Art Kills

I think I was very lucky to have been raised by my mother. She tolerated each of her children's artistic fumblings from my eldest sister's dragging every pot from the kitchen cabinet to bash against them with wooden spoons, through two more sisters & a brother, to my painting surreal scenes, reciting shallow poetry, banging on my guitar &, seriously, not singing, as well as my piss-poor fiction & non-fiction. The woman is clearly destine for sainthood.

And anyone with any artistic ability doesn't stand out simply because we possess some level of talent. We stand out because we are different. Most people in society are one way, & we are another. Sometimes we can fit in, to one degree or another, but we do not act, think or feel like the rest of you. We live, generally, in an alien world. Whatever causes artistic ability, whatever alien influence enters our consciousness, takes us from a very early age -- perhaps at conception. We are different.

So, since I was young, I have marveled over the lives of well known artists. I didn't find their antics odd. I didn't question what they did to get their messages across. They always seemed perfectly reasonable even when they were caught committing some seemingly self-destructive act in a night club & were subsequently arrested.

What I questioned was the reactions of others. Why are artists often arrested, detained for mental observation, or simply criticized by those who don't get it? I've heard so much criticism of artists over the years that it's a wonder every artist in modern society hasn't been rounded up & pumped full of countless pharmaceuticals to make them conform to society's ideals.

And that's it. Conformity. Non-artists want to enjoy the products of art, but know nothing about that alien quality possessing artists & feel threatened when an artists acts out. Say the word fuck one too many times in polite society & get a shot. Get pissed off that your instructions for the display of your work are completely ignored & get a shot. Criticize the US Government &...well, if I start naming names, none of you should be surprised that I just disappear & live out my life in some FEMA la-la land.

What those without talent don't understand is that we artists don't pursue art necessarily because we want to. Sure, we often enjoy the process as well as the product. But it is more a matter of possession. We are, normally, removed from ourselves. Art, in a sense, produces itself through us.

All right. This may not be entirely true, but it's not far off the mark. I am known to edit as I work. When I've painted, I've gone over areas with another color than I had originally; when I wrote poetry & music, I had cut bits here added more there -- & I do this with my blahgs. But most every artist will insist that their work will take them away. When we are working at our best, we are oblivious to everything -- the work just flows.

Yet non-artists are unaware of this. Artists aren't necessarily ever lucid in the way society would have us. It's as if we are in a Samadhic or Alpha state most of the time. Sometimes we are so intent of our work, we achieve a very powerful state akin to that of enlightenment. Other times we are so completely distracted from our natural state, we become jolted out of our bliss by society, that we act in a way most people can't fathom. We act out.

Lenny Bruce was destroyed by society's attempts to force him to conform; rock stars & actors go to rehab; Rocky Erickson withdrew -- only time will tell if his brother's insistence on Rocky's being balanced by pharmaceuticals, if his willingness to play music again, will result in a happy Rocky.

Conformity will ruin art.

So, if society wants to continue to enjoy art, then society must stop expecting artists to be like them. Can artists ever expect to be accepted?

We are writing our own death warrants. Society will never understand or accept.

Obviously, art kills.

Constitution? What's That?

I find it fascinating how very much things can change. Take for instance education. When I was growing up, there was a great deal of emphasis on studying the US Constitution &, naturally, the Bill of Rights. Apart from the fact that the USA Patriot Act -- which our president Obama had promised to dismantle, yet has taken steps to strengthen -- is in direct opposition to both the aforementioned areas of study ground into most American students at least as long as I was in school.  Our politicians continually violate the one supreme legal document which our Supreme Court was created to interpret.

Back in 1989 I was rather consumed with the ubiquitous news reports concerning the Polish Solidarity movement's Round Table Talks. I knew that the Soviets were at the end of their run -- they couldn't afford all the satellite countries they'd occupied, they couldn't afford to pay their soldiers. So, I also knew that because Soviet control was falling apart -- the people having had enough -- that it would not be long before the only territory the Soviets had any control over would be Red Square, where the famed Kremlin stands.

No one wanted to believe my claims -- even Condoleezza Rice -- so called expert on the Soviet Union -- was stupid enough to go on record stating something to the effect that there will always be a Soviet Union. Naturally, I cannot find this quote.  We can't have the blunders of experts available on the Web, can we?

It didn't surprise me that the Poles I knew, who had lived most or all their lives under Soviet suppression, couldn't conceive of free Poland.  Of course, the freedom Poland knows now with American partnership (the term "partnership" is very questionable) & EU membership doesn't seem to have brought the promised prosperity to individuals, but rather to their own government.  But I've yet to visit Poland & can only go by what I read & hear from the few Poles who discuss such.

In that same year -- 1989 -- there was another small news story.  One that didn't only make me laugh, but brought a level of anger to me.  I admit that I wasn't paying any great attention to the US Constitution all those years ago in school, but because it was ground into me, I retain a certain intuitive knowledge of points in it.  It's no wonder I questioned this news story.

In 1989, President Ronald Reagan received an honorary British knighthood, the Knight Grand Cross of the Order of the Bath.  Sure, it's called honorary, but I can only suspect that this is applied as an afterthought.  Have a look at the US Constitution.  Such is illegal under the very document every president swears "...To the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

Interesting.  To be president of the United States, one must take this oath that George W Bush had said in a press conference of the US Constitution is "...just a piece of paper".  I'd love to provide a link to the YouTube video which had this statement in it, but it appears to have been removed from YouTube.  Not to worry, though.  You can find a link to it in another of my fairly recent blahg entries.  Besides, there are plenty of Gazoogle entries related to it.

Then, in 1993, "Daddy" Bush had received the very same honorary knighthood.  But I sincerely doubt that anyone is oblivious to where GHW Bush places his loyalty.

But things just grow more murky.  As I'd mentioned, our current figure head, President Obama, had promised while running for the presidency, that he would dismantle the USA Patriot Act.  He hasn't. What's more, he's even, this year, decided to give it another year.  Sad for those of us who live in the US, but if you weren't sickened by that, have a look at this:

Obama now heads the UN Security Council.

If it weren't a violation for Reagan & Bush Sr to give allegiance to the British Crown, how is any more a violation for a sitting US president to take control of a foreign (technically speaking) political body?

Now, I'm not exactly what one would call a Constitutionalist -- hell, I'm only an American by an accident of birth.  I value my liberty above most anything you can name, but I've never felt patriotic toward the so called American way of life.  I've actually been seeking a legal & honorable means of obtaining citizenship, & gainful employment, in any number of other countries since I was an early teen.  You can say I really don't give a damn about the future of the US, & you wouldn't be entirely wrong to do so.

But when a government so flagrantly disregard the very people who they're supposed to be working for, as opposed to those who value money & power over all else, & continually lie about their actions, I grow continually more pissed off.

So should all of you.

Come On, Now

The other day I'd found myself in a conversation concerning experts. Those who know me are well aware of my lack of respect for so called authority. This isn't from any foundation of ignorance. It's from both experience & study. Really, I've cracked a few books, in my time, on any number of subjects.

Like a growing percentage of people all over the world, I was born with a genetic disease.

Horror!

In my case, it's more an annoyance than it is debilitating. Don't ask me the name of this disease, the doctor -- another expert -- apart from his egotistic explanation, had told me that the damage caused by this disease was so advanced that it was a miracle I could even walk. He'd even gone on to inform me that in the not too distant future, I would be faced with complete joint replacement surgery or to live out my life in a wheel chair.

This was nearly thirty years ago, & I'm still ambulatory.

Sure, I have to refrain from running; I probably shouldn't go hiking; I have to stay away from too many flights of steps, & I have to stop every half mile to a mile because now one of my hip joints experiences trouble, & the pain can be a problem. Not really a problem for me, though.  This is a good excuse to sit down & have a smoke. I expect I'll have another thirty to fifty years during which I'll still be walking -- just a little more slowly.

Growing up -- & still, on occasion -- I'd experienced periods of rather painful, ugly eruptions of eczema. For those who don't know, this is a skin disorder, which -- for me -- is related to my joint trouble. In any case, I'd gone to doctor after doctor. Each one knew the cause. Of course, each previous doctor was wrong in their prognosis, but the new ones had to be right. The hell they'd put me through was worse than the pain I've experienced due to the connective tissue in my joints deteriorating -- leaving the nerves not just intact, but exposed. That's where the pain comes from.

Anyway, while my mother was at pains to not contradict the prevailing beliefs of the day, to just take what some authority said as the truth -- even if another authority was wrong, I was much more attracted to the idea of questioning authority. Come on, even a kid can be smart enough to recognize contradiction.

I wonder what I would have become had either of my parents ever said to me the words, "Do as I say, not as I do."

So, the other day, I'm in conversation with my cousin on the subject of studies. You know, "Studies show..." this, or "Studies prove..." that. Experts again. Experts want us to believe all sorts of things which often later prove false. I think I'd mentioned the fallacy of the great cholesterol studies which nearly succeeded in destroying the egg industry in the US. Turned out that a new study found that there are two -- count 'em -- two kinds of cholesterol & eggs are A-OK.

What should be bothering you isn't just the fact that we have to question the agenda of those performing the study, or even the agenda of those funding the study, but that no one takes any responsibility. How many workers lost their jobs &, subsequently, how many children went hungry because the original study claimed that eggs were evil? How many businesses had either gone out of business or had to scramble to reposition themselves to remain in business?

Did those who'd performed the first study apologize? No. Did those who learned that eggs were not the problem point out that sometimes experts are wrong? Of course not. Why? Money. People would be sued if anyone were to take any responsibility. We can't have that. The rich must remain the rich.

Now, I watch a lot of documentaries. Granted, a good number of them are composed of subjects either the government or corporations or just the super rich spend a great deal of money to discredit. And a number of docs are really not very authoritative.

I can usually see past the misinformation, or the "holes" in their reporting.

This isn't exactly what I'm writing about today, though. What has come to my attention is something missing. This something missing is an incredibly important part of a puzzle, but no one really wants to talk about it. It's been touched upon by a few docs I've seen -- normally by way of an economist or historian clouding it in the complicated language of either finance or maritime law -- but no one wants to really explain it.

It all has to do with the immense shroud surrounding the Federal Reserve System. I've already discussed, elsewhere, that this is a sham perpetrated upon us -- the middle classes & the poor. I've even mentioned the body responsible for collecting the money to pay the super rich (look for where I mention the Queen of England) the interest on funds they'd never even granted our government as loans.

OK. So, even I have written round the whole thing without stating it all clearly. Well, I'm no expert. How am I to suggest authority on the subject? Besides, it really is immense & seemingly convoluted.

Here I was, wondering why only some of the pieces of the puzzle are explained in detail, while a few are either obscured, or neglected entirely? After all, if I can figure all this out with what info is out there, anyone can.

Clearly, the reason for it is in the power of those who hold the strings. I've been bitching about corporations, governments & politicians for years, but I see it, now. As I'd recently written, politicians -- & the US Government -- are pawns. That's right. Yes, politicians are corrupt -- & our esteemed Supreme Court has now lit the passages of this corruption by making it legal for our politicians to be paid directly by corporations.

Wouldn't it be lovely to see this sponsorship displayed as it is in sports? Most people think nothing of advertising some idiot corporation's logo on their clothing without payment. Why shouldn't our politicians now wear on their suits the logos of their corporate sponsorship?

Of course, this won't happen because they want to appear to be their own person -- not the stooge of the corporations who have bought & sold our politicians for generations.

And you -- or I, anyway -- have to wonder why I can't fly in the US without being given a ticket which indicates that I have to go through a more thorough security inspection than other passengers. I don't have the slightest interest in misogynist religious beliefs, I don't hang out with political activists, I don't even subscribe to questionable political publications.

I'm just a loud-mouthed writer & artist trying to figure out who's responsible.

Uh-oh! I publish what might lead to sedition. Oooh! But I'm only watched. I'm not a threat. Why? Because so few even read my stuff! Woe is me should I ever attain any level of notoriety -- fame is very unlikely. I sometimes wish I would attain such, if only to gain respect among the foreigners among whom I one day hope to live.

What's my point? Connect the dots, folks. Don't leave me alone out here.