese Communist government's interrogators …

 

Recommended:

 

God Is God | Bless God | Christian Music Video "All People Live in God's Light" | Praise and Worship youtu.be/seKL3iHubMg

 

The Power of the Lord | Christian Movie "In the Deep of Winter" | The Testimony of a Christian youtu.be/EfVo9ESfSX8

 

Eastern Lightning, The Church of Almighty God was created because of the appearance and work of Almighty God, the second coming of the Lord Jesus, Christ of the last days. It is made up of all those who accept Almighty God's work in the last days and are conquered and saved by His words. It was entirely founded by Almighty God personally and is led by Him as the Shepherd. It was definitely not created by a person. Christ is the truth, the way, and the life. God's sheep hear God's voice. As long as you read the words of Almighty God, you will see God has appeared.

 

Special statement: This video production was produced as a not-for-profit piece by the Church of Almighty God. The actors that appear in this production are performing on a not-for-profit basis, and have not been paid in any way. This video may not be distributed for profit to any third party, and we hope that everyone will share it and distribute it openly. When you distribute it, please note the source. Without the consent of the Church of Almighty God, no organization, social group, or individual may tamper with or misrepresent the contents of this video.

How Xmas feels to some of us

 

Cover of Puck magazine, December 1912 (Restored)

 

Library of Congress.

  

Poster size

www.youtube.com/watch?v=A1v81t37hRw

 

Il gabbiano Jonathan Livingston (Jonathan Livingston Seagull, 1973) è un celebre romanzo breve di Richard Bach. Best seller in molti paesi del mondo negli anni settanta, diventato per molti un vero e proprio cult, Jonathan Livingston è essenzialmente una fiaba a contenuto morale e spirituale. La metafora principale del libro, ovvero il percorso di autoperfezionamento del gabbiano che impara a volare/vivere attraverso l'abnegazione e il sacrificio, è stata letta da diverse generazioni secondo diverse prospettive ideologiche, dal cattolicesimo al pensiero positivo, l'anarchismo cristiano e la New Age. Bach disse che la storia era ispirata da un pilota acrobatico di nome John H. "Johnny" Livingston (Cedar Falls, Iowa, 30 novembre 1897 - 30 giugno 1974), particolarmente attivo nel periodo fra gli anni venti e trenta.

Jonathan è un gabbiano diverso dagli altri: il suo desiderio non è mangiare, ma imparare a volare in modo perfetto. Per questo è rimproverato dai suoi genitori ed escluso dagli altri componenti del suo stormo, lo Stormo Buonappetito, in quanto nessuno capisce la sua passione per il volo, dal momento che volare è considerato soltanto come una comodità per procurarsi il cibo. Nonostante la buona volontà di Jonathan per cercare di essere un gabbiano come tutti gli altri e di non dedicarsi più alla sua passione, il suo desiderio di trovare il volo perfetto è più forte di lui e in poco tempo riesce a compiere acrobazie incredibili, mai compiute da nessun altro volatile. Ma lo Stormo non lo accetta.

Abbandonato e solo, Jonathan trascorre diversi anni ad esercitarsi nel volo finché un giorno, dopo essere morto (o meglio: dopo essere passato ad un livello successivo dopo la morte), lo raggiungono due gabbiani dalle piume candide, che si librano nell’aria con lui. Questi lo convincono a seguirli nel "Paradiso dei Gabbiani", un luogo dove potrà volare con più facilità, e tutto quello che aveva appreso sarebbe stata una piccolissima parte del cammino verso la perfezione. Jonathan accetta, diventando anche lui bianco e splendente come i suoi nuovi compagni. Per diversi anni rimane nel Paradiso dei Gabbiani sotto la guida di Sullivan, suo maestro ed amico.

È lo stesso Sullivan, insieme ad altri gabbiani, a spiegargli che quello non è il vero Paradiso, ma solo un livello transitorio, dopo il quale si passa più in alto ancora, fino a raggiungere la perfezione e che tutti, prima o poi, saliranno di piano in piano. Quando finalmente raggiunge i livelli del suo maestro, si accorge che - nonostante tutto ciò che ha imparato - il suo corpo gli è ancora d'intralcio. Così chiede al gabbiano più anziano, Ciang, di insegnargli a volare alla velocità del pensiero, a superare il "qui ed ora", cosa che soltanto Ciang sa fare.

Dopo molti tentativi, Jonathan riesce nel suo impegno, ma poche settimane dopo Ciang muore e viene portato in un Paradiso superiore. Egli lascia il posto di maestro a Jonathan: non basta allenarsi al volo perfetto, il vero scopo è arrivare a capire il segreto della bontà e dell'amore, ovvero la cosa più difficile da mettere in pratica. Rimasto senza guida, Jonathan tormentato dal desiderio di insegnare al resto dei gabbiani dello Stormo Buonappetito tutto ciò che ha appreso, confessa a Sullivan i suoi pensieri, ma questo lo convince ad aiutarlo nella sua attività di addestramento dei nuovi arrivati. Qualche tempo dopo, torna il desiderio di andare ad insegnare allo stormo Buonappetito: così saluta Sullivan e parte per ritornare al suo luogo di origine, dove trova un giovane: Fletcher Lynd, che diventa suo allievo. Poi torna allo stormo con altri 8 gabbiani. Molti gabbiani dello stormo rimangono incuriositi dalle evoluzioni dei gabbiani di Jonathan e decidono di unirsi a lui. Il romanzo si conclude con un dialogo tra Jonathan e Flechter che fa capire al giovane gabbiano che cos'è la vera perfezione.

(fonte: Wikipedia)

Jonathan Livingston Seagull, written by Richard Bach, is a fable in novella form about a seagull learning about life and flight, and a homily about self-perfection. It was first published in 1970 as "Jonathan Livingston Seagull — a story." By the end of 1972, over a million copies were in print, Reader's Digest had published a condensed version, and the book reached the top of the New York Times Best Seller list where it remained for 38 weeks. In 1972 and 1973 the book topped the Publishers Weekly list of bestselling novels in the United States.

PlotThe book tells the story of Jonathan Livingston Seagull, a seagull who is bored with the daily squabbles over food. Seized by a passion for flight, he pushes himself, learning everything he can about flying, until finally his unwillingness to conform results in his expulsion from his flock. An outcast, he continues to learn, becoming increasingly pleased with his abilities as he leads an idyllic life.

One day, Jonathan is met by two gulls who take him to a "higher plane of existence" in that there is no heaven but a better world found through perfection of knowledge, where he meets other gulls who love to fly. He discovers that his sheer tenacity and desire to learn make him "pretty well a one-in-a-million bird." Jonathan befriends the wisest gull in this new place, named Chiang, who takes him beyond his previous learning, teaching him how to move instantaneously to anywhere else in the Universe. The secret, Chiang says, is to "begin by knowing that you have already arrived." Not satisfied with his new life, Jonathan returns to Earth to find others like him, to bring them his learning and to spread his love for flight. His mission is successful, gathering around him others who have been outlawed for not conforming. Ultimately, the very first of his students, Fletcher Lynd Seagull, becomes a teacher in his own right and Jonathan leaves to teach other flocks.

Part One of the book finds young Jonathan Livingston frustrated with the meaningless materialism and conformity and limitation of the seagull life. He is seized with a passion for flight of all kinds, and his soul soars as he experiments with exhilarating challenges of daring and triumphant aerial feats. Eventually, his lack of conformity to the limited seagull life leads him into conflict with his flock, and they turn their backs on him, casting him out of their society and exiling him. Not deterred by this, Jonathan continues his efforts to reach higher and higher flight goals, finding he is often successful but eventually he can fly no higher. He is then met by two radiant, loving seagulls who explain to him that he has learned much, and that they are there now to teach him more.

Part TwoJonathan transcends into a society where all the gulls enjoy flying. He is only capable of this after practising hard alone for a long time (described in the first part). In this other society, real respect emerges as a contrast of the coercive force that was keeping the former "Breakfast Flock" together. The learning process, linking the highly experienced teacher and the diligent student, is raised into almost sacred levels, suggesting that this may be the true relation between human and God. Because of this, each has been described as believing that human and God, regardless of the all immense difference, are sharing something of great importance that can bind them together: "You've got to understand that a seagull is an unlimited idea of freedom, an image of the Great Gull." He realizes that you have to be true to yourself: "You have the freedom to be yourself, your true self, here and now, and nothing can stand in your way."

Part ThreeIn the third part of the book are the last words of Jonathan's teacher: "Keep working on love." Through his teachings, Jonathan understands that the spirit cannot be really free without the ability to forgive, and that the way to progress leads—for him, at least—through becoming a teacher, not just through working hard as a student. Jonathan returns to the Breakfast Flock to share his newly discovered ideals and the recent tremendous experience, ready for the difficult fight against the current rules of that society. The ability to forgive seems to be a mandatory "passing condition."

"Do you want to fly so much that you will forgive the Flock, and learn, and go back to them one day and work to help them know?" Jonathan asks his first student, Fletcher Lynd Seagull, before getting into any further talks. The idea that the stronger can reach more by leaving the weaker friends behind seems totally rejected.

Hence, love, deserved respect, and forgiveness all seem to be equally important to the freedom from the pressure to obey the rules just because they are commonly accepted.

(source: Wikipedia)

2019 july 16

 

abstract optical materialism macropaintograph with household materials

 

Camera: Pentax K-50 16 Mpixel Digital SLR + Carl Zeiss Tessar 2.8/50mm via extension tube

Tattoo materialism RARE gacha by Suicidal Thots TAXI :https://marketplace.secondlife.com/stores/205267

Who will win?

We surround us with things we don´t need ,but we think they are important.

 

I am doing a cleaning process trying to throw away or recycle and giving away things that we don´t use.

I will thow away things that doesen´t give any joy as well...I need to be a free child again ready for new fresh energy..

Most difficult for me is to release me from so many things from my mum that passed away in 1999.

 

My energy is low at the moment but I am sure that soon I will have more force and time to spend as I want,that means also having a look at my friends photography.

 

Take care dear friends and enjoy your weekend.

Warm hugs!

 

>>To be seen in Flickr-group "Creative Composition" and others<<

"No PERFECT CAMERA? No PERFECT GEAR?....do not let materialism kill your creativity. Show the whole world your creativity through your photos and let us change the way others see things."

Indre By (Inner City) in Copenhagen, Denmark.

 

Copenhagen was founded in 1167 by Bishop Absalon, who erected a fortress on Slotsholmen Island, fortifying a small and previously unprotected harbourside village. After the fortification was built, the harbourside village grew in importance and took on the name Kømandshavn (Merchant’s Port), which was later condensed to København. Absalon’s fortress stood until 1369, when it was destroyed in an attack on the town by the powerful Hanseatic states.

 

In 1376 construction began on a new Slotsholmen fortification, Copenhagen Castle, and in 1416 King Erik of Pomerania took up residence at the site, marking the beginning of Cop-enhagen’s role as the capital of Denmark.

 

Still, it wasn’t until the reign of Christian IV, in the first half of the 17th century, that the city was endowed with much of its splendour. A lofty Renaissance designer, Christian IV began an ambitious construction scheme, building two new castles and many other grand edifices, including the Rundetårn observatory and the glorious Børsen, Europe’s first stock exchange.

 

In 1711 the bubonic plague reduced Cop-enhagen’s population of 60, 000 by one-third. Tragic fires, one in 1728 and the other in 1795, wiped out large tracts of the city, including most of its timber buildings. However, the worst scourge in the city’s history is generally regarded as the unprovoked British bombardment of Copenhagen in 1807, during the Napoleonic Wars. The attack targeted the heart of the city, inflicting numerous civilian casualties and setting hundreds of homes, churches and public buildings on fire.

 

Copenhagen flourished in the 19th and 20th centuries, expanding beyond its old city walls and establishing a reputation as a centre for culture, liberal politics and the arts. Dark times were experienced with the Nazi occupation of the city during WWII, although the city managed to emerge relatively unscathed.

 

During the war and in the economic depression that had preceded it, many Copenhagen neighbourhoods had deteriorated into slums. In 1948 an ambitious urban renewal policy called the ‘Finger Plan’ was adopted; this redeveloped much of the city, creating new housing projects interspaced with green areas of parks and recreational facilities that spread out like fingers from the city centre.

 

A rebellion by young people disillusioned with growing materialism, the nuclear arms race and an authoritarian educational system took hold in Copenhagen in the 1960s. Student protests broke out on the university campus and squatters occupied vacant buildings around the city. It came to a head in 1971 when protesters tore down the fence of an abandoned military camp at the east side of Christianshavn and began an occupation of the 41-hectare site, naming this settlement Christiania.

 

Information Source:

www.lonelyplanet.com/denmark/copenhagen/history

 

>>To be seen in Flickr-group "Creative Composition" and others<<

"No PERFECT CAMERA? No PERFECT GEAR?....do not let materialism kill your creativity. Show the whole world your creativity through your photos and let us change the way others see things."

2019 july 27

 

abstract optical materialism macropaintograph with household materials

 

Camera: Pentax K-50 16 Mpixel Digital SLR + Carl Zeiss Tessar 2.8/50mm via extension tube

 

When God created man in His image, He created a measure; the human perception of the world corresponds to God's creative intention. Man by definition is a center, or "the center" in a given universe; not by accident, but in virtue of the very nature of Being, and this is why that which is large or small for man is large or small in the divine intention; man perceives things as they present themselves in the divine Intellect. And that is why the world of the indefinitely small, as well as the world of the indefinitely large, is as it were forbidden to man, who should not want to disproportionately enlarge the small or to disproportionately reduce the large. Man ought to feel that there is no advantage or happiness in such enterprises; and he would feel it if he had maintained a relationship with the Absolute, or if this relationship were sincere and sufficient.

 

He, who is really at peace with God is free from all unhealthy curiosity, if one may say so; he lives, like a well-guarded child, in the blessed garden of a grace that does not forsake him; the Creator knows the best place for the creature, and He knows what is good for man.

 

In a certain sense, the world of atoms as well as that of galaxies is hostile to human beings, and comprises for them, in principle or potentially, a climate of alienation and terror. Some people will doubtless argue that "the man of our times" is an "adult," but this is pride, even satanism, for a normal man always keeps a childlike side, as all sacred Scriptures attest by their language; if such were not the case, childhood itself would not comprise a positive aspect. Of course, a mature man ought to be "adult," but he can be so otherwise than by plunging into forbidden abysses; the spiritual victory over illusion is a matter appreciably more serious than the insensitivityof the explorers of the inhuman.

 

There are two points to consider in created things, namely the empirical appearance and the mechanism; now the appearance manifests the divine intention, as we have stated above; the mechanism merely operates the mode of manifestation.

 

For example, in man's body the divine intention is expressed by its form, its deiformity, its symbolism and its beauty; the mechanism is its anatomy and vital functioning.

 

The modern mentality, having always a scientific and "iconoclastic" tendency, tends to overaccentuate the mechanism to the detriment of the creative intention, and does so on all levels, psychological as well as physical; the result is a jaded and "demystified" mentality that is no longer "impressed" by anything. By forgetting the divine intention - which nonetheless is apparent a priori - one ends in an emptiness devoid of all reference points and meaning, and in a mentality of nihilism and despair, if not of careless and brutal materialism. In the face of this deviation it is the child who is right when he believes that the blue sky above us is Paradise.

 

---

 

Frithjof Schuon: Roots of the Human Condition

An emblem of the city of Barcelona, Spain, and its most famous building, the Sagrada Familia is a fragment of what its architect, Antoni Gaudi (1852-1926), intended. Gaudi began work on the church in 1883 and for the latter part of his life dedicated himself entirely to building a temple that would do penance for the materialism of the modern world.

 

Gaudi worked on the temple for 43 years until his tragic accidental death in 1926. His funeral cortege, which went through much of Barcelona and finished in the Sagrada Familia, was a grand event in the city in recognition of his status as the greatest architect Barcelona has ever seen. He was buried in the chapel of Our Lady of Mount Carmel in the crypt of the Sagrada Familia.

 

Construction of the Sagrada Familia is not expected to be completed until 2026, a century after the death of Gaudi.

 

1. The Mind-Body Problem and the History of Dualism

1.1 The Mind-Body Problem

The mind-body problem is the problem: what is the relationship between mind and body? Or alternatively: what is the relationship between mental properties and physical properties?

Humans have (or seem to have) both physical properties and mental properties. People have (or seem to have)the sort of properties attributed in the physical sciences. These physical properties include size, weight, shape, colour, motion through space and time, etc. But they also have (or seem to have) mental properties, which we do not attribute to typical physical objects These properties involve consciousness (including perceptual experience, emotional experience, and much else), intentionality (including beliefs, desires, and much else), and they are possessed by a subject or a self. Physical properties are public, in the sense that they are, in principle, equally observable by anyone. Some physical properties – like those of an electron – are not directly observable at all, but they are equally available to all, to the same degree, with scientific equipment and techniques. The same is not true of mental properties. I may be able to tell that you are in pain by your behaviour, but only you can feel it directly. Similarly, you just know how something looks to you, and I can only surmise. Conscious mental events are private to the subject, who has a privileged access to them of a kind no-one has to the physical. The mind-body problem concerns the relationship between these two sets of properties. The mind-body problem breaks down into a number of components. The ontological question: what are mental states and what are physical states? Is one class a subclass of the other, so that all mental states are physical, or vice versa? Or are mental states and physical states entirely distinct?

The causal question: do physical states influence mental states? Do mental states influence physical states? If so, how?

Different aspects of the mind-body problem arise for different aspects of the mental, such as consciousness, intentionality, the self. The problem of consciousness: what is consciousness? How is it related to the brain and the body? The problem of intentionality: what is intentionality? How is it related to the brain and the body? The problem of the self: what is the self? How is it related to the brain and the body? Other aspects of the mind-body problem arise for aspects of the physical. For example:

 

The problem of embodiment: what is it for the mind to be housed in a body? What is it for a body to belong to a particular subject?

The seemingly intractable nature of these problems have given rise to many different philosophical views.

 

Materialist views say that, despite appearances to the contrary, mental states are just physical states. Behaviourism, functionalism, mind-brain identity theory and the computational theory of mind are examples of how materialists attempt to explain how this can be so. The most common factor in such theories is the attempt to explicate the nature of mind and consciousness in terms of their ability to directly or indirectly modify behaviour, but there are versions of materialism that try to tie the mental to the physical without explicitly explaining the mental in terms of its behaviour-modifying role. The latter are often grouped together under the label ‘non-reductive physicalism’, though this label is itself rendered elusive because of the controversial nature of the term ‘reduction’.

 

Idealist views say that physical states are really mental. This is because the physical world is an empirical world and, as such, it is the intersubjective product of our collective experience.

 

Dualist views (the subject of this entry) say that the mental and the physical are both real and neither can be assimilated to the other. For the various forms that dualism can take and the associated problems, see below.

 

In sum, we can say that there is a mind-body problem because both consciousness and thought, broadly construed, seem very different from anything physical and there is no convincing consensus on how to build a satisfactorily unified picture of creatures possessed of both a mind and a body.

 

Other entries which concern aspects of the mind-body problem include (among many others): behaviorism, consciousness, eliminative materialism, epiphenomenalism, functionalism, identity theory, intentionality, mental causation, neutral monism, and physicalism.

 

1.2 History of dualism

In dualism, ‘mind’ is contrasted with ‘body’, but at different times, different aspects of the mind have been the centre of attention. In the classical and mediaeval periods, it was the intellect that was thought to be most obviously resistant to a materialistic account: from Descartes on, the main stumbling block to materialist monism was supposed to be ‘consciousness’, of which phenomenal consciousness or sensation came to be considered as the paradigm instance.

 

The classical emphasis originates in Plato’s Phaedo. Plato believed that the true substances are not physical bodies, which are ephemeral, but the eternal Forms of which bodies are imperfect copies. These Forms not only make the world possible, they also make it intelligible, because they perform the role of universals, or what Frege called ‘concepts’. It is their connection with intelligibility that is relevant to the philosophy of mind. Because Forms are the grounds of intelligibility, they are what the intellect must grasp in the process of understanding. In Phaedo Plato presents a variety of arguments for the immortality of the soul, but the one that is relevant for our purposes is that the intellect is immaterial because Forms are immaterial and intellect must have an affinity with the Forms it apprehends (78b4–84b8). This affinity is so strong that the soul strives to leave the body in which it is imprisoned and to dwell in the realm of Forms. It may take many reincarnations before this is achieved. Plato’s dualism is not, therefore, simply a doctrine in the philosophy of mind, but an integral part of his whole metaphysics.

 

One problem with Plato’s dualism was that, though he speaks of the soul as imprisoned in the body, there is no clear account of what binds a particular soul to a particular body. Their difference in nature makes the union a mystery.

 

Aristotle did not believe in Platonic Forms, existing independently of their instances. Aristotelian forms (the capital ‘F’ has disappeared with their standing as autonomous entities) are the natures and properties of things and exist embodied in those things. This enabled Aristotle to explain the union of body and soul by saying that the soul is the form of the body. This means that a particular person’s soul is no more than his nature as a human being. Because this seems to make the soul into a property of the body, it led many interpreters, both ancient and modern, to interpret his theory as materialistic. The interpretation of Aristotle’s philosophy of mind – and, indeed, of his whole doctrine of form – remains as live an issue today as it was immediately after his death (Robinson 1983 and 1991; Nussbaum 1984; Rorty and Nussbaum, eds, 1992). Nevertheless, the text makes it clear that Aristotle believed that the intellect, though part of the soul, differs from other faculties in not having a bodily organ. His argument for this constitutes a more tightly argued case than Plato’s for the immateriality of thought and, hence, for a kind of dualism. He argued that the intellect must be immaterial because if it were material it could not receive all forms. Just as the eye, because of its particular physical nature, is sensitive to light but not to sound, and the ear to sound and not to light, so, if the intellect were in a physical organ it could be sensitive only to a restricted range of physical things; but this is not the case, for we can think about any kind of material object (De Anima III,4; 429a10–b9). As it does not have a material organ, its activity must be essentially immaterial.

 

It is common for modern Aristotelians, who otherwise have a high view of Aristotle’s relevance to modern philosophy, to treat this argument as being of purely historical interest, and not essential to Aristotle’s system as a whole. They emphasize that he was not a ‘Cartesian’ dualist, because the intellect is an aspect of the soul and the soul is the form of the body, not a separate substance. Kenny (1989) argues that Aristotle’s theory of mind as form gives him an account similar to Ryle (1949), for it makes the soul equivalent to the dispositions possessed by a living body. This ‘anti-Cartesian’ approach to Aristotle arguably ignores the fact that, for Aristotle, the form is the substance.

 

These issues might seem to be of purely historical interest. But we shall see in below, in section 4.5, that this is not so.

 

The identification of form and substance is a feature of Aristotle’s system that Aquinas effectively exploits in this context, identifying soul, intellect and form, and treating them as a substance. (See, for example, Aquinas (1912), Part I, questions 75 and 76.) But though the form (and, hence, the intellect with which it is identical) are the substance of the human person, they are not the person itself. Aquinas says that when one addresses prayers to a saint – other than the Blessed Virgin Mary, who is believed to retain her body in heaven and is, therefore, always a complete person – one should say, not, for example, ‘Saint Peter pray for us’, but ‘soul of Saint Peter pray for us’. The soul, though an immaterial substance, is the person only when united with its body. Without the body, those aspects of its personal memory that depend on images (which are held to be corporeal) will be lost.(See Aquinas (1912), Part I, question 89.)

 

The more modern versions of dualism have their origin in Descartes’ Meditations, and in the debate that was consequent upon Descartes’ theory. Descartes was a substance dualist. He believed that there were two kinds of substance: matter, of which the essential property is that it is spatially extended; and mind, of which the essential property is that it thinks. Descartes’ conception of the relation between mind and body was quite different from that held in the Aristotelian tradition. For Aristotle, there is no exact science of matter. How matter behaves is essentially affected by the form that is in it. You cannot combine just any matter with any form – you cannot make a knife out of butter, nor a human being out of paper – so the nature of the matter is a necessary condition for the nature of the substance. But the nature of the substance does not follow from the nature of its matter alone: there is no ‘bottom up’ account of substances. Matter is a determinable made determinate by form. This was how Aristotle thought that he was able to explain the connection of soul to body: a particular soul exists as the organizing principle in a particular parcel of matter.

 

The belief in the relative indeterminacy of matter is one reason for Aristotle’s rejection of atomism. If matter is atomic, then it is already a collection of determinate objects in its own right, and it becomes natural to regard the properties of macroscopic substances as mere summations of the natures of the atoms.

 

Although, unlike most of his fashionable contemporaries and immediate successors, Descartes was not an atomist, he was, like the others, a mechanist about the properties of matter. Bodies are machines that work according to their own laws. Except where there are minds interfering with it, matter proceeds deterministically, in its own right. Where there are minds requiring to influence bodies, they must work by ‘pulling levers’ in a piece of machinery that already has its own laws of operation. This raises the question of where those ‘levers’ are in the body. Descartes opted for the pineal gland, mainly because it is not duplicated on both sides of the brain, so it is a candidate for having a unique, unifying function.

 

The main uncertainty that faced Descartes and his contemporaries, however, was not where interaction took place, but how two things so different as thought and extension could interact at all. This would be particularly mysterious if one had an impact view of causal interaction, as would anyone influenced by atomism, for whom the paradigm of causation is like two billiard balls cannoning off one another.

 

Various of Descartes’ disciples, such as Arnold Geulincx and Nicholas Malebranche, concluded that all mind-body interactions required the direct intervention of God. The appropriate states of mind and body were only the occasions for such intervention, not real causes. Now it would be convenient to think that occasionalists held that all causation was natural except for that between mind and body. In fact they generalized their conclusion and treated all causation as directly dependent on God. Why this was so, we cannot discuss here.

 

Descartes’ conception of a dualism of substances came under attack from the more radical empiricists, who found it difficult to attach sense to the concept of substance at all. Locke, as a moderate empiricist, accepted that there were both material and immaterial substances. Berkeley famously rejected material substance, because he rejected all existence outside the mind. In his early Notebooks, he toyed with the idea of rejecting immaterial substance, because we could have no idea of it, and reducing the self to a collection of the ‘ideas’ that constituted its contents. Finally, he decided that the self, conceived as something over and above the ideas of which it was aware, was essential for an adequate understanding of the human person. Although the self and its acts are not presented to consciousness as objects of awareness, we are obliquely aware of them simply by dint of being active subjects. Hume rejected such claims, and proclaimed the self to be nothing more than a concatenation of its ephemeral contents.

 

In fact, Hume criticised the whole conception of substance for lacking in empirical content: when you search for the owner of the properties that make up a substance, you find nothing but further properties. Consequently, the mind is, he claimed, nothing but a ‘bundle’ or ‘heap’ of impressions and ideas – that is, of particular mental states or events, without an owner. This position has been labelled bundle dualism, and it is a special case of a general bundle theory of substance, according to which objects in general are just organised collections of properties. The problem for the Humean is to explain what binds the elements in the bundle together. This is an issue for any kind of substance, but for material bodies the solution seems fairly straightforward: the unity of a physical bundle is constituted by some form of causal interaction between the elements in the bundle. For the mind, mere causal connection is not enough; some further relation of co-consciousness is required. We shall see in 5.2.1 that it is problematic whether one can treat such a relation as more primitive than the notion of belonging to a subject.

 

One should note the following about Hume’s theory. His bundle theory is a theory about the nature of the unity of the mind. As a theory about this unity, it is not necessarily dualist. Parfit (1970, 1984) and Shoemaker (1984, ch. 2), for example, accept it as physicalists. In general, physicalists will accept it unless they wish to ascribe the unity to the brain or the organism as a whole. Before the bundle theory can be dualist one must accept property dualism, for more about which, see the next section.

 

A crisis in the history of dualism came, however, with the growing popularity of mechanism in science in the nineteenth century. According to the mechanist, the world is, as it would now be expressed, ‘closed under physics’. This means that everything that happens follows from and is in accord with the laws of physics. There is, therefore, no scope for interference in the physical world by the mind in the way that interactionism seems to require. According to the mechanist, the conscious mind is an epiphenomenon (a notion given general currency by T. H. Huxley 1893): that is, it is a by-product of the physical system which has no influence back on it. In this way, the facts of consciousness are acknowledged but the integrity of physical science is preserved. However, many philosophers found it implausible to claim such things as the following; the pain that I have when you hit me, the visual sensations I have when I see the ferocious lion bearing down on me or the conscious sense of understanding I have when I hear your argument – all have nothing directly to do with the way I respond. It is very largely due to the need to avoid this counterintuitiveness that we owe the concern of twentieth century philosophy to devise a plausible form of materialist monism. But, although dualism has been out of fashion in psychology since the advent of behaviourism (Watson 1913) and in philosophy since Ryle (1949), the argument is by no means over. Some distinguished neurologists, such as Sherrington (1940) and Eccles (Popper and Eccles 1977) have continued to defend dualism as the only theory that can preserve the data of consciousness. Amongst mainstream philosophers, discontent with physicalism led to a modest revival of property dualism in the last decade of the twentieth century. At least some of the reasons for this should become clear below.

 

2. Varieties of Dualism: Ontology

There are various ways of dividing up kinds of dualism. One natural way is in terms of what sorts of things one chooses to be dualistic about. The most common categories lighted upon for these purposes are substance and property, giving one substance dualism and property dualism. There is, however, an important third category, namely predicate dualism. As this last is the weakest theory, in the sense that it claims least, I shall begin by characterizing it.

 

2.1 Predicate dualism

Predicate dualism is the theory that psychological or mentalistic predicates are (a) essential for a full description of the world and (b) are not reducible to physicalistic predicates. For a mental predicate to be reducible, there would be bridging laws connecting types of psychological states to types of physical ones in such a way that the use of the mental predicate carried no information that could not be expressed without it. An example of what we believe to be a true type reduction outside psychology is the case of water, where water is always H2O: something is water if and only if it is H2O. If one were to replace the word ‘water’ by ‘H2O’, it is plausible to say that one could convey all the same information. But the terms in many of the special sciences (that is, any science except physics itself) are not reducible in this way. Not every hurricane or every infectious disease, let alone every devaluation of the currency or every coup d’etat has the same constitutive structure. These states are defined more by what they do than by their composition or structure. Their names are classified as functional terms rather than natural kind terms. It goes with this that such kinds of state are multiply realizable; that is, they may be constituted by different kinds of physical structures under different circumstances. Because of this, unlike in the case of water and H2O, one could not replace these terms by some more basic physical description and still convey the same information. There is no particular description, using the language of physics or chemistry, that would do the work of the word ‘hurricane’, in the way that ‘H2O’ would do the work of ‘water’. It is widely agreed that many, if not all, psychological states are similarly irreducible, and so psychological predicates are not reducible to physical descriptions and one has predicate dualism. (The classic source for irreducibility in the special sciences in general is Fodor (1974), and for irreducibility in the philosophy of mind, Davidson (1971).)

 

2.2 Property Dualism

Whereas predicate dualism says that there are two essentially different kinds of predicates in our language, property dualism says that there are two essentially different kinds of property out in the world. Property dualism can be seen as a step stronger than predicate dualism. Although the predicate ‘hurricane’ is not equivalent to any single description using the language of physics, we believe that each individual hurricane is nothing but a collection of physical atoms behaving in a certain way: one need have no more than the physical atoms, with their normal physical properties, following normal physical laws, for there to be a hurricane. One might say that we need more than the language of physics to describe and explain the weather, but we do not need more than its ontology. There is token identity between each individual hurricane and a mass of atoms, even if there is no type identity between hurricanes as kinds and some particular structure of atoms as a kind. Genuine property dualism occurs when, even at the individual level, the ontology of physics is not sufficient to constitute what is there. The irreducible language is not just another way of describing what there is, it requires that there be something more there than was allowed for in the initial ontology. Until the early part of the twentieth century, it was common to think that biological phenomena (‘life’) required property dualism (an irreducible ‘vital force’), but nowadays the special physical sciences other than psychology are generally thought to involve only predicate dualism. In the case of mind, property dualism is defended by those who argue that the qualitative nature of consciousness is not merely another way of categorizing states of the brain or of behaviour, but a genuinely emergent phenomenon.

 

2.3 Substance Dualism

There are two important concepts deployed in this notion. One is that of substance, the other is the dualism of these substances. A substance is characterized by its properties, but, according to those who believe in substances, it is more than the collection of the properties it possesses, it is the thing which possesses them. So the mind is not just a collection of thoughts, but is that which thinks, an immaterial substance over and above its immaterial states. Properties are the properties of objects. If one is a property dualist, one may wonder what kinds of objects possess the irreducible or immaterial properties in which one believes. One can use a neutral expression and attribute them to persons, but, until one has an account of person, this is not explanatory. One might attribute them to human beings qua animals, or to the brains of these animals. Then one will be holding that these immaterial properties are possessed by what is otherwise a purely material thing. But one may also think that not only mental states are immaterial, but that the subject that possesses them must also be immaterial. Then one will be a dualist about that to which mental states and properties belong as well about the properties themselves. Now one might try to think of these subjects as just bundles of the immaterial states. This is Hume’s view. But if one thinks that the owner of these states is something quite over and above the states themselves, and is immaterial, as they are, one will be a substance dualist.

 

Substance dualism is also often dubbed ‘Cartesian dualism’, but some substance dualists are keen to distinguish their theories from Descartes’s. E. J. Lowe, for example, is a substance dualist, in the following sense. He holds that a normal human being involves two substances, one a body and the other a person. The latter is not, however, a purely mental substance that can be defined in terms of thought or consciousness alone, as Descartes claimed. But persons and their bodies have different identity conditions and are both substances, so there are two substances essentially involved in a human being, hence this is a form of substance dualism. Lowe (2006) claims that his theory is close to P. F. Strawson’s (1959), whilst admitting that Strawson would not have called it substance dualism.

 

3. Varieties of Dualism: Interaction

If mind and body are different realms, in the way required by either property or substance dualism, then there arises the question of how they are related. Common sense tells us that they interact: thoughts and feelings are at least sometimes caused by bodily events and at least sometimes themselves give rise to bodily responses. I shall now consider briefly the problems for interactionism, and its main rivals, epiphenomenalism and parallelism.

 

3.1 Interactionism

Interactionism is the view that mind and body – or mental events and physical events – causally influence each other. That this is so is one of our common-sense beliefs, because it appears to be a feature of everyday experience. The physical world influences my experience through my senses, and I often react behaviourally to those experiences. My thinking, too, influences my speech and my actions. There is, therefore, a massive natural prejudice in favour of interactionism. It has been claimed, however, that it faces serious problems (some of which were anticipated in section 1).

 

The simplest objection to interaction is that, in so far as mental properties, states or substances are of radically different kinds from each other, they lack that communality necessary for interaction. It is generally agreed that, in its most naive form, this objection to interactionism rests on a ‘billiard ball’ picture of causation: if all causation is by impact, how can the material and the immaterial impact upon each other? But if causation is either by a more ethereal force or energy or only a matter of constant conjunction, there would appear to be no problem in principle with the idea of interaction of mind and body.

 

Even if there is no objection in principle, there appears to be a conflict between interactionism and some basic principles of physical science. For example, if causal power was flowing in and out of the physical system, energy would not be conserved, and the conservation of energy is a fundamental scientific law. Various responses have been made to this. One suggestion is that it might be possible for mind to influence the distribution of energy, without altering its quantity. (See Averill and Keating 1981). Another response is to challenge the relevance of the conservation principle in this context. The conservation principle states that ‘in a causally isolated system the total amount of energy will remain constant’. Whereas ‘[t]he interactionist denies…that the human body is an isolated system’, so the principle is irrelevant (Larmer (1986), 282: this article presents a good brief survey of the options). This approach has been termed conditionality, namely the view that conservation is conditional on the physical system being closed, that is, that nothing non-physical is interacting or interfering with it, and, of course, the interactionist claims that this condition is, trivially, not met. That conditionality is the best line for the dualist to take, and that other approaches do not work, is defended in Pitts (2019) and Cucu and Pitts (2019). This, they claim, makes the plausibility of interactionism an empirical matter which only close investigation on the fine operation of the brain could hope to settle. Cucu, in a separate article (2018), claims to find critical neuronal events which do not have sufficient physical explanation.This claim clearly needs further investigation.

 

Robins Collins (2011) has claimed that the appeal to conservation by opponents of interactionism is something of a red herring because conservation principles are not ubiquitous in physics. He argues that energy is not conserved in general relativity, in quantum theory, or in the universe taken as a whole. Why then, should we insist on it in mind-brain interaction?

 

Most discussion of interactionism takes place in the context of the assumption that it is incompatible with the world’s being ‘closed under physics’. This is a very natural assumption, but it is not justified if causal overdetermination of behaviour is possible. There could then be a complete physical cause of behaviour, and a mental one. The strongest intuitive objection against overdetermination is clearly stated by Mills (1996: 112), who is himself a defender of overdetermination.

 

For X to be a cause of Y, X must contribute something to Y. The only way a purely mental event could contribute to a purely physical one would be to contribute some feature not already determined by a purely physical event. But if physical closure is true, there is no feature of the purely physical effect that is not contributed by the purely physical cause. Hence interactionism violates physical closure after all.

 

Mills says that this argument is invalid, because a physical event can have features not explained by the event which is its sufficient cause. For example, “the rock’s hitting the window is causally sufficient for the window’s breaking, and the window’s breaking has the feature of being the third window-breaking in the house this year; but the facts about prior window-breakings, rather than the rock’s hitting the window, are what cause this window-breaking to have this feature.”

 

The opponent of overdetermination could perhaps reply that his principle applies, not to every feature of events, but to a subgroup – say, intrinsic features, not merely relational or comparative ones. It is this kind of feature that the mental event would have to cause, but physical closure leaves no room for this. These matters are still controversial.

 

The problem with closure of physics may be radically altered if physical laws are indeterministic, as quantum theory seems to assert. If physical laws are deterministic, then any interference from outside would lead to a breach of those laws. But if they are indeterministic, might not interference produce a result that has a probability greater than zero, and so be consistent with the laws? This way, one might have interaction yet preserve a kind of nomological closure, in the sense that no laws are infringed. Because it involves assessing the significance and consequences of quantum theory, this is a difficult matter for the non-physicist to assess. Some argue that indeterminacy manifests itself only on the subatomic level, being cancelled out by the time one reaches even very tiny macroscopic objects: and human behaviour is a macroscopic phenomenon. Others argue that the structure of the brain is so finely tuned that minute variations could have macroscopic effects, rather in the way that, according to ‘chaos theory’, the flapping of a butterfly’s wings in China might affect the weather in New York. (For discussion of this, see Eccles (1980), (1987), and Popper and Eccles (1977).) Still others argue that quantum indeterminacy manifests itself directly at a high level, when acts of observation collapse the wave function, suggesting that the mind may play a direct role in affecting the state of the world (Hodgson 1988; Stapp 1993).

 

3.2 Epiphenomenalism

If the reality of property dualism is not to be denied, but the problem of how the immaterial is to affect the material is to be avoided, then epiphenomenalism may seem to be the answer. According to this theory, mental events are caused by physical events, but have no causal influence on the physical. I have introduced this theory as if its point were to avoid the problem of how two different categories of thing might interact. In fact, it is, at best, an incomplete solution to this problem. If it is mysterious how the non-physical can have it in its nature to influence the physical, it ought to be equally mysterious how the physical can have it in its nature to produce something non-physical. But that this latter is what occurs is an essential claim of epiphenomenalism. (For development of this point, see Green (2003), 149–51). In fact, epiphenomenalism is more effective as a way of saving the autonomy of the physical (the world as ‘closed under physics’) than as a contribution to avoiding the need for the physical and non-physical to have causal commerce.

 

There are at least three serious problems for epiphenomenalism. First, as I indicated in section 1, it is profoundly counterintuitive. What could be more apparent than that it is the pain that I feel that makes me cry, or the visual experience of the boulder rolling towards me that makes me run away? At least one can say that epiphenomenalism is a fall-back position: it tends to be adopted because other options are held to be unacceptable.

 

The second problem is that, if mental states do nothing, there is no reason why they should have evolved. This objection ties in with the first: the intuition there was that conscious states clearly modify our behaviour in certain ways, such as avoiding danger, and it is plain that they are very useful from an evolutionary perspective.

 

Frank Jackson (1982) replies to this objection by saying that it is the brain state associated with pain that evolves for this reason: the sensation is a by-product. Evolution is full of useless or even harmful by-products. For example, polar bears have evolved thick coats to keep them warm, even though this has the damaging side effect that they are heavy to carry. Jackson’s point is true in general, but does not seem to apply very happily to the case of mind. The heaviness of the polar bear’s coat follows directly from those properties and laws which make it warm: one could not, in any simple way, have one without the other. But with mental states, dualistically conceived, the situation is quite the opposite. The laws of physical nature which, the mechanist says, make brain states cause behaviour, in no way explain why brain states should give rise to conscious ones. The laws linking mind and brain are what Feigl (1958) calls nomological danglers, that is, brute facts added onto the body of integrated physical law. Why there should have been by-products of that kind seems to have no evolutionary explanation.

 

The third problem concerns the rationality of belief in epiphenomenalism, via its effect on the problem of other minds. It is natural to say that I know that I have mental states because I experience them directly. But how can I justify my belief that others have them? The simple version of the ‘argument from analogy’ says that I can extrapolate from my own case. I know that certain of my mental states are correlated with certain pieces of behaviour, and so I infer that similar behaviour in others is also accompanied by similar mental states. Many hold that this is a weak argument because it is induction from one instance, namely, my own. The argument is stronger if it is not a simple induction but an ‘argument to the best explanation’. I seem to know from my own case that mental events can be the explanation of behaviour, and I know of no other candidate explanation for typical human behaviour, so I postulate the same explanation for the behaviour of others. But if epiphenomenalism is true, my mental states do not explain my behaviour and there is a physical explanation for the behaviour of others. It is explanatorily redundant to postulate such states for others. I know, by introspection, that I have them, but is it not just as likely that I alone am subject to this quirk of nature, rather than that everyone is?

 

For more detailed treatment and further reading on this topic, see the entry epiphenomenalism.

3.3 Parallelism

The epiphenomenalist wishes to preserve the integrity of physical science and the physical world, and appends those mental features that he cannot reduce. The parallelist preserves both realms intact, but denies all causal interaction between them. They run in harmony with each other, but not because their mutual influence keeps each other in line. That they should behave as if they were interacting would seem to be a bizarre coincidence. This is why parallelism has tended to be adopted only by those – like Leibniz – who believe in a pre-established harmony, set in place by God. The progression of thought can be seen as follows. Descartes believes in a more or less natural form of interaction between immaterial mind and material body. Malebranche thought that this was impossible naturally, and so required God to intervene specifically on each occasion on which interaction was required. Leibniz decided that God might as well set things up so that they always behaved as if they were interacting, without particular intervention being required. Outside such a theistic framework, the theory is incredible. Even within such a framework, one might well sympathise with Berkeley’s instinct that once genuine interaction is ruled out one is best advised to allow that God creates the physical world directly, within the mental realm itself, as a construct out of experience.

 

4. Arguments for Dualism

4.1 The Knowledge Argument Against Physicalism

One category of arguments for dualism is constituted by the standard objections against physicalism. Prime examples are those based on the existence of qualia, the most important of which is the so-called ‘knowledge argument’. Because this argument has its own entry (see the entry qualia: the knowledge argument), I shall deal relatively briefly with it here. One should bear in mind, however, that all arguments against physicalism are also arguments for the irreducible and hence immaterial nature of the mind and, given the existence of the material world, are thus arguments for dualism.

 

The knowledge argument asks us to imagine a future scientist who has lacked a certain sensory modality from birth, but who has acquired a perfect scientific understanding of how this modality operates in others. This scientist – call him Harpo – may have been born stone deaf, but become the world’s greatest expert on the machinery of hearing: he knows everything that there is to know within the range of the physical and behavioural sciences about hearing. Suppose that Harpo, thanks to developments in neurosurgery, has an operation which finally enables him to hear. It is suggested that he will then learn something he did not know before, which can be expressed as what it is like to hear, or the qualitative or phenomenal nature of sound. These qualitative features of experience are generally referred to as qualia. If Harpo learns something new, he did not know everything before. He knew all the physical facts before. So what he learns on coming to hear – the facts about the nature of experience or the nature of qualia – are non-physical. This establishes at least a state or property dualism. (See Jackson 1982; Robinson 1982.)

 

There are at least two lines of response to this popular but controversial argument. First is the ‘ability’ response. According to this, Harpo does not acquire any new factual knowledge, only ‘knowledge how’, in the form of the ability to respond directly to sounds, which he could not do before. This essentially behaviouristic account is exactly what the intuition behind the argument is meant to overthrow. Putting ourselves in Harpo’s position, it is meant to be obvious that what he acquires is knowledge of what something is like, not just how to do something. Such appeals to intuition are always, of course, open to denial by those who claim not to share the intuition. Some ability theorists seem to blur the distinction between knowing what something is like and knowing how to do something, by saying that the ability Harpo acquires is to imagine or remember the nature of sound. In this case, what he acquires the ability to do involves the representation to himself of what the thing is like. But this conception of representing to oneself, especially in the form of imagination, seems sufficiently close to producing in oneself something very like a sensory experience that it only defers the problem: until one has a physicalist gloss on what constitutes such representations as those involved in conscious memory and imagination, no progress has been made.

 

The other line of response is to argue that, although Harpo’s new knowledge is factual, it is not knowledge of a new fact. Rather, it is new way of grasping something that he already knew. He does not realise this, because the concepts employed to capture experience (such as ‘looks red’ or ‘sounds C-sharp’) are similar to demonstratives, and demonstrative concepts lack the kind of descriptive content that allow one to infer what they express from other pieces of information that one may already possess. A total scientific knowledge of the world would not enable you to say which time was ‘now’ or which place was ‘here’. Demonstrative concepts pick something out without saying anything extra about it. Similarly, the scientific knowledge that Harpo originally possessed did not enable him to anticipate what it would be like to re-express some parts of that knowledge using the demonstrative concepts that only experience can give one. The knowledge, therefore, appears to be genuinely new, whereas only the mode of conceiving it is novel.

 

Proponents of the epistemic argument respond that it is problematic to maintain both that the qualitative nature of experience can be genuinely novel, and that the quality itself be the same as some property already grasped scientifically: does not the experience’s phenomenal nature, which the demonstrative concepts capture, constitute a property in its own right? Another way to put this is to say that phenomenal concepts are not pure demonstratives, like ‘here’ and ‘now’, or ‘this’ and ‘that’, because they do capture a genuine qualitative content. Furthermore, experiencing does not seem to consist simply in exercising a particular kind of concept, demonstrative or not. When Harpo has his new form of experience, he does not simply exercise a new concept; he also grasps something new – the phenomenal quality – with that concept. How decisive these considerations are, remains controversial.

 

4.2 The Argument from Predicate Dualism to Property Dualism

I said above that predicate dualism might seem to have no ontological consequences, because it is concerned only with the different way things can be described within the contexts of the different sciences, not with any real difference in the things themselves. This, however, can be disputed.

 

The argument from predicate to property dualism moves in two steps, both controversial. The first claims that the irreducible special sciences, which are the sources of irreducible predicates, are not wholly objective in the way that physics is, but depend for their subject matter upon interest-relative perspectives on the world. This means that they, and the predicates special to them, depend on the existence of minds and mental states, for only minds have interest-relative perspectives. The second claim is that psychology – the science of the mental – is itself an irreducible special science, and so it, too, presupposes the existence of the mental. Mental predicates therefore presuppose the mentality that creates them: mentality cannot consist simply in the applicability of the predicates themselves.

 

First, let us consider the claim that the special sciences are not fully objective, but are interest-relative.

 

No-one would deny, of course, that the very same subject matter or ‘hunk of reality’ can be described in irreducibly different ways and it still be just that subject matter or piece of reality. A mass of matter could be characterized as a hurricane, or as a collection of chemical elements, or as mass of sub-atomic particles, and there be only the one mass of matter. But such different explanatory frameworks seem to presuppose different perspectives on that subject matter.

 

This is where basic physics, and perhaps those sciences reducible to basic physics, differ from irreducible special sciences. On a realist construal, the completed physics cuts physical reality up at its ultimate joints: any special science which is nomically strictly reducible to physics also, in virtue of this reduction, it could be argued, cuts reality at its joints, but not at its minutest ones. If scientific realism is true, a completed physics will tell one how the world is, independently of any special interest or concern: it is just how the world is. It would seem that, by contrast, a science which is not nomically reducible to physics does not take its legitimation from the underlying reality in this direct way. Rather, such a science is formed from the collaboration between, on the one hand, objective similarities in the world and, on the other, perspectives and interests of those who devise the science. The concept of hurricane is brought to bear from the perspective of creatures concerned about the weather. Creatures totally indifferent to the weather would have no reason to take the real patterns of phenomena that hurricanes share as constituting a single kind of thing. With the irreducible special sciences, there is an issue of salience , which involves a subjective component: a selection of phenomena with a certain teleology in mind is required before their structures or patterns are reified. The entities of metereology or biology are, in this respect, rather like Gestalt phenomena.

 

Even accepting this, why might it be thought that the perspectivality of the special sciences leads to a genuine property dualism in the philosophy of mind? It might seem to do so for the following reason. Having a perspective on the world, perceptual or intellectual, is a psychological state. So the irreducible special sciences presuppose the existence of mind. If one is to avoid an ontological dualism, the mind that has this perspective must be part of the physical reality on which it has its perspective. But psychology, it seems to be almost universally agreed, is one of those special sciences that is not reducible to physics, so if its subject matter is to be physical, it itself presupposes a perspective and, hence, the existence of a mind to see matter as psychological. If this mind is physical and irreducible, it presupposes mind to see it as such. We seem to be in a vicious circle or regress.

 

We can now understand the motivation for full-blown reduction. A true basic physics represents the world as it is in itself, and if the special sciences were reducible, then the existence of their ontologies would make sense as expressions of the physical, not just as ways of seeing or interpreting it. They could be understood ‘from the bottom up’, not from top down. The irreducibility of the special sciences creates no problem for the dualist, who sees the explanatory endeavor of the physical sciences as something carried on from a perspective conceptually outside of the physical world. Nor need this worry a physicalist, if he can reduce psychology, for then he could understand ‘from the bottom up’ the acts (with their internal, intentional contents) which created the irreducible ontologies of the other sciences. But psychology is one of the least likely of sciences to be reduced. If psychology cannot be reduced, this line of reasoning leads to real emergence for mental acts and hence to a real dualism for the properties those acts instantiate (Robinson 2003).

 

4.3 The Modal Argument

There is an argument, which has roots in Descartes (Meditation VI), which is a modal argument for dualism. One might put it as follows:

 

It is imaginable that one’s mind might exist without one’s body.

therefore

 

It is conceivable that one’s mind might exist without one’s body.

therefore

 

It is possible one’s mind might exist without one’s body.

therefore

 

One’s mind is a different entity from one’s body.

The rationale of the argument is a move from imaginability to real possibility. I include (2) because the notion of conceivability has one foot in the psychological camp, like imaginability, and one in the camp of pure logical possibility and therefore helps in the transition from one to the other.

 

This argument should be distinguished from a similar ‘conceivability’ argument, often known as the ‘zombie hypothesis’, which claims the imaginability and possibility of my body (or, in some forms, a body physically just like it) existing without there being any conscious states associated with it. (See, for example, Chalmers (1996), 94–9.) This latter argument, if sound, would show that conscious states were something over and above physical states. It is a different argument because the hypothesis that the unaltered body could exist without the mind is not the same as the suggestion that the mind might continue to exist without the body, nor are they trivially equivalent. The zombie argument establishes only property dualism and a property dualist might think disembodied existence inconceivable – for example, if he thought the identity of a mind through time depended on its relation to a body (e.g., Penelhum 1970).

 

Before Kripke (1972/80), the first challenge to such an argument would have concerned the move from (3) to (4). When philosophers generally believed in contingent identity, that move seemed to them invalid. But nowadays that inference is generally accepted and the issue concerns the relation between imaginability and possibility. No-one would nowadays identify the two (except, perhaps, for certain quasi-realists and anti-realists), but the view that imaginability is a solid test for possibility has been strongly defended. W. D. Hart ((1994), 266), for example, argues that no clear example has been produced such that “one can imagine that p (and tell less imaginative folk a story that enables them to imagine that p) plus a good argument that it is impossible that p. No such counterexamples have been forthcoming…” This claim is at least contentious. There seem to be good arguments that time-travel is incoherent, but every episode of Star-Trek or Doctor Who shows how one can imagine what it might be like were it possible.

 

It is worth relating the appeal to possibility in this argument to that involved in the more modest, anti-physicalist, zombie argument. The possibility of this hypothesis is also challenged, but all that is necessary for a zombie to be possible is that all and only the things that the physical sciences say about the body be true of such a creature. As the concepts involved in such sciences – e.g., neuron, cell, muscle – seem to make no reference, explicit or implicit, to their association with consciousness, and are defined in purely physical terms in the relevant science texts, there is a very powerful prima facie case for thinking that something could meet the condition of being just like them and lack any connection with consciousness. There is no parallel clear, uncontroversial and regimented account of mental concepts as a whole that fails to invoke, explicitly or implicitly, physical (e.g., behavioural) states.

 

For an analytical behaviourist the appeal to imaginability made in the argument fails, not because imagination is not a reliable guide to possibility, but because we cannot imagine such a thing, as it is a priori impossible. The impossibility of disembodiment is rather like that of time travel, because it is demonstrable a priori, though only by arguments that are controversial. The argument can only get under way for those philosophers who accept that the issue cannot be settled a priori, so the possibility of the disembodiment that we can imagine is still prima facie open.

 

A major rationale of those who think that imagination is not a safe indication of possibility, even when such possibility is not eliminable a priori, is that we can imagine that a posteriori necessities might be false – for example, that Hesperus might not be identical to Phosphorus. But if Kripke is correct, that is not a real possibility. Another way of putting this point is that there are many epistemic possibilities which are imaginable because they are epistemic possibilities, but which are not real possibilities. Richard Swinburne (1997, New Appendix C), whilst accepting this argument in general, has interesting reasons for thinking that it cannot apply in the mind-body case. He argues that in cases that involve a posteriori necessities, such as those identities that need discovering, it is because we identify those entities only by their ‘stereotypes’ (that is, by their superficial features observable by the layman) that we can be wrong about their essences. In the case of our experience of ourselves this is not true.

 

Now it is true that the essence of Hesperus cannot be discovered by a mere thought experiment. That is because what makes Hesperus Hesperus is not the stereotype, but what underlies it. But it does not follow that no one can ever have access to the essence of a substance, but must always rely for identification on a fallible stereotype. One might think that for the person him or herself, while what makes that person that person underlies what is observable to others, it does not underlie what is experienceable by that person, but is given directly in their own self-awareness.

 

This is a very appealing Cartesian intuition: my identity as the thinking thing that I am is revealed to me in consciousness, it is not something beyond the veil of consciousness. Now it could be replied to this that though I do access myself as a conscious subject, so classifying myself is rather like considering myself qua cyclist. Just as I might never have been a cyclist, I might never have been conscious, if things had gone wrong in my very early life. I am the organism, the animal, which might not have developed to the point of consciousness, and that essence as animal is not revealed to me just by introspection.

 

But there are vital differences between these cases. A cyclist is explicitly presented as a human being (or creature of some other animal species) cycling: there is no temptation to think of a cyclist as a basic kind of thing in its own right. Consciousness is not presented as a property of something, but as the subject itself. Swinburne’s claim that when we refer to ourselves we are referring to something we think we are directly aware of and not to ‘something we know not what’ that underlies our experience seemingly ‘of ourselves’ has powerful intuitive appeal and could only be overthrown by very forceful arguments. Yet, even if we are not referring primarily to a substrate, but to what is revealed in consciousness, could it not still be the case that there is a necessity stronger than causal connecting this consciousness to something physical? To consider this further we must investigate what the limits are of the possible analogy between cases of the water-H2O kind, and the mind-body relation.

 

We start from the analogy between the water stereotype – how water presents itself – and how consciousness is given first-personally to the subject. It is plausible to claim that something like water could exist without being H2O, but hardly that it could exist without some underlying nature. There is, however, no reason to deny that this underlying nature could be homogenous with its manifest nature: that is, it would seem to be possible that there is a world in which the water-like stuff is an element, as the ancients thought, and is water-like all the way down. The claim of the proponents of the dualist argument is that this latter kind of situation can be known to be true a priori in the case of the mind: that is, one can tell by introspection that it is not more-than-causally dependent on something of a radically different nature, such as a brain or body. What grounds might one have for thinking that one could tell that a priori?

 

The only general argument that seem to be available for this would be the principle that, for any two levels of discourse, A and B, they are more-than-causally connected only if one entails the other a priori. And the argument for accepting this principle would be that the relatively uncontroversial cases of a posteriori necessary connections are in fact cases in which one can argue a priori from facts about the microstructure to the manifest facts. In the case of water, for example, it would be claimed that it follows a priori that if there were something with the properties attributed to H2O by chemistry on a micro level, then that thing would possess waterish properties on a macro level. What is established a posteriori is that it is in fact H2O that underlies and explains the waterish properties round here, not something else: the sufficiency of the base – were it to obtain – to explain the phenomena, can be deduced a priori from the supposed nature of the base. This is, in effect, the argument that Chalmers uses to defend the zombie hypothesis. The suggestion is that the whole category of a posteriori more-than-causally necessary connections (often identified as a separate category of metaphysical necessity) comes to no more than this. If we accept that this is the correct account of a posteriori necessities, and also deny the analytically reductionist theories that would be necessary for a priori connections between mind and body, as conceived, for example, by the behaviourist or the functionalist, does it follow that we can tell a priori that consciousness is not more-than-causally dependent on the body?

 

It is helpful in considering this question to employ a distinction like Berkeley’s between ideas and notions. Ideas are the objects of our mental acts, and they capture transparently – ‘by way of image or likeness’ (Principles, sect. 27) – that of which they are the ideas. The self and its faculties are not the objects of our mental acts, but are captured only obliquely in the performance of its acts, and of these Berkeley says we have notions, meaning by this that what we capture of the nature of the dynamic agent does not seem to have the same transparency as what we capture as the normal objects of the agent’s mental acts. It is not necessary to become involved in Berkeley’s metaphysics in general to feel the force of the claim that the contents and internal objects of our mental acts are grasped with a lucidity that exceeds that of our grasp of the agent and the acts per se. Because of this, notions of the self perhaps have a ‘thickness’ and are permanently contestable: there seems always to be room for more dispute as to what is involved in that concept. (Though we shall see later, in 5.2.2, that there is a ‘non-thick’ way of taking the Berkeleyan concept of a notion.)

 

Because ‘thickness’ always leaves room for dispute, this is one of those cases in philosophy in which one is at the mercy of the arguments philosophers happen to think up. The conceivability argument creates a prima facie case for thinking that mind has no more than causal ontological dependence on the body. Let us assume that one rejects analytical (behaviourist or functionalist) accounts of mental predicates. Then the above arguments show that any necessary dependence of mind on body does not follow the model that applies in other scientific cases. This does not show that there may not be other reasons for believing in such dependence, for so many of the concepts in the area are still contested. For example, it might be argued that identity through time requires the kind of spatial existence that only body can give: or that the causal continuity required by a stream of consciousness cannot be a property of mere phenomena. All these might be put forward as ways of filling out those aspects of our understanding of the self that are only obliquely, not transparently, presented in self-awareness. The dualist must respond to any claim as it arises: the conceivability argument does not pre-empt them.......

5.2 The Unity of the Mind

Whether one believes that the mind is a substance or just a bundle of properties, the same challenge arises, which is to explain the nature of the unity of the immaterial mind. For the Cartesian, that means explaining how he understands the notion of immaterial substance. For the Humean, the issue is to explain the nature of the relationship between the different elements in the bundle that binds them into one thing. Neither tradition has been notably successful in this latter task: indeed, Hume, in the appendix to the Treatise, declared himself wholly mystified by the problem, rejecting his own initial solution (though quite why is not clear from the text).

plato.stanford.edu/entries/dualism/

Originality, it is said, usually means coming from somewhere else. "Somewhere else" can be many places: another time, another culture, the other gender, despair, madness-- anywhere, except familiar here and everyday now. John Lennon has told of his first magical meeting with Yoko Ono, when he wandered into her one-woman show at the Indica Gallery in London on November 9, 1966, a pivotal date in the ferment remembered as the Nineteen Sixties, and was intrigued, as well as mystified, by what he saw. Invited by Ono to pay five shillings to hammer a nail into a piece of plain wood shown as artwork, Lennon made a counter-offer: "Well, I'll give you an imaginary five shillings and hammer an imaginary nail in." "That's when we really met," Lennon later recalled. "That's when we locked eyes and she got it and I got it, and, as they say in all the interviews we do, the rest is history."

 

All lovers know the moment when complicity leaps like an electric spark, but in their case, founded on what? Outwardly, the two had nothing in common. Lennon had come from the "genteel poverty" of a dysfunctional working-class family, via art school and sweaty teen-age dance hangouts in Liverpool, England, and Hamburg, Germany, to world fame and an honorable fortune as a rock-and-roll musician, composer, and role model for the first generation of Western youth to remember nothing of World War Two. Ono, seven years his senior, remembered all too well the apocalyptic end of Japan's Pacific War, the hunger and despair that had followed the defeat and enemy occupation which she had seen at first hand. But her own roots were in wealth and privilege: her mother Isoko came from the Yasuda banking family, and her father, Eisuke Ono, himself a banker by profession, descended from a long line of samurai warrior-scholars. Yoko had known little personal experience of deprivation, and had been educated among Japan's business and intellectual elite. Just the same, like had recognized like, at that mythic London meeting.

 

Why? The explanation lies half-buried under the decades of Japan's new prosperity. By 1966 Lennon, was emerging as one of the gurus of the disillusioned, questing mood called "The Sixties" in the West. Yoko Ono had been there, spiritually, long before. Something very like the mood of the Sixties first took shape in Tokyo in the late 1940's; Japan's confused, hungry years were the "somewhere else" Yoko Ono came from. Even then, and there, it was the amalgam, rather than any of its elements, that was really new. Radical pacifism and politicized feminism had both erupted in spiritually defeated Europe after the First World War, where they had found artistic voices in the instant arts of gesture and performance, made somewhat more durable by photographs, and in the perversely intellectual anti-intellectualism of Dada.

 

Bereft of social and political protest, however, Dada became just another style, and it was as an avant-garde style that Dada in the 1920's reached Japan, which had suffered next to nothing, and gained much, by the First World War. By the late 1940's, however, after the Second World War, Japan was in a state of despair even deeper and longer-lasting than Europe had known after the first war and by the mid-fifties Japanese art had found a similar expression, this time not as an imported style but with its own emotional authenticity. Japanese ingredients, notably the cerebral anti-intellectualism of Zen Buddhism, flavored a mixture which was original, distinctive, and more than the sum of its parts. Yoko Ono was the prophetess who, with the help of John Lennon, brought the amalgam to a West at long last ready to reconsider its own values. By different paths, Lennon and Western youth had arrived at a need, Ono at its fulfillment. More justifiably than most lovers, John and Yoko knew, in an instant of enlightenment at the Indica Gallery, that they were of one mind.

 

Ono's Upbringing

 

Ono's route to the rendezvous was the more devious of the two. She was born in Tokyo on February 18, 1932, the year Japan set up a puppet state in Manchuria, a long step towards the catastrophe of 1945. Two weeks earlier, her father had been transferred to San Francisco with the Yokohama Specie Bank, the financial arm of Japan's expanding empire. His wife and daughter soon followed, and Yoko from infancy heard both English and Japanese, the foundation of her subsequent bilingualism. In the spring of 1937 as Japan began full-scale war in China Yoko, her mother and younger brother Keisuke, born in December 1936, returned to Tokyo, where Yoko was enrolled in the kindergarten of the Peers' School, a Tokyo institution then open only to relatives of the Imperial family or of members of the House of Peers (her maternal grandfather, the banker Zenjiro Yasuda, had been ennobled in 1915). In 1940 Yoko's mother, fearing that all Japanese might be interned if Japan and the United States went to war and that she might not see him for many years, bravely rejoined her husband, by this time stationed in New York, taking her two children. The family sailed from San Francisco for the last time in the spring of 1941. At the time of Pearl Harbor Yoko's father was working in the Hanoi branch of his bank while Yoko was enrolled in a Christian primary school in Tokyo, run by one of the Mitsui family for Japanese children returned from abroad.

 

Takasumi Mitsui's school gave Yoko a safe and liberal refuge for most of the war. She continued studying in English and was listed as a primary school student well after her twelfth birthday, when most boys and girls her age became liable for war work, often risky. She was still living in Tokyo and being privately tutored in The Bible, Buddhism and the piano when a quarter of the city was burnt out in the great fire raid of March 9, 1945-- an inferno she survived in the Ono family bunker in the affluent

 

Azabu residential district, far from the incinerated downtown. Only then did her mother move her three children to a small farming village near the still fashionable Karuizawa mountain resort. The choice of refuge proved fortunate, as Yoko and her brother and sister, in the desperate days of the defeat and the collapse of the Japanese economy, were able to help their mother barter family treasures for food. One notable deal yielded sixty kilograms of life-sustaining rice for a German-made sewing machine. At the end of the war the family returned to Tokyo, where Yoko rejoined the re-opened Peers' School in April, 1946.

 

Founded in Tokyo in 1877, the Peers' School, like its rough equivalents Eton in England and Groton in the United States, has been more noted for social than for academic status. Its campus near the Imperial Palace survived the fire raids more or less intact, and its first post-war intake was like the pre-war ones. When the peerage was abolished in 1947 the school became theoretically open to anyone, including foreign exchange students (a classmate of the present Crown Prince Naruhito was the son of a plumber from Melbourne, Australia) but, like Tokyo itself, the Peers' School has since recovered much of its high-society glitter.

 

The view from the school windows, however, has changed beyond recognition. When Yoko and her classmates looked outside the school's high walls in the spring of 1946 they saw a city all but returned, as General Curtis E. LeMay Jr., U. S. Army Air Corps, had promised, to the Stone Age. Whole districts were sterile wastelands of twisted iron and blackened stones. People lived in holes clawed in the ground, roofed with stray sheets of metal. On every corner of what had once been shopping streets, famished men and women tried to sell trinkets, clothes, anything for food. Every train from the countryside brought farmers loaded with rice and vegetables for the black market. In makeshift bars in dank cellars, workers formed lines to gulp industrial alcohol. To sharpen the misery, smartly-turned-out, well-fed American soldiers tootled around the ruins in jeeps, driving on the side of the road they were accustomed to, the right-- the rare Japanese vehicle simply got out of the way. In a terminal degradation of Japanese martial values, American servicewomen smiled for souvenir snaps in rickshaws pulled by Japanese men still wearing the tattered remnants of military uniforms, eyes turned down in exhaustion, hunger and shame. Few would have recognized in this desolate scene the seedbed of a great and original flowering of art and cinema-- unless they had seen Berlin in 1919, or Moscow before Stalin.

 

Japan under occupation was a paradox; democracy imposed by a conqueror under the iron rule of General Douglas MacArthur, "the Macarto," more autocratic than any shogun had been for centuries. The occupation supposedly freed the Japanese press, but two weeks after it began, occupation censorship was imposed, and mention of what had happened in Hiroshima and Nagasaki, for instance, was blue-pencilled. The predictable result was to turn the atomic bombs into monstrous symbols of evil, beyond all rational discourse, in which shape they haunt Japanese and the rest of us to this day. Some accused Japanese war criminals were arrested and leisurely trials began; but Emperor Hirohito, who (as all but a handful of the Japanese elite believed) had directed Japan's war in person was free to visit the conqueror-- and the resulting photograph, of a stiffly correct Emperor and a showily casual general, was as ambiguous as the occasion. The trials were intended to show the Japanese their war crimes-- but the Soviet judge was from the nation that still held a half-million Japanese as war prisoners, many never to see homes and families again.

 

Most Tokyo residents, like those of any war-devastated city, were engrossed in the search for food and shelter. Even from an island of privilege like the Peers' School, the world outside no longer made sense. That America's war had been wholly just ("the justest war in history," U.S. propaganda claimed) and therefore Japan's totally unjust was by no means so clear to these puzzled young people as it was to the victors. Yes, there had been crimes and cruelties, on both sides, and who could strike the balance? And how could these crimes have been averted? The best answer seemed to be that war itself was to blame. Pacifism has been, for Japanese, the most enduring legacy of those years: "make love not war," the slogan of the Western sixties, well expresses the mood of Tokyo in 1946, as of starving Berlin in 1918. Right up to the present, PEACE (a brand of cigarette) and LOVE (with an arrow-pierced heart) are English words almost every Japanese knows.

 

Postwar Pacifism

 

More than a half-century on, any Japanese politician who suggests that Japan might one day go to war again is sure of an angry reaction. We have proof, from the Peers' School itself, that pacifism impacted with particular force on Yoko Ono's generation. Prince Akihito, now Emperor of Japan, returned there, as she did, in April 1946 from the same mountain refuge, the Karuizawa area, and saw the same fire-ravaged cityscape from its windows. The Crown Prince was tutored in English and world history by an American, Elizabeth Gray Vining, selected by Emperor Hirohito with full knowledge that her Quaker faith enjoins strict pacifism. Thirty-four years later, when Akihito acceded to the throne he swore to uphold the constitution, the first Japanese emperor ever to do so-- and to Japanese this can only mean Article Nine, renouncing war. One of the new Emperor Akihito's first official duties was to plant a tree in Nagasaki, whose mayor, Hitoshi Motoshima had not long before been shot and seriously injured by a right-wing fanatic after urging Japanese to reflect on their role in World War II, for which, said the mayor, Emperor Hirohito "shared responsibility." Meeting the mayor-- it could not have been by chance-- Hirohito's eldest son wished him a speedy recovery. Within the restraints of his office, Yoko's schoolmate could not have made his abiding pacifist views plainer.

 

Feminist agitation was more prominent in Japan's early post-war years than it has ever been since. Women were given the vote by the largely American-written 1946 constitution, and pressure from the new female members of parliament finally led in 1958 to the abolition of the licensed brothels, into which poor girls had been sold into debt slavery. The law making adultery a crime for wives but not for husbands was repealed in 1947. A few professions, notably teaching, introduced equal pay. However, the feminism that reverberated in the Japan of the post-war years was less ideological than situational, the feminism of hard times. War, especially in Japan, has been a hyper-masculine pursuit, with the homoeroticism found in all military societies.

 

The utter defeat of 1945 temporarily, perhaps permanently, discredited the warrior ethos. Strong, resourceful women like Yoko Ono's mother, who had kept homes and families afloat through eight years of war saw Japan's surrender as simply another man-made crisis to be somehow survived. Thousands of Japanese women, "pan pan girls," prostituted themselves to American soldiers, often for food for their families. Others hired out as the victors' maids, cooks and nannies. In close to a millennium, only one part of the English-speaking world has known such total defeat. Novelist Margaret Mitchell, in Scarlett O'Hara, imagined a strong woman's response to the shipwreck of Southern male pretensions very like the reaction of many Japanese women in 1945. In Woman is the Nigger of the World by Yoko Ono and John Lennon, we can hear, behind the offensive racial slur, the anger of a privileged girl at what her humbler sisters had once had to do, just for survival.

 

One of the first arts to revive in Japan was cinema, by which a mass audience could be reached for the price of a seat in a drafty hall. The great director Akira Kurosawa had a script in shape for his enigmatic Rashomon as early as 1947, although he took until 1950 to find finance and finish it. Its theme, the impossibility of arriving at reliable truth about any event by way of the self-serving distortions of witnesses and participants, was a plain parable of Japan's situation. The first voice to speak from within defeated Japan and be heard outside, Rashomon began the process, still incomplete, of explaining the pariah nation to a suspicious world. Kurosawa had added an important aside to the bleak vision of Ryunosuke Akutagawa, who wrote the two stories on which it is partly based and suicided, at thirty-five, in 1927. Kurosawa's addition has the woodcutter, one of the witnesses whose version of the rape of a samurai's wife and the murder of her husband by a bandit cannot be trusted, adopt a baby abandoned by the ruined city gate which gives the film its name. Life, says the film, goes on, the human spirit rebounds, there is always hope. A quarter-century later, John Lennon was to climb a ladder at the Indica Gallery and through a magnifying glass read the one word Yoko One had written on the gallery's ceiling, YES. "At least" Lennon later recalled, "her message was positive."

 

Kurosawa apart (Rashomon won the gold cup at the 1950 Venice film festival and became an international hit) all that the outside world heard from Japan in the immediate post-war years came through the propaganda megaphone operated by the U.S. occupation. MacArthur's headquarters censored not only what the Japanese media reported in Japan, but what the corps of foreign correspondents stationed in Tokyo could send to their readers. The publication of John Hersey's searing Hiroshima (1946), the century's most influential piece of journalism, was only possible because Hersey wrote it in the offices of the New Yorker, far from the occupation's censors.

 

The year 1945 in fact marked the sharpest discontinuity between generations in all Japanese history, but few outside Japan could distinguish this reality from the claims of MacArthur's personal publicity machine-- and, as with all such breaks with the past, much continued unchanged, and a reverse current soon set in, guided by the same occupation authority. What many Japanese still remember as the years of post-war democracy all too soon ended. The role in the world assigned to Japan was changing. In 1949 the Soviets broke the U.S. nuclear monopoly, the Chinese Communist Party won its civil war, and the Korean War broke out in June, 1950. Already the occupation had begun its "reverse course." No longer an enemy to be punished and reformed, Japan became a potential ally to be courted for the threatened new world war with communism. Korean war spending, the opening of the huge U.S. market to Japanese products, the revival of Japan's wartime production system with its close ties between banks, bureaucrats and favored industrialists-- the celebrated "Japan Inc."-- got Japan back on the dual road to economic recovery and social counter-revolution.

 

Good times, however, are not necessarily propitious for the arts. By 1951, when Yoko Ono graduated from the Peers' School, the creative ferment of the postwar years was subsiding, as everyday Japan settled down to take advantage of the "reverse course" and its material payoffs. Feminism stalled, Japan's new pacifism was entangled in the alliance with the nuclear-armed U.S. Early in 1952 Yoko was accepted by the philosophy faculty of her school's associated Peers' University as its first female student of that most cerebral of disciplines, but after two semesters she dropped out. Approaching her twentieth birthday, her most impressionable years behind her, Ono rejoined her family in Scarsdale, New York, where her father was once again a banker. She enrolled in nearby Sarah Lawrence College, then strong in the visual arts (painter Bradley Walker Tomlin had taught abstract expressionism there). This led her to American avant-garde circles, where she experimented with painting, music, film and the various performance arts. By 1962 she was back in Tokyo, exhibiting with some success as a member of the Japanese artistic avant-garde, some of whom called themselves Neo-Dadaists, part of the Dada stylistic revival taking place world-wide.

 

The original Dada (from French baby-talk "dada," a rocking-horse, a word intended to be meaningless) had arisen first in sidelined, neutral Zurich during the First World War. By 1918 it had spread to Berlin, then to Paris and later to New York. Taking a hint from Marcel Duchamp, who had exhibited a bicycle wheel mounted on a stool as an artwork in 1913, the Dadaists hoped, by exhibiting themeless objects, to condemn the futility of war and to shock the bourgeoisie out of the materialism and complacency the artists believed had exacerbated its horrors. Dada attracted some attention in the European cities plunged into something like the despair of Tokyo in 1945, but by 1924 that war was receding, the bourgeoisie were again complacent, and the Dada movement, bereft of social concern, had retreated into style.

 

As Japan's America-oriented prosperity grew into the early 1960's, the Japanese neo-Dada movement became similarly fragmented and dispirited. Resistance to the Japan-U.S. Security Treaty (ANPO), mostly from students, attracted some of its practitioners; as did opposition to the 1964 Olympics, seen by most Japanese as a milestone in Japan's revival; anti-materialism inspired such notable art as Genpei Akasegawa's Great Japan Zero-Yen Note, mocking the preoccupation of most of his compatriots. But the creative despair of the late 1940's was long gone. Via two failed marriages and a parting from her only daughter, Kyoko, claimed by her American ex-husband Anthony Cox, Yoko again left Japan eventually to find her way to a small London gallery specializing in the avant-garde, then beginning to find the wider audience it always does in times of social upheaval. It took the aristocratic Ono some time to discover what the untutored, instinctual Lennon really had to offer her-- the wide world, as an audience for her art.

 

Lennon's Trajectory

 

How had John Lennon reached his side of the mysteriously fated rendezvous at the Indica Gallery in 1966? Born in 1940, his adolescence, the 'fifties, was a time of self-satisfaction in the English-speaking world, of growing affluence, of endless war movies presenting the victors as supermen (but not yet as superwomen-- just as war had deflated the male values of Japanese, it inflated those of the Western winners, whose women were ejected from the jobs they had held while the men were away fighting, and theoretically went back to being full-time housewives and mothers).

 

Prosperity not known since the 1920's did little for adult women, but a great deal economically for adolescents, now called "teenagers," who commanded real wages and competitively bigger parental allowances in economies finally freed of unemployment. Teenage purchasing power made a new market for records, and the performers correspondingly rich-- none richer than the Fab Four from England, the Beatles.

 

The Beatles owed their huge success to a creative tension between John Lennon and Paul McCartney, who wrote most of their songs-- Paul the syrupy and tuneful, John the tart realist. Advised by their astute manager, Brian Epstein, to present a wholesome image unthreatening to British parents, the Beatles were made Members of the Order of the British Empire (a medal usually given to civil servants like postmasters) in 1965, and they duly acquired wholesome girl friends and/or wives to suit. With a blonde English wife, Cynthia, and an infant son, Julian, Lennon later described feeling "trapped" in "a happily married state of boredom." Money had never been his main motivation-- rather, as wordsmith and intellectual of the partnership, he sought self-expression, meaning expressing the feelings of his contemporaries, the normal rebellion of any generation against the one before it, delayed for Lennon and those who thought like him by the huge (and not unjustified) self-satisfaction of their elders who had won the war, the peace and in their own minds, the game of life itself.

 

Aimless, shapeless discontent among young people who felt themselves overshadowed and marginalized by the war generation had already inspired James Dean's Rebel Without a Cause (1955), Alan Ginsberg's Howl (1956), John Osborne's Look Back in Anger (1956), and Jack Kerouac's On the Road (1957). These one-offs by unknown outsiders, meaningless to mainstream adults, could be ignored-- whereas the Beatles were the Western establishment's own lovable young rascals, with teenage followers in just about every English-speaking home. All that remained to complete the radicalization of youth in the later 'sixties was a new war, a spectacular crisis calling for immediate public action.

 

I happened to be in Vietnam, covering the first big search-and-destroy operations by American regular troops, in the very same month that Yoko met John. War was again a front-page, news-dominating story. After an on-again, off-again courtship, Lennon left his wife and their posh stockbroker-belt country mansion and set up house with Yoko in a London flat. In 1968 they released Unfinished Music #1: Two Virgins, a collage of electronic sound recorded on their first night together, with a self-shot nude photograph of the couple on the cover. They married in March 1969, promising to stage many "happenings." The wedding was the first, followed by "Bed Peace" in an Amsterdam hotel, then the huge billboard in Times Square, New York: "WAR IS OVER-- if you want it." The two Lennons had become the emblematic leaders of a universal cultural revolution. Long matured, the preoccupations of Yoko Ono's vivid Tokyo adolescence had meshed with John Lennon's energies, and given his showy, empty life a sense of purpose, and her art a world audience. Like the o's in Yoko Ono, another train of political and artistic wheels had at last come full circle.

  

MURRAY SAYLE, an Australian writer long resident in Japan, contributed this account of the intellectual origins of Yoko Ono, in slightly different form, to the catalogue of the multimedia retrospective "YES YOKO ONO," which opened at the Japan Society Gallery, New York, on October 16, 2000. The exhibition, curated by Alexandra Munroe, director of the gallery, in consultation with Jon Hendricks, curator of the Yoko Ono archive, is scheduled to tour the Walker Art Center, Minneapolis; the Museum of Contemporary Art, Houston; the List Center for Visual Arts, Cambridge, Massachusetts; the San Francisco Museum of Modern Art; the Art Gallery of Ontario, Toronto; the Museum of Contemporary Art, North Miami; and may travel to Asia.

Fiódor Mijáilovich Dostoyevski (en ruso: Фёдор Миха́йлович Достое́вский, romanización: Fëdor Mihajlovič Dostoevskij; Moscú, 11 de noviembre de 1821 – San Petersburgo, 9 de febrero de 1881) fue uno de los principales escritores de la Rusia zarista, cuya literatura explora la psicología humana en el complejo contexto político, social y espiritual de la sociedad rusa del siglo XIX.

Es considerado uno de los más grandes escritores de Occidente y de la literatura universal. De él dijo Friedrich Nietzsche: «Dostoyevski, el único psicólogo, por cierto, del cual se podía aprender algo, es uno de los accidentes más felices de mi vida». Y José Ortega y Gasset escribió: «En tanto que otros grandes declinan, arrastrados hacia el ocaso por la misteriosa resaca de los tiempos, Dostoyevski se ha instalado en lo más alto».

Si bien la madre de Fiódor Dostoyevski era rusa, su ascendencia paterna se remonta a un pueblo denominado Dostóyevo, ubicado en la gubérniya de Minsk (Bielorrusia). En sus orígenes, el acento del apellido, como el del pueblo, recaía en la segunda sílaba, pero cambió su posición a la tercera en el siglo XIX. De acuerdo con algunas versiones, los ancestros paternos de Dostoyevski eran nobles polonizados (szlachta) de origen ruteno que fueron a la guerra con el escudo de armas de Radwan.

Fue el segundo de los siete hijos del matrimonio formado por Mijaíl Andréievich Dostoievski y María Fiódorovna Necháyeva. Un padre autoritario, médico del hospital para pobres Mariinski en Moscú, y una madre vista por sus hijos como un refugio de amor y protección marcaron el ambiente familiar en la infancia de Dostoyevski. Cuando Fiódor tenía once años de edad, la familia se radicó en la aldea de Darovóye, en Tula, donde el padre había adquirido unas tierras.

En 1834 ingresó, junto con su hermano Mijaíl, en el pensionado de Chermak, donde cursarían los estudios secundarios. La temprana muerte de la madre por tuberculosis en 1837 sumió al padre en la depresión y el alcoholismo, por lo que Fiódor y su hermano Mijaíl fueron enviados a la Escuela de Ingenieros Militares de San Petersburgo, lugar en el que el joven Dostoievski comenzaría a interesarse por la literatura a través de las obras de Shakespeare, Pascal, Victor Hugo y E. T. A. Hoffmann.

En 1839, cuando tenía dieciocho años, le llegó la noticia de que su padre había fallecido. Los siervos mancomunados de Mijaíl Dostoyevski (hidalgo de Darovóye), enfurecidos tras uno de sus brutales arranques de violencia provocados por el alcohol, lo habían inmovilizado y obligado a beber vodka hasta que murió ahogado. Otra historia sugiere que Mijaíl murió por causas naturales, pero que un terrateniente vecino suyo inventó la historia de la rebelión para comprar la finca a un precio más reducido. En parte, Fiódor se culpó posteriormente de este hecho por haber deseado la muerte de su padre en muchas ocasiones. En su artículo de 1928, «Dostoyevski y el parricidio», Sigmund Freud señalaría este sentimiento de culpa como la causa de la intensificación de su epilepsia.

En 1841, Dostoyevski fue ascendido a alférez ingeniero de campo. Ese mismo año, influido por el poeta prerromántico alemán Friedrich Schiller, escribió dos obras teatrales románticas (María Estuardo y Borís Godunov) que no han sido conservadas. Dostoyevski se describía como un «soñador» en su juventud y en esa época admiraba a Schiller.

Durante toda su carrera literaria Dostoievski padeció una epilepsia que supo incorporar en su obra. Los personajes presentados con epilepsia son Murin y Ordínov (La patrona, 1847), Nelly (Humillados y ofendidos, 1861), Myshkin (El idiota, 1868), Kiríllov (Los demonios, 1872) y Smerdiakov (Los hermanos Karamázov, 1879-80). Dostoievski también supo utilizar la epilepsia para librarse de una condena vitalicia a servir en el ejército en Siberia. Aunque la epilepsia había comenzado durante sus años académicos como estudiante de ingeniería militar en San Petersburgo (1838-1843), el diagnóstico tardaría una década en llegar. En 1863 viajó al extranjero con intención de consultar a los especialistas Romberg y Trousseau. Stephenson e Isotoff apuntaron en 1935 la probable influencia Psique (1848), de Carus, en la construcción de sus personajes. Por contrapartida, la epilepsia de Dostoyevski ha inspirado a numerosos epileptólogos, incluyendo a Freud, Alajouanine y Gastaut. La de Dostoievski es la historia natural de una epilepsia que en terminología científica contemporánea se clasificaría como criptogénica focal de probable origen temporal. Sin embargo, más allá del interés que pueda despertar la historia clínica de un trastorno neurológico heterogéneo, bastante bien comprendido y correctamente diagnosticado en vida del escritor, el caso de Dostoievski muestra el buen uso de una enfermedad común por un genio literario que supo transformar la adversidad en oportunidad. Una de las ideas capitales en su obra (que un buen recuerdo puede colmar toda una vida de felicidad) guarda una estrecha relación con los momentos de éxtasis que alcanzaba el escritor durante algunos episodios de la enfermedad o en el momento (aura epiléptica) que anunciaba las crisis epilépticas más violentas, tal como fueron descritos en su obra literaria.

Dostoyevski terminó sus estudios de Ingeniería en 1843 y, después de adquirir el grado militar de subteniente, se incorporó a la Dirección General de Ingenieros en San Petersburgo.

En 1844, Honoré de Balzac visitó San Petersburgo. Dostoyevski decidió traducir Eugenia Grandet para saldar una deuda de 300 rublos con un usurero. Esta traducción despertaría su vocación y poco después de terminarla pidió la excedencia del ejército con la idea de dedicarse exclusivamente a la literatura. En 1845 dejó el ejército y empezó a escribir la novela epistolar Pobres gentes, obra que le proporcionaría sus primeros éxitos de crítica y, fundamentalmente, el reconocimiento del crítico literario Belinski. La obra, editada en forma de libro al año siguiente, convirtió a Dostoyevski en una celebridad literaria a los veinticuatro años. En esta misma época comenzó a contraer algunas deudas y a sufrir con más frecuencia ataques epilépticos. Las novelas siguientes —El doble (1846), Noches blancas (1848) y Niétochka Nezvánova (1849)— no tuvieron el éxito de la primera y recibieron críticas negativas, lo que sumió a Dostoyevski en la depresión. En esta época entró en contacto con ciertos grupos de ideas utópicas, llamados nihilistas, que buscaban la libertad del hombre.

Dostoyevski fue arrestado y encarcelado el 23 de abril de 1849 por formar parte del grupo intelectual liberal Círculo Petrashevski bajo el cargo de conspirar contra el zar Nicolás I. Después de la revuelta decembrista en 1825 y las revoluciones de 1848 en Europa, Nicolás I se mostraba reacio a cualquier tipo de organización clandestina que pudiera poner en peligro su autocracia.

El 16 de noviembre, Dostoyevski y otros miembros del Círculo Petrashevski fueron llevados a la fortaleza de San Pedro y San Pablo y condenados a muerte por participar en actividades consideradas antigubernamentales. El 22 de diciembre, los prisioneros fueron llevados al patio para su fusilamiento; Dostoyevski tenía que situarse frente al pelotón e incluso escuchar los disparos con los ojos vendados, pero su pena fue conmutada en el último momento por cinco años de trabajos forzados en Omsk, Siberia. Durante esta época sus ataques epilépticos fueron en aumento. Años más tarde, Dostoyevski le relataría a su hermano los sufrimientos que atravesó durante los años que pasó «silenciado dentro de un ataúd». Describió el cuartel donde estuvo, que «debería haber sido demolido años atrás», con estas palabras:

En verano, encierro intolerable; en invierno, frío insoportable. Todos los pisos estaban podridos. La suciedad de los pavimentos tenía una pulgada de grosor; uno podía resbalar y caer... Nos apilaban como anillos de un barril... Ni siquiera había lugar para dar la vuelta. Era imposible no comportarse como cerdos, desde el amanecer hasta el atardecer. Pulgas, piojos, y escarabajos por celemín.

Fue liberado en 1854 y se reincorporó al ejército como soldado raso, lo que constituía la segunda parte de su condena. Durante los siguientes cinco formó parte del Séptimo Batallón de línea acuartelado en la fortaleza de Semipalátinsk en Kazajistán. Allí comenzó una relación con María Dmítrievna Isáyeva, esposa de un conocido suyo en Siberia. Se casaron en febrero de 1857 después de la muerte de su esposo. Ese mismo año, el zar Alejandro II decretó una amnistía que benefició a Dostoyevski, quien recuperó su título nobiliario y obtuvo permiso para continuar publicando sus obras.

Al final de su estadía en Kazajistán, Dostoyevski era ya un cristiano convencido. Se convirtió en un agudo crítico del nihilismo y del movimiento socialista de su época. Tiempo después, dedicó parte de sus libros Los endemoniados y Diario de un escritor a criticar las ideas socialistas. Estas críticas se fundamentaban en la creencia de que quienes las pregonaban no conocían al pueblo ruso y de que no era posible trasladar un sistema de ideas de origen europeo a la Rusia de entonces, de la misma forma que no era posible adoptar las doctrinas de una institución occidental como la Iglesia católica a un pueblo esencialmente cristiano-ortodoxo. Dostoyevski plasmaría estas convicciones en la descripción de Piotr Stepánovich para su novela Los endemoniados y en la redacción de las reflexiones del starets Zosima en «Un religioso ruso», de Los hermanos Karamázov.

Dostoievski fue acercándose progresivamente a una postura eslavófila moderada y a las ideas del ideólogo del paneslavismo Nikolái Danilevski, autor de Rusia y Europa. Su interpretación de esta filosofía rescataba el papel integrador y salvador de la religiosidad rusa y no consideraciones de superioridad racial eslava. Por otra parte, en su interpretación, la unión rusa y su supuesto servicio a la humanidad no implicaba desprecio alguno por la influencia europea, que Dostoyevski reconocía gratamente. Más tarde trabó amistad con el estadista conservador Konstantín Pobedonóstsev y abrazó algunos de los principios del Póchvennichestvo.

Con todo, posicionar políticamente a Dostoyevski no es del todo sencillo: como cristiano, rechazaba el ateísmo socialista; como tradicionalista, la destrucción de las instituciones y, como pacifista, cualquier método violento de cambio social, tanto progresista como reaccionario. A pesar de esto, dio claras muestras de simpatía por las reformas sociales producidas durante el reinado de Alejandro II, en particular por la que implicó la abolición de la servidumbre en el campo, dictada en 1861. Por otra parte, si bien en los primeros años de su regreso de Kazajistán era todavía escéptico respecto de los reclamos de las feministas, en 1870 escribió que «todavía podía esperar mucho de la mujer rusa» y cambió de parecer.

Su preocupación por la desigualdad social es notable en su obra y, desde un punto de vista cristiano ascético, creía —como luego reflejaría en su personaje Zosima— que «al considerar la libertad como el aumento de las necesidades y su pronta saturación, se altera su sentido, pues la consecuencia de ello es un aluvión de deseos insensatos, de ilusiones y costumbres absurdas», y quizás confiara, como dicho personaje, en que «el rico más depravado acabará por avergonzarse de su riqueza ante el pobre».

En febrero de 1854, Dostoyevski le pidió por carta a su hermano que le enviara diversos libros, especialmente Lecciones sobre la historia de la filosofía, de Hegel. Durante su destierro en Semipalátinsk, planeó también traducir junto a Alexander Vrangel obras del filósofo alemán, pero el proyecto nunca se concretó. Según Nikolái Strájov, Dostoyevski le ofreció la obra de Hegel enviada por Mijáil sin haberla leído.

En 1859, tras largas gestiones, Dostoyevski consiguió ser licenciado con la condición de residir en cualquier lugar excepto San Petersburgo y Moscú, por lo que se trasladó a Tver. Allí logró publicar El sueño del tío y Stepánchikovo y sus habitantes, que no obtuvieron la crítica que esperaba.

En diciembre de ese mismo año se le autorizó regresar a San Petersburgo, donde fundó, con su hermano Mijaíl, la revista Vremya («Tiempo»), en cuyo primer número apareció Humillados y ofendidos (1861), otra novela inspirada en su etapa siberiana. En ella se encuentran, además, varias alusiones autobiográficas, especialmente en lo referente a la primera etapa de Dostoyevski como escritor; se alude en ella, sobre todo, en su primera obra, Noches blancas, con varios guiños a situaciones o personajes específicos. Su siguiente obra, Recuerdos de la casa de los muertos (1861-1862), basada en sus experiencias como prisionero, fue publicada por capítulos en la revista El Mundo Ruso.

Durante 1862 y 1863 realizó diversos viajes por Europa que lo llevaron a Berlín, París, Londres, Ginebra, Turín, Florencia y Viena. Durante estos viajes comenzó una relación con Polina Súslova,27 una estudiante con ideas avanzadas, que lo abandonó poco después. Perdió mucho dinero jugando a la ruleta y, a finales de octubre de 1863, regresó a Moscú solo y sin dinero. Durante su ausencia, Vremya fue prohibida por haber publicado un artículo sobre el Levantamiento de Enero.

En 1864 Dostoyevski consiguió editar con su hermano una nueva revista llamada Epoja («Época»), en la que publicó Memorias del subsuelo. Su ánimo terminó de quebrarse tras la muerte de su esposa, María Dmítrievna Isáyeva, seguida poco después por la de su hermano. Dostoyevski debió hacerse cargo de la viuda y los cuatro hijos de Mijaíl y, además, de una deuda de 25 000 rublos que este había dejado. Se hundió en una profunda depresión y en el juego, lo que siguió generándole enormes deudas. Para escapar de todos sus problemas financieros, huyó al extranjero, donde perdió el dinero que le quedaba en los casinos. Allí se reencontró con Polina Súslova y le propuso matrimonio, pero fue rechazado.

En 1865, de nuevo en San Petersburgo, comenzó a escribir Crimen y castigo, una de sus obras capitales. La fue publicando, con gran éxito, en la revista El Mensajero Ruso. Sin embargo, sus deudas eran cada vez mayores por lo que, en 1866, se vio obligado a firmar un contrato con el editor Stellovski. Dicho contrato establecía que Dostoyevski recibiría tres mil rublos —que pasarían directamente a manos de sus acreedores— a cambio de los derechos de edición de todas sus obras, y el compromiso de entregar una nueva novela ese mismo año. Si ésta no era entregada en noviembre, recibiría una fuerte multa y, si en diciembre seguía sin estar lista, perdería todos los derechos patrimoniales sobre sus obras, que pasarían a manos de Stellovski. Dostoyevski entonces contrató a Anna Grigórievna Snítkina, una joven taquígrafa a quien dictó, en sólo veintiséis días, su novela El jugador, entregada en conformidad con los términos del contrato. El día de su entrega, sin embargo, el administrador de la editorial aseguró no haber recibido el aviso pertinente por parte de Stellovski, ante lo cual Dostoyevski se vio obligado a constatar la entrega —con acuse de recibo legal— en una comisaría.

Dostoyevski se casó con Snítkina el 15 de febrero de 1867 y, tras una breve estadía en Moscú, partieron hacia Europa. La debilidad de Dostoyevski por el juego volvió a manifestarse en Baden-Baden. En 1867, finalmente establecido en Ginebra, comenzó a preparar el esquema de su novela El idiota, que debía publicarse en los dos primeros fascículos de El Mensajero Ruso del año siguiente. Según Anna Grigórievna, Dostoyevski afirmaba sobre esta obra que «nunca había tenido una idea más poética y más rica, pero que no había logrado expresar ni siquiera la décima parte de lo que quería decir». En 1868 nació su primera hija, Sonia, pero murió tres meses después. El hecho fue devastador para la pareja, y Dostoyevski cayó en una profunda depresión. Decidieron alejarse de Ginebra y, luego de una estadía en Vevey, viajaron a Italia. Allí visitaron Milán, Florencia, Bolonia y Venecia. En 1869, partieron hacia Dresde, donde nació su segunda hija, Liubov. Su situación económica era, en palabras de Anna Grigórievna, de «relativa pobreza». Dostoyevski recibió el dinero convenido por El Mensajero Ruso y El idiota, y pudieron —a pesar de verse obligados a utilizar parte de este para pagar deudas— vivir con algo más de tranquilidad que en años anteriores.

En 1870 el autor se dedicó a escribir una nueva novela, El eterno marido, que fue publicada en la revista Zariá. Algunos pasajes de la obra son de carácter autobiográfico. Específicamente, en el capítulo «En casa de los Zajlebinin», Dostoyevski recuerda el verano de 1866 pasado en una casa de campo en Liublin, cerca de Moscú, junto con una de sus hermanas.

En 1871, terminó Los endemoniados, publicada en 1872. La novela refleja las inquietudes políticas de Dostoyevski en esa época. Al respecto, escribió a su amigo Strájov:

Espero mucho de lo que escribo ahora en El Mensajero Ruso, no sólo desde el punto de vista artístico, sino también en lo que respecta a la calidad del tema: desearía expresar algunos pensamientos, aunque por su causa debe sufrir el arte; pero estoy de tal modo fascinado por las ideas que se han acumulado en mi espíritu y en mi corazón, que debo expresarlas aunque sólo pueda lograr un opúsculo; es lo mismo, debo expresarme.

Poco antes de que Dostoyevski comenzara a escribir la novela, la pareja recibió la visita del hermano de Anna, que vivía en San Petersburgo. Este les habló del agitado clima político que se vivía en la ciudad y, especialmente, acerca de un asesinato que había tenido gran repercusión. Ivánov, un estudiante perteneciente al grupo extremista de Sergéi Necháyev, había sido asesinado en una gruta por orden de este, tras alejarse del grupo por rechazar sus métodos de acción. Dostoyevski decidió tomar como protagonista para su nueva novela a Ivánov bajo el nombre de Shátov y describió, siguiendo el relato del hermano de Anna, el parque de la Academia de Pedro y la gruta en la que fue asesinado Ivánov.

Hacia 1871, Dostoyevski y Anna Grigórievna habían cumplido cuatro años de residencia en el extranjero y estaban resueltos a volver a Rusia. Como Anna estaba embarazada, decidieron partir cuanto antes para no tener que viajar con un niño recién nacido. Luego de recibir la parte del pago de El Mensajero Ruso y la correspondiente a la publicación de El eterno marido, partieron hacia San Petersburgo haciendo escala en Berlín.

A los ocho días de su llegada a Rusia nació Fiódor. Dostoyevski hizo un viaje rápido a Moscú, donde cobró lo correspondiente a la parte publicada de Los demonios en El mensajero ruso. Con este dinero les fue posible alquilar una casa en San Petersburgo. Pronto se vio el autor nuevamente asediado por acreedores, especialmente algunos que reclamaban deudas de la época de Tiempo, que le correspondían por la muerte de su hermano. Los acreedores se presentaban algunas veces sin documento probatorio y Dostoyevski, ingenuo, les firmaba letras de cambio.

En 1872 partieron hacia Stáraya Rusa, donde permanecerían hasta 1875. Tras finalizar la novela Los demonios, Dostoyevski aceptó la propuesta de encargarse de la redacción del semanario El ciudadano. En 1873 editó la versión completa de Los demonios, publicada por la pequeña editorial que había fundado con medios propios, ayudado por Anna. El éxito de esta edición fue abrumador. Luego reeditó también varias de sus obras anteriores y comenzó a publicar la revista Diario de un escritor, en la que escribía solo, recopilando historias cortas, artículos políticos y crítica literaria. Esta publicación, aunque muy exitosa, se vio interrumpida en 1878, cuando Dostoyevski comenzó Los hermanos Karamázov, que aparecería en gran parte en la revista El Mensajero Ruso.

En 1874 Dostoyevski abandonó la redacción de El Ciudadano, tarea que no satisfizo sus aspiraciones, para dedicarse completamente a escribir una nueva novela. Luego de evaluar las ofertas editoriales de El Mensajero Ruso y Memorias de la Patria (del poeta Nikolái Nekrásov), decidió aceptar esta última. La novela sería titulada El adolescente y comenzaría a publicarse ese mismo año. Por aquella época, Dostoyevski tuvo fuertes crisis asmáticas, y estuvo un tiempo en Berlín y Ems tratando su afección.

En 1875 nació su cuarto hijo, Alekséi, y el matrimonio decidió volver a San Petersburgo. Durante esa época vivieron del dinero que obtenían por El adolescente. Mientras tanto, Dostoyevski continuaba reuniendo material para Diario de un escritor y frecuentaba con asiduidad reuniones literarias, donde se encontraba y debatía con viejos amigos y enemigos. En 1877, la publicación de Diario de un escritor tuvo gran éxito y, aunque el autor estaba muy satisfecho tanto con los resultados económicos como con la simpatía que el público manifestaba en su correspondencia, sentía gran necesidad de crear algo nuevo. Decidió entonces interrumpir por dos o tres años la publicación de la revista para ocuparse de una nueva novela.

Nekrásov, amigo de Dostoyevski —el primero en reconocer su talento con Pobres gentes y que más tarde editó El adolescente— se encontraba muy enfermo. Una de las veces que fue a verlo, el poeta le leyó una de sus últimas composiciones, «Los infelices», y le dijo: «La escribí para usted». El poeta murió a finales de 1877. Durante su funeral, Dostoyevski pronunció un emotivo discurso, que más tarde ampliaría e incluiría en el último número de Diario de un escritor de ese año, dividido en cuatro capítulos: «La muerte de Nekrásov», «Pushkin, Lérmontov y Nekrásov», «El poeta y el ciudadano: Nekrásov hombre» y «Un testigo a favor de Nekrásov». Al dolor de Dostoyevski por esta pérdida se le agregaría, al año siguiente, el causado por la muerte de su hijo Alekséi. El niño fue sepultado en el cementerio de Bolsháia Ojta.

Dostoyevski y su esposa, consternados, pensaron que no tenían más que hacer en San Petersburgo y regresaron con sus hijos a Stáraya Rusa. Dostoyevski acordó con El mensajero ruso la publicación de una nueva novela para 1879: se trataba de la futura Los hermanos Karamázov. De una bendición recibida por un sacerdote de la ermita de Óptina, tras contarle Dostoyevski lo sucedido con su hijo, surgiría la escena del capítulo Las mujeres creyentes, en la que el starets Zosima bendice a una madre tras la muerte de su hijo, también llamado Alekséi. Por otra parte, la figura del starets Zosima sería creada a partir de las figuras de este sacerdote y de otro a quien el autor admiraba, Tijon Zadonski.

Apenas comenzó a publicarse, Los hermanos Karamázov atrajo fuertemente la atención de lectores y críticos. Dostoyevski solía leer algunos fragmentos de ella en reuniones literarias con una excelente respuesta por parte del público. Muy pronto se la consideró una obra maestra de la literatura rusa y hasta logró que Dostoyevski se ganara el respeto de varios de sus enemigos literarios. El autor la consideró su magnum opus. A pesar de esto, la novela nunca se terminó. Originalmente, según los esquemas del autor, consistiría en dos partes, y los sucesos de la segunda ocurrirían trece años más tarde que los de la primera. Esta segunda parte nunca llegó a escribirse.

En 1880, Dostoyevski participó en la inauguración del monumento a Aleksandr Pushkin en Moscú, donde pronunció un discurso sobre el destino de Rusia en el mundo. El 8 de noviembre de ese mismo año, terminó Los hermanos Karamázov en San Petersburgo.

Dostoyevski murió en su casa de San Petersburgo, el 9 de febrero de 1881, de una hemorragia pulmonar asociada a un enfisema y a un ataque epiléptico. Fue enterrado en el cementerio Tijvin, dentro del Monasterio de Alejandro Nevski, en San Petersburgo. El vizconde E. M. de Vogüé, diplomático francés, describió el funeral como una especie de apoteosis. En su libro Le Roman russe, señala que entre los miles de jóvenes que seguían el cortejo, se podía distinguir incluso a los nihilistas, que se encontraban en las antípodas de las creencias del escritor. Anna Grigórievna señaló que «los diferentes partidos se reconciliaron en el dolor común y en el deseo de rendir el último homenaje al célebre escritor».

En su lápida sepulcral puede leerse el siguiente versículo de San Juan, que sirvió también como epígrafe de su última novela, Los hermanos Karamázov:

 

En verdad, en verdad os digo que si el grano de trigo que cae en la tierra no muere, queda solo; pero si muere produce mucho fruto. Evangelio de San Juan 12:24

 

es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fiódor_Dostoyevski

es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anexo:Novelas_de_Fiódor_Dostoyevski

  

Fyodor Mikhailovich Dostoevsky (Фёдор Михайлович Достоевский) (11 November 1821 – 9 February 1881), sometimes transliterated Dostoyevsky, was a Russian novelist, short story writer, essayist, journalist and philosopher. Dostoevsky's literary works explore human psychology in the troubled political, social, and spiritual atmospheres of 19th-century Russia, and engage with a variety of philosophical and religious themes. His most acclaimed works include Crime and Punishment (1866), The Idiot (1869), Demons (1872), and The Brothers Karamazov (1880). Dostoevsky's oeuvre consists of 11 novels, three novellas, 17 short stories, and numerous other works. Many literary critics rate him as one of the greatest psychologists in world literature.[3] His 1864 novella Notes from Underground is considered to be one of the first works of existentialist literature.

Born in Moscow in 1821, Dostoevsky was introduced to literature at an early age through fairy tales and legends, and through books by Russian and foreign authors. His mother died in 1837 when he was 15, and around the same time, he left school to enter the Nikolayev Military Engineering Institute. After graduating, he worked as an engineer and briefly enjoyed a lavish lifestyle, translating books to earn extra money. In the mid-1840s he wrote his first novel, Poor Folk, which gained him entry into St. Petersburg's literary circles. Arrested in 1849 for belonging to a literary group that discussed banned books critical of Tsarist Russia, he was sentenced to death but the sentence was commuted at the last moment. He spent four years in a Siberian prison camp, followed by six years of compulsory military service in exile. In the following years, Dostoevsky worked as a journalist, publishing and editing several magazines of his own and later A Writer's Diary, a collection of his writings. He began to travel around western Europe and developed a gambling addiction, which led to financial hardship. For a time, he had to beg for money, but he eventually became one of the most widely read and highly regarded Russian writers.

Dostoevsky was influenced by a wide variety of philosophers and authors including Pushkin, Gogol, Augustine, Shakespeare, Dickens, Balzac, Lermontov, Hugo, Poe, Plato, Cervantes, Herzen, Kant, Belinsky, Hegel, Schiller, Solovyov, Bakunin, Sand, Hoffmann, and Mickiewicz. His writings were widely read both within and beyond his native Russia and influenced an equally great number of later writers including Russians like Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn and Anton Chekhov as well as philosophers such as Friedrich Nietzsche and Jean-Paul Sartre. His books have been translated into more than 170 languages.

Dostoevsky's parents were part of a multi-ethnic and multi-denominational noble family, its branches including Russian Orthodox Christians, Polish Roman Catholics and Ukrainian Eastern Catholics. The family traced its roots back to a Tatar, Aslan Chelebi-Murza, who in 1389 defected from the Golden Horde and joined the forces of Dmitry Donskoy, the first prince of Muscovy to openly challenge the Mongol authority in the region, and whose descendant, Danilo Irtishch, was ennobled and given lands in the Pinsk region (for centuries part of the Grand Duchy of Lithuania, now in modern-day Belarus) in 1509 for his services under a local prince, his progeny then taking the name "Dostoevsky" based on a village there called Dostoïevo

Dostoevsky's immediate ancestors on his mother's side were merchants; the male line on his father's side were priests. His father, Mikhail Andreevich, was expected to join the clergy but instead ran away from home and broke with the family permanently.

In 1809, the 20-year-old Mikhail Andreevich Dostoevsky enrolled in Moscow's Imperial Medical-Surgical Academy. From there he was assigned to a Moscow hospital, where he served as military doctor, and in 1818, he was appointed a senior physician. In 1819 he married Maria Nechayeva. The following year, he took up a post at the Mariinsky Hospital for the poor. In 1828, when his two sons, Mikhail and Fyodor, were eight and seven respectively, he was promoted to collegiate assessor, a position which raised his legal status to that of the nobility and enabled him to acquire a small estate in Darovoye, a town about 150 km (100 miles) from Moscow, where the family usually spent the summers. Dostoevsky's parents subsequently had six more children: Varvara (1822–1892), Andrei (1825–1897), Lyubov (born and died 1829), Vera (1829–1896), Nikolai (1831–1883) and Aleksandra (1835–1889).

Fyodor Dostoevsky, born on 11 November [O.S. 30 October] 1821, was the second child of Dr. Mikhail Dostoevsky and Maria Dostoevskaya (born Nechayeva). He was raised in the family home in the grounds of the Mariinsky Hospital for the Poor, which was in a lower class district on the edges of Moscow. Dostoevsky encountered the patients, who were at the lower end of the Russian social scale, when playing in the hospital gardens.

Dostoevsky was introduced to literature at an early age. From the age of three, he was read heroic sagas, fairy tales and legends by his nanny, Alena Frolovna, an especially influential figure in his upbringing and love for fictional stories. When he was four his mother used the Bible to teach him to read and write. His parents introduced him to a wide range of literature, including Russian writers Karamzin, Pushkin and Derzhavin; Gothic fiction such as Ann Radcliffe; romantic works by Schiller and Goethe; heroic tales by Cervantes and Walter Scott; and Homer's epics. Although his father's approach to education has been described as strict and harsh, Dostoevsky himself reports that his imagination was brought alive by nightly readings by his parents.

Some of his childhood experiences found their way into his writings. When a nine-year-old girl had been raped by a drunk, he was asked to fetch his father to attend to her. The incident haunted him, and the theme of the desire of a mature man for a young girl appears in The Devils, The Brothers Karamazov, Crime and Punishment, and other writings. An incident involving a family servant, or serf, in the estate in Darovoye, is described in "The Peasant Marey": when the young Dostoevsky imagines hearing a wolf in the forest, Marey, who is working nearby, comforts him.

Although Dostoevsky had a delicate physical constitution, his parents described him as hot-headed, stubborn and cheeky. In 1833, Dostoevsky's father, who was profoundly religious, sent him to a French boarding school and then to the Chermak boarding school. He was described as a pale, introverted dreamer and an over-excitable romantic. To pay the school fees, his father borrowed money and extended his private medical practice. Dostoevsky felt out of place among his aristocratic classmates at the Moscow school, and the experience was later reflected in some of his works, notably The Adolescent.

On 27 September 1837 Dostoevsky's mother died of tuberculosis. The previous May, his parents had sent Dostoevsky and his brother Mikhail to St Petersburg to attend the free Nikolayev Military Engineering Institute, forcing the brothers to abandon their academic studies for military careers. Dostoevsky entered the academy in January 1838, but only with the help of family members. Mikhail was refused admission on health grounds and was sent to the Academy in Reval, Estonia.

Dostoevsky disliked the academy, primarily because of his lack of interest in science, mathematics and military engineering and his preference for drawing and architecture. As his friend Konstantin Trutovsky once said, "There was no student in the entire institution with less of a military bearing than F.M. Dostoevsky. He moved clumsily and jerkily; his uniform hung awkwardly on him; and his knapsack, shako and rifle all looked like some sort of fetter he had been forced to wear for a time and which lay heavily on him." Dostoevsky's character and interests made him an outsider among his 120 classmates: he showed bravery and a strong sense of justice, protected newcomers, aligned himself with teachers, criticised corruption among officers and helped poor farmers. Although he was solitary and inhabited his own literary world, he was respected by his classmates. His reclusiveness and interest in religion earned him the nickname "Monk Photius".

Signs of Dostoevsky's epilepsy may have first appeared on learning of the death of his father on 16 June 1839, although the reports of a seizure originated from accounts written by his daughter (later expanded by Sigmund Freud.) which are now considered to be unreliable. His father's official cause of death was an apoplectic stroke, but a neighbour, Pavel Khotiaintsev, accused the father's serfs of murder. Had the serfs been found guilty and sent to Siberia, Khotiaintsev would have been in a position to buy the vacated land. The serfs were acquitted in a trial in Tula, but Dostoevsky's brother Andrei perpetuated the story. After his father's death, Dostoevsky continued his studies, passed his exams and obtained the rank of engineer cadet, entitling him to live away from the academy. He visited Mikhail in Reval, and frequently attended concerts, operas, plays and ballets. During this time, two of his friends introduced him to gambling.

On 12 August 1843 Dostoevsky took a job as a lieutenant engineer and lived with Adolph Totleben in an apartment owned by Dr. Rizenkampf, a friend of Mikhail. Rizenkampf characterised him as "no less good-natured and no less courteous than his brother, but when not in a good mood he often looked at everything through dark glasses, became vexed, forgot good manners, and sometimes was carried away to the point of abusiveness and loss of self-awareness". Dostoevsky's first completed literary work, a translation of Honoré de Balzac's novel Eugénie Grandet, was published in June and July 1843 in the 6th and 7th volume of the journal Repertoire and Pantheon, followed by several other translations. None were successful, and his financial difficulties led him to write a novel.

Dostoevsky completed his first novel, Poor Folk, in May 1845. His friend Dmitry Grigorovich, with whom he was sharing an apartment at the time, took the manuscript to the poet Nikolay Nekrasov, who in turn showed it to the renowned and influential literary critic Vissarion Belinsky. Belinsky described it as Russia's first "social novel". Poor Folk was released on 15 January 1846 in the St Petersburg Collection almanac and became a commercial success.

Dostoevsky felt that his military career would endanger his now flourishing literary career, so he wrote a letter asking to resign his post. Shortly thereafter, he wrote his second novel, The Double, which appeared in the journal Notes of the Fatherland on 30 January 1846, before being published in February. Around the same time, Dostoevsky discovered socialism through the writings of French thinkers Fourier, Cabet, Proudhon and Saint-Simon. Through his relationship with Belinsky he expanded his knowledge of the philosophy of socialism. He was attracted to its logic, its sense of justice and its preoccupation with the destitute and the disadvantaged. However, his relationship with Belinsky became increasingly strained as Belinsky's atheism and dislike of religion clashed with Dostoevsky's Russian Orthodox beliefs. Dostoevsky eventually parted with him and his associates.

After The Double received negative reviews, Dostoevsky's health declined and he had more frequent seizures, but he continued writing. From 1846 to 1848 he released several short stories in the magazine Annals of the Fatherland, including "Mr. Prokharchin", "The Landlady", "A Weak Heart", and "White Nights". These stories were unsuccessful, leaving Dostoevsky once more in financial trouble, so he joined the utopian socialist Betekov circle, a tightly knit community which helped him to survive. When the circle dissolved, Dostoevsky befriended Apollon Maykov and his brother Valerian. In 1846, on the recommendation of the poet Aleksey Pleshcheyev,[41] he joined the Petrashevsky Circle, founded by Mikhail Petrashevsky, who had proposed social reforms in Russia. Mikhail Bakunin once wrote to Alexander Herzen that the group was "the most innocent and harmless company" and its members were "systematic opponents of all revolutionary goals and means". Dostoevsky used the circle's library on Saturdays and Sundays and occasionally participated in their discussions on freedom from censorship and the abolition of serfdom.[43][44]

In 1849, the first parts of Netochka Nezvanova, a novel Dostoevsky had been planning since 1846, were published in Annals of the Fatherland, but his banishment ended the project. Dostoevsky never attempted to complete it.

The members of the Petrashevsky Circle were denounced to Liprandi, an official at the Ministry of Internal Affairs. Dostoevsky was accused of reading works by Belinsky, including the banned Letter to Gogol,[46] and of circulating copies of these and other works. Antonelli, the government agent who had reported the group, wrote in his statement that at least one of the papers criticised Russian politics and religion. Dostoevsky responded to these charges by declaring that he had read the essays only "as a literary monument, neither more nor less"; he spoke of "personality and human egoism" rather than of politics. Even so, he and his fellow "conspirators" were arrested on 23 April 1849 at the request of Count A. Orlov and Tsar Nicolas I, who feared a revolution like the Decembrist revolt of 1825 in Russia and the Revolutions of 1848 in Europe. The members were held in the well-defended Peter and Paul Fortress, which housed the most dangerous convicts.

The case was discussed for four months by an investigative commission headed by the Tsar, with Adjutant General Ivan Nabokov, senator Prince Pavel Gagarin, Prince Vasili Dolgorukov, General Yakov Rostovtsev and General Leonty Dubelt, head of the secret police. They sentenced the members of the circle to death by firing squad, and the prisoners were taken to Semyonov Place in St Petersburg on 23 December 1849 where they were split into three-man groups. Dostoevsky was the third in the second row; next to him stood Pleshcheyev and Durov. The execution was stayed when a cart delivered a letter from the Tsar commuting the sentence.

Dostoevsky served four years of exile with hard labour at a katorga prison camp in Omsk, Siberia, followed by a term of compulsory military service. After a fourteen-day sleigh ride, the prisoners reached Tobolsk, a prisoner way station. Despite the circumstances, Dostoevsky consoled the other prisoners, such as the Petrashevist Ivan Yastrzhembsky, who was surprised by Dostoevsky's kindness and eventually abandoned his decision to commit suicide. In Tobolsk, the members received food and clothes from the Decembrist women, as well as several copies of the New Testament with a ten-ruble banknote inside each copy. Eleven days later, Dostoevsky reached Omsk together with just one other member of the Petrashevsky Circle, the poet Sergei Durov. Dostoevsky described his barracks:

 

In summer, intolerable closeness; in winter, unendurable cold. All the floors were rotten. Filth on the floors an inch thick; one could slip and fall ... We were packed like herrings in a barrel ... There was no room to turn around. From dusk to dawn it was impossible not to behave like pigs ... Fleas, lice, and black beetles by the bushel ...

 

Classified as "one of the most dangerous convicts", Dostoevsky had his hands and feet shackled until his release. He was only permitted to read his New Testament Bible. In addition to his seizures, he had haemorrhoids, lost weight and was "burned by some fever, trembling and feeling too hot or too cold every night". The smell of the privy pervaded the entire building, and the small bathroom had to suffice for more than 200 people. Dostoevsky was occasionally sent to the military hospital, where he read newspapers and Dickens novels. He was respected by most of the other prisoners, and despised by some because of his xenophobic statements.

After his release on 14 February 1854, Dostoevsky asked Mikhail to help him financially and to send him books by Vico, Guizot, Ranke, Hegel and Kant.[55] The House of the Dead, based on his experience in prison, was published in 1861 in the journal Vremya ("Time") – it was the first published novel about Russian prisons. Before moving in mid-March to Semipalatinsk, where he was forced to serve in the Siberian Army Corps of the Seventh Line Battalion, Dostoevsky met geographer Pyotr Semyonov and ethnographer Shokan Walikhanuli. Around November 1854, he met Baron Alexander Egorovich Wrangel, an admirer of his books, who had attended the aborted execution. They both rented houses in the Cossack Garden outside Semipalatinsk. Wrangel remarked that Dostoevsky "looked morose. His sickly, pale face was covered with freckles, and his blond hair was cut short. He was a little over average height and looked at me intensely with his sharp, grey-blue eyes. It was as if he were trying to look into my soul and discover what kind of man I was."

In Semipalatinsk, Dostoevsky tutored several schoolchildren and came into contact with upper-class families, including that of Lieutenant-Colonel Belikhov, who used to invite him to read passages from newspapers and magazines. During a visit to Belikhov, Dostoevsky met the family of Alexander Ivanovich Isaev and Maria Dmitrievna Isaeva and fell in love with the latter. Alexander Isaev took a new post in Kuznetsk, where he died in August 1855. Maria and her son then moved with Dostoevsky to Barnaul. In 1856 Dostoevsky sent a letter through Wrangel to General Eduard Totleben, apologising for his activity in several utopian circles. As a result, he obtained the right to publish books and to marry, although he remained under police surveillance for the rest of his life. Maria married Dostoevsky in Semipalatinsk on 7 February 1857, even though she had initially refused his marriage proposal, stating that they were not meant for each other and that his poor financial situation precluded marriage. Their family life was unhappy and she found it difficult to cope with his seizures. Describing their relationship, he wrote: "Because of her strange, suspicious and fantastic character, we were definitely not happy together, but we could not stop loving each other; and the more unhappy we were, the more attached to each other we became". They mostly lived apart. In 1859 he was released from military service because of deteriorating health and was granted permission to return to Russia, first to Tver, where he met his brother for the first time in ten years, and then to St Petersburg.

"A Little Hero" (Dostoevsky's only work completed in prison) appeared in a journal, but "Uncle's Dream" and "The Village of Stepanchikovo" were not published until 1860. Notes from the House of the Dead was released in Russky Mir (Russian World) in September 1860. "The Insulted and the Injured" was published in the new Vremya magazine, which had been created with the help of funds from his brother's cigarette factory.

Dostoevsky travelled to western Europe for the first time on 7 June 1862, visiting Cologne, Berlin, Dresden, Wiesbaden, Belgium, and Paris. In London, he met Herzen and visited the Crystal Palace. He travelled with Nikolay Strakhov through Switzerland and several North Italian cities, including Turin, Livorno, and Florence. He recorded his impressions of those trips in Winter Notes on Summer Impressions, in which he criticised capitalism, social modernisation, materialism, Catholicism and Protestantism.

From August to October 1863, Dostoevsky made another trip to western Europe. He met his second love, Polina Suslova, in Paris and lost nearly all his money gambling in Wiesbaden and Baden-Baden. In 1864 his wife Maria and his brother Mikhail died, and Dostoevsky became the lone parent of his stepson Pasha and the sole supporter of his brother's family. The failure of Epoch, the magazine he had founded with Mikhail after the suppression of Vremya, worsened his financial situation, although the continued help of his relatives and friends averted bankruptcy.

The first two parts of Crime and Punishment were published in January and February 1866 in the periodical The Russian Messenger, attracting at least 500 new subscribers to the magazine.

Dostoevsky returned to Saint Petersburg in mid-September and promised his editor, Fyodor Stellovsky, that he would complete The Gambler, a short novel focused on gambling addiction, by November, although he had not yet begun writing it. One of Dostoevsky's friends, Milyukov, advised him to hire a secretary. Dostoevsky contacted stenographer Pavel Olkhin from Saint Petersburg, who recommended his pupil, the twenty-year-old Anna Grigoryevna Snitkina. Her shorthand helped Dostoevsky to complete The Gambler on 30 October, after 26 days' work. She remarked that Dostoevsky was of average height but always tried to carry himself erect. "He had light brown, slightly reddish hair, he used some hair conditioner, and he combed his hair in a diligent way ... his eyes, they were different: one was dark brown; in the other, the pupil was so big that you could not see its color, [this was caused by an injury]. The strangeness of his eyes gave Dostoyevsky some mysterious appearance. His face was pale, and it looked unhealthy."

On 15 February 1867 Dostoevsky married Snitkina in Trinity Cathedral, Saint Petersburg. The 7,000 rubles he had earned from Crime and Punishment did not cover their debts, forcing Anna to sell her valuables. On 14 April 1867, they began a delayed honeymoon in Germany with the money gained from the sale. They stayed in Berlin and visited the Gemäldegalerie Alte Meister in Dresden, where he sought inspiration for his writing. They continued their trip through Germany, visiting Frankfurt, Darmstadt, Heidelberg and Karlsruhe. They spent five weeks in Baden-Baden, where Dostoevsky had a quarrel with Turgenev and again lost much money at the roulette table. The couple travelled on to Geneva.

In September 1867, Dostoevsky began work on The Idiot, and after a prolonged planning process that bore little resemblance to the published novel, he eventually managed to write the first 100 pages in only 23 days; the serialisation began in The Russian Messenger in January 1868.

Their first child, Sonya, had been conceived in Baden-Baden, and was born in Geneva on 5 March 1868. The baby died of pneumonia three months later, and Anna recalled how Dostoevsky "wept and sobbed like a woman in despair". The couple moved from Geneva to Vevey and then to Milan, before continuing to Florence. The Idiot was completed there in January 1869, the final part appearing in The Russian Messenger in February 1869. Anna gave birth to their second daughter, Lyubov, on 26 September 1869 in Dresden. In April 1871, Dostoevsky made a final visit to a gambling hall in Wiesbaden. Anna claimed that he stopped gambling after the birth of their second daughter, but this is a subject of debate.

After hearing news that the socialist revolutionary group "People's Vengeance" had murdered one of its own members, Ivan Ivanov, on 21 November 1869, Dostoevsky began writing Demons. In 1871, Dostoevsky and Anna travelled by train to Berlin. During the trip, he burnt several manuscripts, including those of The Idiot, because he was concerned about potential problems with customs. The family arrived in Saint Petersburg on 8 July, marking the end of a honeymoon (originally planned for three months) that had lasted over four years.

Back in Russia in July 1871, the family was again in financial trouble and had to sell their remaining possessions. Their son Fyodor was born on 16 July, and they moved to an apartment near the Institute of Technology soon after. They hoped to cancel their large debts by selling their rental house in Peski, but difficulties with the tenant resulted in a relatively low selling price, and disputes with their creditors continued. Anna proposed that they raise money on her husband's copyrights and negotiate with the creditors to pay off their debts in installments.

Dostoevsky revived his friendships with Maykov and Strakhov and made new acquaintances, including church politician Terty Filipov and the brothers Vsevolod and Vladimir Solovyov. Konstantin Pobedonostsev, future Imperial High Commissioner of the Most Holy Synod, influenced Dostoevsky's political progression to conservatism. Around early 1872 the family spent several months in Staraya Russa, a town known for its mineral spa. Dostoevsky's work was delayed when Anna's sister Maria Svatkovskaya died on 1 May 1872, either from typhus or malaria, and Anna developed an abscess on her throat.

The family returned to St Petersburg in September. Demons was finished on 26 November and released in January 1873 by the "Dostoevsky Publishing Company", which was founded by Dostoevsky and his wife. Although they only accepted cash payments and the bookshop was in their own apartment, the business was successful, and they sold around 3,000 copies of Demons. Anna managed the finances. Dostoevsky proposed that they establish a new periodical, which would be called A Writer's Diary and would include a collection of essays, but funds were lacking, and the Diary was published in Vladimir Meshchersky's The Citizen, beginning on 1 January, in return for a salary of 3,000 rubles per year. In the summer of 1873, Anna returned to Staraya Russa with the children, while Dostoevsky stayed in St Petersburg to continue with his Diary.

In March 1874, Dostoevsky left The Citizen because of the stressful work and interference from the Russian bureaucracy. In his fifteen months with The Citizen, he had been taken to court twice: on 11 June 1873 for citing the words of Prince Meshchersky without permission, and again on 23 March 1874. Dostoevsky offered to sell a new novel he had not yet begun to write to The Russian Messenger, but the magazine refused. Nikolay Nekrasov suggested that he publish A Writer's Diary in Notes of the Fatherland; he would receive 250 rubles for each printer's sheet – 100 more than the text's publication in The Russian Messenger would have earned. Dostoevsky accepted. As his health began to decline, he consulted several doctors in St Petersburg and was advised to take a cure outside Russia. Around July, he reached Ems and consulted a physician, who diagnosed him with acute catarrh. During his stay he began The Adolescent. He returned to Saint Petersburg in late July.

Anna proposed that they spend the winter in Staraya Russa to allow Dostoevsky to rest, although doctors had suggested a second visit to Ems because his health had previously improved there. On 10 August 1875 his son Alexey was born in Staraya Russa, and in mid-September the family returned to Saint Petersburg. Dostoevsky finished The Adolescent at the end of 1875, although passages of it had been serialised in Notes of the Fatherland since January. The Adolescent chronicles the life of Arkady Dolgoruky, the illegitimate child of the landowner Versilov and a peasant mother. It deals primarily with the relationship between father and son, which became a frequent theme in Dostoevsky's subsequent works.

In early 1876, Dostoevsky continued work on his Diary. The book includes numerous essays and a few short stories about society, religion, politics and ethics. The collection sold more than twice as many copies as his previous books. Dostoevsky received more letters from readers than ever before, and people of all ages and occupations visited him. With assistance from Anna's brother, the family bought a dacha in Staraya Russa. In the summer of 1876, Dostoevsky began experiencing shortness of breath again. He visited Ems for the third time and was told that he might live for another 15 years if he moved to a healthier climate. When he returned to Russia, Tsar Alexander II ordered Dostoevsky to visit his palace to present the Diary to him, and he asked him to educate his sons, Sergey and Paul. This visit further increased Dosteyevsky's circle of acquaintances. He was a frequent guest in several salons in Saint Petersburg and met many famous people, including Princess Sophia Tolstaya, Yakov Polonsky, Sergei Witte, Alexey Suvorin, Anton Rubinstein and Ilya Repin.

Dostoevsky's health declined further, and in March 1877 he had four epileptic seizures. Rather than returning to Ems, he visited Maly Prikol, a manor near Kursk. While returning to St Petersburg to finalise his Diary, he visited Darovoye, where he had spent much of his childhood. In December he attended Nekrasov's funeral and gave a speech. He was appointed an honorary member of the Russian Academy of Sciences, from which he received an honorary certificate in February 1879. He declined an invitation to an international congress on copyright in Paris after his son Alyosha had a severe epileptic seizure and died on 16 May. The family later moved to the apartment where Dostoevsky had written his first works. Around this time, he was elected to the board of directors of the Slavic Benevolent Society in Saint Petersburg. That summer, he was elected to the honorary committee of the Association Littéraire et Artistique Internationale, whose members included Victor Hugo, Ivan Turgenev, Paul Heyse, Alfred Tennyson, Anthony Trollope, Henry Longfellow, Ralph Waldo Emerson and Leo Tolstoy. Dostoevsky made his fourth and final visit to Ems in early August 1879. He was diagnosed with early-stage pulmonary emphysema, which his doctor believed could be successfully managed, but not cured.

On 3 February 1880 Dostoevsky was elected vice-president of the Slavic Benevolent Society, and he was invited to speak at the unveiling of the Pushkin memorial in Moscow. On 8 June he delivered his speech, giving an impressive performance that had a significant emotional impact on his audience. His speech was met with thunderous applause, and even his long-time rival Turgenev embraced him. Konstantin Staniukovich praised the speech in his essay "The Pushkin Anniversary and Dostoevsky's Speech" in The Business, writing that "the language of Dostoevsky's [Pushkin Speech] really looks like a sermon. He speaks with the tone of a prophet. He makes a sermon like a pastor; it is very deep, sincere, and we understand that he wants to impress the emotions of his listeners." The speech was criticised later by liberal political scientist Alexander Gradovsky, who thought that Dostoevsky idolised "the people" and by conservative thinker Konstantin Leontiev, who, in his essay "On Universal Love", compared the speech to French utopian socialism. The attacks led to a further deterioration in his health.

On 25 January 1881, while searching for members of the terrorist organisation Narodnaya Volya ("The People's Will") who would soon assassinate Tsar Alexander II, the Tsar's secret police executed a search warrant in the apartment of one of Dostoevsky's neighbours. On the following day, Dostoevsky suffered a pulmonary haemorrhage. Anna denied that the search had caused it, saying that the haemorrhage had occurred after her husband had been looking for a dropped pen holder. After another haemorrhage, Anna called the doctors, who gave a poor prognosis. A third haemorrhage followed shortly afterwards. While seeing his children before dying, Dostoevsky requested that the parable of the Prodigal Son be read to his children. The profound meaning of this request is pointed out by Frank:

It was this parable of transgression, repentance, and forgiveness that he wished to leave as a last heritage to his children, and it may well be seen as his own ultimate understanding of the meaning of his life and the message of his work.

Among Dostoevsky's last words was his quotation of Matthew 3:14–15: "But John forbad him, saying, I have a need to be baptised of thee, and comest thou to me? And Jesus answering said unto him, Suffer it to be so now: for thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness", and he finished with "Hear now—permit it. Do not restrain me!" When he died, his body was placed on a table, following Russian custom. He was interred in the Tikhvin Cemetery at the Alexander Nevsky Convent, near his favourite poets, Nikolay Karamzin and Vasily Zhukovsky. It is unclear how many attended his funeral. According to one reporter, more than 100,000 mourners were present, while others describe attendance between 40,000 and 50,000. His tombstone is inscribed with lines from the New Testament:

 

Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except a corn of wheat fall into the ground and die, it abideth alone: but if it dies, it bringeth forth much fruit. — John 12:24

 

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fyodor_Dostoevsky

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Themes_in_Fyodor_Dostoevsky%27s_wri...

 

2019 oct 23

 

abstract optical materialism macropaintograph with household materials

 

Camera: Pentax K-50 16 Mpixel Digital SLR + Carl Zeiss Jenna 2.8/ 50mm via extension tube

 

1. Individuality and the Group-Soul

4 December 1909, Munich

Today we will consider a general theme: the question of the meaning and tasks of anthroposophical spiritual science. Tomorrow we will take up a more specific theme: the destiny and nature of the individual human being. We have often emphasized that anthroposophy has a special task and meaning for human beings in the present age. People who think will not be able to avoid the question what the aims of this spiritual movement are and how they relate to other tasks of our time. Such tasks may be explained from diverse points of view, as we have often done. Today we will try to describe the evolutionary stage of contemporary humanity and attempt to look a little into the future. Then we will consider the task of anthroposophy in reference to our present evolutionary stage.

We know that since the great Atlantean catastrophe, which entirely transformed the earth, there have been five great epochs of civilization. We designate these as the ancient Indian, the ancient Persian, the Egypto-Chaldean, the Greco-Latin, and the epoch we presently live in. The latter was prepared in the eighth, ninth, and tenth centuries after Christ; we are now actually in the middle of this epoch. Of course, such divisions are not to be understood as indicating that each evolutionary epoch abruptly came to an end and then a new one began. Rather, one epoch gradually and slowly merged into another. Long before one epoch has run its course, the next one is already being prepared.

In our own cultural epoch, the fifth post-Atlantean epoch, the characteristics of the sixth epoch are already being prepared. Roughly speaking, people in our time can be divided into two groups: those who live blindly for the day, have no idea of, and know nothing about the preparation of the sixth epoch, and those who understand that something new is being prepared. The latter also know that this preparation must basically be accomplished by human beings. We find our place in our time either by passively following the customs of our society and doing what our parents have taught us to do, or by being aware that to be a conscious link in the chain of humanity we must work on ourselves and our environment to contribute, as best we can, to the preparation of what must come, namely, the sixth cultural period.

How it is possible to prepare for the sixth epoch can only be understood when we consider the character of our own period. The best way to do this is to compare it with others. We know these cultural epochs are different from each other, and over the years we have presented their various distinguishing characteristics. We have shown that in the ancient Indian period people had different soul qualities than they did later. At that time, human beings were still endowed with a high degree of clairvoyant consciousness. In later epochs, this clairvoyance was gradually lost, and perception and understanding became limited to the physical world. We have seen that the fourth epoch was slowly prepared; it was in that period that humanity came to live entirely in the physical world. This made it possible for the being whom we call Christ Jesus to incarnate in human form, as a human being on the physical plane. Next we have seen that since that time a certain stream further strengthened human capacities in the physical world. Indeed, the materialistic tendency of our age and the insistence to accept only the physical world as real are connected with humanity's further descent into the physical. However, things must not remain like this. We must ascend again into the spiritual world, bearing with us the attainments and fruits we have acquired in the physical world. It is the task of anthroposophy to offer people the possibility of ascending once again into the spiritual world.

Immediately after the great Atlantean catastrophe, there were many human beings who knew through direct perception that they were surrounded by, and lived in, a spiritual world. Gradually, however, the number of those who knew this decreased as human perception became more limited to the physical senses. In our time, the capacity to perceive the spiritual world has almost disappeared; yet something so significant is being prepared in our time that a great many people will have quite different faculties in their next incarnation. Human faculties have changed during the past five cultural epochs, and they will change again in the sixth. The capacities of a great number of people living today will change considerably in their next incarnation, as will be clear from the whole nature of their soul. Today we will talk about how different many of these human souls will be already in their next incarnation; of course, for other people, this change will not happen until two incarnations from now.

 

Looking at past epochs of human evolution, we can also see that the closer we come to the ancient clairvoyance, the more the human soul has the character of what we can call “group-soulness.” I have often pointed out that consciousness of this group-soulness existed preeminently among the ancient Hebrews. A person who consciously felt himself to be a member of this people understood, “As an individual human being, I am a transitory phenomenon, but there lives in me something that has an immediate connection with all the soul essence that has streamed down since the days of our progenitor, Abraham.” In esoteric terms, we can describe these feelings of the Hebrew people as a spiritual phenomenon. We will better understand what happened there if we look at the following.

Let us consider a Hebrew initiate of that time. Although initiation was not so frequent among the ancient Hebrews as among other peoples, we can characterize such a real initiate — that is, one initiated not just into theories and the law, but one who really saw into the spiritual worlds — only by taking into consideration the peculiarity of the Hebrew people as a whole. Nowadays, historians, who are concerned only with documents, check the Old Testament against all kinds of external records and find it unsubstantiated. We will have occasion to point out that the Old Testament gives us facts more faithfully than external historical records. In any case, spiritual science shows that the blood relationship of the Hebrews to Abraham can really be proven, and that their claim on Abraham as their original progenitor is fully justified. It was known particularly in the ancient Hebrew Mystery schools that the individuality or psychic essence of Abraham did not incarnate only in him, but is an eternal being existing in the spiritual world.

In fact, all true initiates among the Hebrews were inspired by the same spirit that inspired Abraham; they could call upon that spirit and were permeated by the same soul nature as Abraham. There was a real connection between every initiate and the tribal ancestor Abraham. This connection was expressed also in the feelings of the individuals belonging to the Hebrew people. They felt that what came to expression in Abraham was the group-soul of the people.

Group-souls were also experienced in the same way by other peoples of that time. Humanity in general goes back to group-souls. The farther back we go in human evolution, the less developed we find the individuality. Instead, a whole group belonged together as a unit, as is the case in the animal kingdom. This “groupness” is more and more pronounced the farther back we go into ancient times. Groups of human beings then belonged together, and the group-soul was considerably stronger than the individual soul.

Even today human group-soulness is still not overcome. Those who claim the opposite merely fail to take into account certain subtler phenomena of life, such as the resemblance of certain people not only in their physiognomies but also in their soul qualities. In a sense, people can be divided into categories, and everyone will fit into one of them. Individuals may differ as to this or that quality but a certain group-soulness still makes itself felt and not only because there are still different peoples. The boundaries between the nations continue to disintegrate, but other groupings are still perceptible. Thus certain basic characteristics are combined in individuals in such a way that the last vestiges of group-soulness can still be perceived today.

We are now living in a period of transition. All group-soulness must gradually be stripped off. Just as the differences between nations are gradually disappearing, and the factions within them come to understand each other better, so also will other group-soul qualities have to be shed. Instead, the individual nature of each person will be pushed to the fore. We have here characterized something essential in evolution. From another point of view, we can also say that in the course of evolution the concept of race, by which group-soulness is chiefly expressed, gradually loses its significance.

 

If we go back beyond the Atlantean catastrophe, we see how human races were prepared. In the ancient Atlantean age, human beings were grouped according to external bodily characteristics even more so than in our time. The races we distinguish today are merely vestiges of these significant differences between human beings in ancient Atlantis. The concept of race is only fully applicable to Atlantis. Because we are dealing with the real evolution of humanity, we have therefore never used this concept of race in its original meaning. Thus, we do not speak of an Indian race, a Persian race, and so on, because it is no longer true or proper to do so. Instead, we speak of an Indian, a Persian, and other periods of civilization. And it would make no sense at all to say that in our time a sixth “race” is being prepared. Though remnants of ancient Atlantean differences, of ancient Atlantean group-soulness, still exist and the division into races is still in effect, what is being prepared for the sixth epoch is precisely the stripping away of race. That is essentially what is happening.

Therefore, in its fundamental nature, the anthroposophical movement, which is to prepare the sixth period, must cast aside the division into races. It must seek to unite people of all races and nations, and to bridge the divisions and differences between various groups of people. The old point of view of race has a physical character, but what will prevail in the future will have a more spiritual character.

That is why it is absolutely essential to understand that our anthroposophical movement is a spiritual one. It looks to the spirit and overcomes the effects of physical differences through the force of being a spiritual movement. Of course, any movement has its childhood illnesses, so to speak. Consequently, in the beginning of the theosophical movement the earth was divided into seven periods of time, one for each of the seven root races, and each of these root races was divided into seven sub-races. These seven periods were said to repeat in a cycle so that one could always speak of seven races and seven sub-races. However, we must get beyond the illnesses of childhood and understand clearly that the concept of race has ceased to have any meaning in our time.

Humanity is becoming evermore individual, and this has further implications for human individuality. It is important that this individuality develop in the right way. The anthroposophical movement is to help people become individualities, or personalities, in the right sense. How can it accomplish this? Here we must look to the most striking new quality of the human soul that is being prepared. People often ask why we do not remember our former incarnations. I have often answered this question, which is like saying that because a four-year-old child cannot do arithmetic, human beings cannot do arithmetic. When the child reaches ten, he or she will be able to multiply with ease. It is the same with the soul. If it cannot remember our former incarnations today, the time will come when it will be able to do so. Then it will possess the same capacity initiates have.

This new development is happening today. There are numerous souls nowadays who are so far advanced that they are close to the moment of remembering their former incarnations, or at least the last one. A number of people are at the threshold of comprehensive memory, embracing life between birth and death as well as previous incarnations. Many people will remember their present incarnation when they are reborn in their next life. It is simply a question of how they remember. The anthroposophical movement is to help and guide people to remember in the right way.

In light of this, we can describe this anthroposophical movement as leading a person to grasp correctly what is called the I, the innermost member of the human being. I have often pointed out that Fichte rightly said most people would sooner regard themselves as a piece of lava on the moon than as an I. 1 To think how many people in our time have any idea at all of the I — that is, of what they are — leads to a dismal conclusion.

 

In this connection I am always reminded of a friend I had more than thirty years ago and who, as a young student, was completely steeped in the materialistic outlook. Today it is more modern to call it the “monistic” outlook. He always laughed when he heard someone say that within each human being there was something that could be called a spiritual being. My friend thought that what lives as thought in us is produced by mechanical or chemical processes in the brain. I often said to him, “Look, if you seriously believe this, why are you lying all the time?” For, in fact, he really was lying continually because he never said, “My brain feels, my brain thinks,” but, “I think, I feel, I know this or that.” Thus, he contradicted his own theory with his every word — as everyone does, for it is impossible to adhere fully to a materialistic theory one has imagined. It is impossible to remain truthful if one thinks materialistically. If one wanted to say, “My brain loves you,” then one should not say “you,” but “My brain loves your brain.” People are not aware of the consequences of their theories. This may be humorous, but it also shows the deep foundation of unconscious untruthfulness that underlies our present spiritual condition.

Now, most people really would sooner regard themselves as a piece of lava on the moon, that is as a piece of matter, than as an I. The I can be understood least of all through science with its materialistic methods and way of thinking. How can we understand the I? How can we arrive at an idea or concept of what we feel instinctively when we say, “I think”? We can do so only through knowing on the basis of the anthroposophical world view how the human being is constituted and structured — that the physical body is related to Saturn, the etheric body to the sun, the astral body to the moon, and the I to the earth. When we keep in mind the ideas we can gather from the cosmos, we understand that the I, as the real master, works on the other members. Then we gradually come to understand what we mean by the word “I.”

As we learn to understand this word, we slowly approach the highest concept of this I. We begin to feel ourselves as spiritual beings not only when we feel ourselves to be within an I, but also when we can say that something lives in our individuality that was already there before Abraham. Then we can say not only, “I and father Abraham are one,” but also “I and the Father, that is, the spiritual element weaving through and living in the world, are one.” What lives in the I is the same spiritual substance that lives and weaves in the world as spirit. Thus we gradually come to understand the I, the bearer of human individuality that goes from incarnation to incarnation.

How do we understand the I and the world in general through the anthroposophical world view? The anthroposophical view of the world develops in the most individual way, but at the same time it is the most un-individual thing you can imagine. It arises in the most individual way when the secrets of the cosmos are revealed in a human soul, when the great spiritual beings of the world stream into this soul. The content of the world must be experienced in the human individuality in the most individual way, but at the same time it must also be experienced completely impersonally. Concerning the true character of cosmic mysteries, we have to say that as long as we still value our personal opinion, we cannot arrive at the truth.

Indeed, it is the peculiar nature of anthroposophical truth that the observer must not hold any opinion of his or her own about it and must not have any preference for this or that theory. The observer must not like this or that view more than any other because of his or her individual peculiarities. As long as we have our own opinions, it is impossible for the true secrets of the world to be revealed to us. We must pursue knowledge quite individually, but our individuality must be so developed that it no longer retains anything personal; it must be free of sympathies and antipathies. This must be taken very seriously. Those who still prefer personal ideas and views and are inclined to this or that because of their education and temperament will never know objective truth.

 

This summer, we have tried to understand eastern wisdom from the standpoint of western teaching. 2 We have tried to do justice to eastern wisdom and to present it truly. It must be emphasized that if we have independent spiritual knowledge in our time, it is impossible to decide for either the oriental or the occidental views of the world on the basis of personal preference. Those who say that because of their temperament they prefer the oriental or the occidental world view and its laws do not understand what is essential here. We should not decide that Christ, let us say, is more significant than what is to be found in eastern teaching because we happen to incline toward him through our western education or temperament. We cannot answer the question how Christ is related to the orient until, from a personal standpoint, we can accept Christian and oriental teachings equally. As long as we have a preference, we are unable to make a decision. We begin to be objective only when we let the facts speak for themselves and disregard our personal opinions.

The anthroposophical world view in its true form is closely interwoven with human individuality, for this world view must spring from the I-force of the individuality and yet be independent of it. The individuality as such does not matter. The person in whom anthroposophical wisdom appears must be completely unimportant compared to this wisdom; the person as such does not matter at all. It is only essential that this person has developed so far that his or her personal likes, dislikes, and opinions do not taint the anthroposophical wisdom. Then this wisdom will indeed be individual, because the spiritual cannot appear in the light of the moon or the stars but only in the individuality, in the human soul. This individuality, however, must be developed to the point of being able to disengage from the development of the wisdom of the world.

What is entering humanity through the anthroposophical movement concerns every human being regardless of race or nationality. This movement speaks only to the new humanity, the new human being — not to an abstract concept “human being,” but to every individual. This is the essential point. Anthroposophy proceeds from the individuality, the innermost core of the human being, and it speaks to and touches this core of a person's being. We usually speak to each other only as one surface to another and mostly about things not connected to our innermost being. Full understanding between individuals is hardly possible today, except when what is to be communicated comes from the center of one individual's being and speaks to and is understood rightly by the center of another. Thus, in a certain way, anthroposophy speaks a new language. Even if we are still obliged to speak in the various national languages, the content of what is said forms a new language.

What is said in the outer world is really only valid for a very limited sphere. In the past, when people still looked into the spiritual world through ancient, dreamy clairvoyance, words indicated something that existed in the spiritual world. Even in ancient Greece such things were different from what they are today. The word “idea” as used by Plato signified something different from “idea” as used by our modern philosophers, who no longer understand Plato. They have no perception of what he called “Idea,” mistaking it for an abstract concept. Plato still meant something spiritual that he could perceive. Even if already rarefied, it was nevertheless something quite real. Words still contained, if I may say so, the juice of the spiritual.

The spiritual can still be traced in words. When people today use the word “wind” or “air,” they mean something external, physical. However, the ancient Hebrew word for this, “Ruach,” did not only refer to something physical but also to something spiritual permeating the universe. Modern materialistic science tells us that when we inhale, we simply breathe in physical air. In ancient times, however, people did not believe they inhaled only physical air; they were aware that they inhaled something spiritual, or at least something psychic.

In fact, in ancient times, words designated something spiritual and psychic. That is no longer true today; language has become limited to the external world at least people who want to be fully up to date culturally are busy finding materialistic meanings behind terms that are obviously derived from the realm of soul and spirit. Physicists, for example, speak of an “impact” of bodies. They have forgotten that “impact” is derived from what a living being performs in its inner nature when it pushes another being. The original meaning of words is forgotten in these simple things. Thus, our language, particularly our scientific language, can no longer express anything but the material. What is in our soul while we speak can therefore be understood only by those soul faculties that are bound to the physical brain as their instrument. As a result, when the soul is disembodied, it understands nothing of all that has been said with these words. When the soul has gone through the gate of death and can no longer use the brain, all scientific discussions are quite incomprehensible to it. It does not hear or perceive what one expresses in contemporary language, which has no meaning for a disembodied soul. Our language has meaning only in the physical world.

We must consider this in relation to our way of thinking and outlook on the world because this fact is much more important than a theory. After all, what matters is life, not theory. Characteristically, one can see in the theosophical movement how materialism has crept in. Materialism sneaked even into theosophy and prevails even there, for example, in the descriptions of the etheric or life body. Rather than making an effort to understand the spiritual, people often describe the etheric body as if it were a kind of finer matter, and they do the same with the astral body. They usually begin with the physical body, proceed to the etheric or life body and say it is constructed on the same pattern as the physical body, only finer. And they continue this way until they reach nirvana. Such descriptions take their images only from the physical world.

 

I have even heard people say that there are fine vibrations in a room when they wanted to describe the good feeling present in the room. They do not notice that they are reducing something spiritual to matter when they think of a room as filled with vibrations as with a thin fog.

This is the most materialistic thinking possible. Materialism has taken hold even of those who want to think spiritually. This is typical of our times, and it is important that we are conscious of it. We must be especially aware that language is always a kind of tyrant over our thinking and has implanted in our souls a tendency to materialism. Many people today who claim to be idealists express themselves in an entirely materialistic way because they have been seduced, as it were, by the tyranny of language. This materialistic language cannot be understood by the soul when it is no longer bound to the brain.

There is yet more to it than this. The method of presentation often employed in scientific-theosophical writings causes real pain to those who know occult contemplation, true spiritual perception. For this way of presentation does not make sense to people who have begun to think not with their brain but with their soul, now freed from the brain — people who really live in the spiritual world. It is all well and good to describe the world materialistically as long as we still think with the physical brain, but as soon as we begin to develop spiritual perception, speaking in this way ceases to have any meaning. Indeed, then it even causes pain to hear people say that “there are good vibrations in this room,” rather than “a good feeling prevails.” Because thoughts are realities, such utterances cause pain in those who can really see things spiritually. For them the room becomes filled with a dark fog when somebody expresses the thought “there are good vibrations in this room.”

It is the task of our anthroposophical way of thinking, which is decidedly more important than all theories, to learn to speak a language that is understood by the soul not only while it is still in a physical body but also when it is no longer bound to the physical brain. In other words, this language must be understood by a soul still in the body and able to perceive spiritually as well as by a soul that has gone through the gate of death. That is what is important. When we use anthroposophical concepts that explain the world and the human being, we are speaking a language that can be understood here in the physical world and also by those who are no longer incarnated in physical bodies but are living between death and a new birth. Yes, what is spoken in anthroposophy is heard and understood by the so-called dead. They are fully at one with us when we speak the same language. With this language we speak to all human beings. After all, in a sense, it is mere chance whether a soul is in a body or in the condition between death and a new birth. Through anthroposophy we learn a language that is comprehensible to all human beings, living or dead. Thus, in anthroposophy we speak a language that is also spoken for the dead.

We really touch the innermost core of a person through what we cultivate in anthroposophical discussions, even if what we say appears to be abstract. We penetrate right into the human soul, and because of that, we can free people from group-soulness. Because we penetrate into their souls, they become increasingly able to really understand themselves as an I.

Interestingly, the difference between those who come to anthroposophy and really embrace it and those who do not is that the I of the former is as if crystallized into a spiritual being through anthroposophical thinking, a spiritual being that is then carried along through the gate of death. The others, who do not practice anthroposophical thinking, have a hollow space, a nothingness in the place where the I is now in physical life and after death. Any other concepts we can take in nowadays will gradually become more and more immaterial for the true core of the human soul. The central essence of the human being will be touched and understood only by the anthroposophical thoughts we take in. These crystallize a spiritual substance in us that we can take with us after death and that enables us to perceive in the spiritual world, to see and hear, and to penetrate the darkness that would otherwise exist there for us. Thus, it becomes possible that we can take the I we have developed through the anthroposophical outlook and concepts — the I that is connected to all the wisdom in the world we can receive — with us into the next incarnation. Then we will be reborn in the next incarnation with this developed I, and we will be able to remember it.

 

It is the deeper task of the anthroposophical movement to enable a number of human beings to enter their next incarnation with an I each remembers as his or her own, individual I. These people will then form the nucleus of the next period of civilization. Then these individuals who have been well prepared through the anthroposophical spiritual movement to remember their individual I will be spread over the earth. For the essential characteristic of the next period of civilization is that it will not be limited to particular localities, but will be spread over the whole earth. These individuals will be scattered over the earth, and thus everywhere on earth there will be a core group of people who will be crucial for the sixth epoch of civilization. These people will recognize each other as those who in their previous incarnation strove together to develop the individual I. That is the proper cultivation of that soul faculty we have spoken of

This soul faculty will be so developed that more and more people who have not developed their I will also be able to remember their former incarnations. However, they will not remember an individual I, but only the group-I in which they had remained. In summary, people who are working in this incarnation to develop their individual I will be able to remember themselves as this or that independent individuality; they will be able to look back at the individuality they were. People who have not developed their individuality will be unable to remember any individuality.

Do not think that mere visionary clairvoyance will enable you to remember your previous I. Humanity was once clairvoyant, and if that in itself sufficed, then everyone would have remembered because all were clairvoyant. Thus, what matters is not clairvoyance; people will indeed be clairvoyant in the future. Rather, what matters is whether we have cultivated our I in this incarnation or not. If we have not cultivated it, the I will not be there as the innermost human essence, and we will remember only a group-I, only what we had in common with others. In that case we will have to look back and admit that we did not free ourselves from the group-I in this incarnation. People to whom this happens will experience it as though it were a new Fall, a second Fall of humanity, a falling back into a conscious connection with the group-soul. Not to remember oneself as an individuality and to be hemmed in by one's inability to transcend group-soulness will be something terrible in the sixth epoch. To put it bluntly, we can say that the earth and all it can yield will belong to those who now cultivate their individualities. Those, however, who do not develop their individual I will be dependent on joining a group that will instruct them in what they should think, feel, will, and do. In the future development of humanity this will be felt as a regression, a second Fall. Therefore, we should not regard the anthroposophical movement and spiritual life as mere theory but rather as something that is given to us now to prepare what is necessary for the future of humanity.

When we understand our present condition correctly — understand where we have come from and where we are going — then we must realize that humanity is now beginning to develop the ability to remember beyond the limits of the present incarnation. What matters now is that we develop it in the right way, that is, by developing our individual I. For we can remember only what we have created in our soul. If we have not created it, we are left only with the fettering memory of a group I, and we will feel this as a falling back into a group-soul of higher animality, as it were. Even if human group-souls are more refined than those of the animals, they are still group-souls. People of an earlier age would not have considered this a regression because they were just in the process of developing from group-soulness to the individual soul. However, if group-soulness is retained today, people will consciously experience this falling back into group-soulness. In the future, this will create an oppressive feeling in those who cannot catch up with the development of the individual I either in the present incarnation or a later one; they will feel their falling back into group-soulness.

Anthroposophy must help people keep pace with this development of the I; that is how we have to see anthroposophy and its place in human life. When we keep in mind that the sixth period is that of the first complete overcoming of the concept of race, we have to realize that it would be sheer fantasy to think that a sixth “race” will also start in a particular place on earth and develop like the earlier races. After all, that is what progress is all about: ever new ways of evolution appear, and concepts that were valid for earlier times will no longer apply in the future. If we do not realize this, the idea of progress will remain unclear for us. And we will again and again fall back into the error of speaking about so and so many cycles, worlds, races of evolution, and so on. It is unclear why this wheel of cycles, worlds, and races should keep turning. We must realize that the word “race” is a term that was valid only for a particular time. As we approach the sixth epoch, this term loses its meaning.

 

In future, what speaks to the depths of the human soul will be expressed increasingly in people's outer appearance. What people have acquired as individuals and yet experienced non-individually will be expressed in their countenance. Thus, the individuality of a person — not the group-soulness — will be inscribed on his or her countenance, and that is what will account for human diversity. Everything will be acquired individually, although it will only be gained through overcoming the individuality. Those who are in the process of developing the I will not form groups, but their individuality will be expressed in their external appearance. That is what will create differences between human beings.

There will be people who have acquired I-hood; they will be scattered over the earth, and their countenances will be very diverse. Yet, in this diversity the individual I is expressing itself even in the person's gestures. However, those who have not developed their individuality will bear the imprint of group-soulness in their countenances; that is, they can be grouped in categories that will resemble each other. That will be the outer physiognomy of our earth: the possibility will be prepared to bear one's individuality as an outer sign or to bear the outer sign of group-soulness. It is the meaning of earthly evolution for human beings to develop more and more the ability to express their inner being in their outer appearance. That is why the highest ideal of the evolution of the I, Christ Jesus, is described as follows in an ancient document: “When two become one, when the outer becomes like the inner, then human beings have attained Christ nature in themselves.” That is the meaning of a certain passage in the so-called Egyptian Gospel. 3 One can understand such passages on the basis of anthroposophical wisdom.

Today we have attempted to understand the task of anthroposophy out of the depth of our insight. Next time we will consider a spiritual problem that is of special concern to the individual and that can lead us to understand our destiny and our true nature.

  

rsarchive.org/Lectures/UniHuman/19091204p02.html

Gleitzeit Interactive VI

53 February 12, 2001 Alejandra: I join the list of those who are intrigues by your message. I am a 21-year old woman and I find your description of desire turned into art very alluring. I have read about the ways human beings use to sublimate their deepest desires, and the sexual-romantic desire is the most powerful one; it plays with our ability to dream and it also asks the trick question: are we prepared to confront our desires when they become a reality? After all, like Oscar Wilde once said, one the tragedies in life is to get what you want.

54 Re: Drunken Santa oil painting by Paul Jaisini. What this work adds is more properly eschatological in nature. The work contains veiled prophecies of a future champion who will rid the Church of its materialism and the political forces within society that disfigure and threaten to destroy it (etc)

55 4/27/00 Kauffman in response to Blue Reincarnation (Narcissus): the essay sheds light on the most misunderstood myth of Narcissus.

56 the overwhelming metaphor for the Human Condition in Drunken Santa I have not seen Drunken Santa but your wonderful criticism of it was almost as good as being there. I can well imagine the rich juxtaposition of compelling events in the picture plane. The deep ironies and, above all, the imbuement of rich mark making. P.S. I forgot to include the overwhelming metaphor for the Human Condition.

57 YOU ARE BEING INVESTIGATED Your texts have been sent to my local police station and reported to FBI. Every email you have sent me has been reported and documented by the Police Department. You will be contacted soon to receive details on a pending lawsuit against your company. You have been notified.

58 Nebojsa: Dear Mr. Kotz-Gottlieb, You see the artist who is suffering from depression is actually me. Thank you so much for your kind words related to my art. It is a great honor to hear such wonderful words from established and well-known art critic like you are. Your work about Paul Jaisini is simply a classic. I envision a plot for a novel. A woman-writer creates her new (male) identity of an artist. She writes about invisible paintings. The description are so good that every reader creates his/her own image of the invisible paintings. She organizes an show with the real paintings displayed. At the art show visitors reject the paintings and ask for her writings to be displayed instead.

59 It was almost as good as being there

>>>""No PERFECT CAMERA? No PERFECT GEAR?....do not let materialism kill your creativity. Show the whole world your creativity through your photos and let us change the way others see things." "<<<

Had the most amazing light during our Christmas afternoon walk. This was the best present of the day. The materialism goods of today just don't live up to natural beauty.

 

Hope everyone had a lovely Christmas with family & friends.