Note: I did not write this article. Struck me and I saved on the PC, but can not remember the author. However, not me.
I leave this wonderful reading *.*
start with a question ... How many of you know the name of Leonardo da Vinci?
guess there are a lot of hands up ... (metaphorically speaking).
guess even know that was a great painter and a genius.
But ... we go to the difficult ... how many of you know exactly why Leonardo da Vinci is considered a great painter and a genius?
How many of you know that, besides being a great painter, was also a great architect, scientist, mathematician, botanist, writer, inventor ...?
How many of you know that Leonardo da Vinci was an innovator? How many of you know why his art is more valuable than that of any of its less illustrious contemporaries (not counting so, for example, Michelangelo Buonarroti and Raphael Sanzio)?
guess now there are many more hands down ... it does not surprise me ...
Now, why this talk? To prove that you are ignorant, of course, understood as one that ignores something rather than a fool, and I'm cultured?
Of course not. Just to let you know, I used the example of Leonardo da Vinci because I'm studying the Renaissance, whose leading exponents of the figure, in fact, Leonardo's obvious that I will know more than most of those who go for another example, the average or who does not love art or Renaissance or those who only grows if you have forgotten, or where there has never been taught much about art, this is not as surprising as it is equally obvious that I I know less of who is teaching this subject, and who specializes in the study of the Renaissance, and also of those who love to read up the bottom on the life of Leonardo da Vinci.
So the point here is not who is more or less ignorant.
The point is that if someone starts talking about Leonardo da Vinci, everyone knows that was a genius, and everyone can say that it was a great painter.
But very few of these people probably know say this because, some of them probably have never seen a painting by Leonardo, live or on a book, and / or have never stopped to examine them to understand exactly why be much appreciated.
What they do, however, is repeating a common view, a cliché, something almost universally accepted as safe can not be wrong.
And why does this happen?
Well, maybe because they look good, read up and go over things ... it's tiring mentally speaking, much harder to nod and agree with someone that that picture / movie / book / singer is fantastic stay there without too much to think about.
And maybe because we are accustomed, ever since childhood and always, not to ask too much about things.
When you are too interested in something, when you wanted to go further ... we are often discouraged, if not prevented from others if you dare say you do not understand why that picture has as much success or comments at the bottom of certain modern works "well I could do it," often come lynched, hopefully just verbally by most adoring, or sufficient knowledge.
The problem is that we are often discouraged to go beyond appearance, to ask ourselves honestly and ask for a reason.
Because that work is considered better or worse than this? Why would a director who is dares things cheered while another who dares to such things is severely criticized? Why a book about a certain topic is considered a great work while another is discredited?
There are things that are now considered the "absolute truth", undeniable, however, often supported by the majority or unanimity in the end ... everyone knows that Stephen King is the king of horror, that Romeo and Juliet is , the most romantic love story of all literature, that Tom Cruise is a great actor, that Brad Pitt is a great cool, that Sharon Stone is a big pussy in Basic Instinct, which Tolkien is a great writer ... (I could go on and on ... the list is long)
But how many know why they say these things?
How many know that Stephen King, however large, has also written the flop crazy, still sold out thanks to his name in large letters on the cover, as many people think that "if it is King must be a bell'horror?
How many know that Romeo and Juliet is actually a parody of Shakespeare's more than a thousand ridiculous stories of love then depopulated, in which a man and a woman meet by chance and was just eternal love at first sight?
How many know that Tom Cruise was cast from the world of cinema for some time because of his behavior, that Brad Pitt has needed a stand-in Troy because her legs are muscular enough to look like a greek warrior, and that the legs of the famous interrogation scene in Basic Instinct does not actually belong to Sharon Stone, but his stand-in?
How many know that Tolkien has put us about 10 years to be able to finish The Lord of the Rings, which is what fantasy is perhaps the most copied of all time?
Yet, Stephen King has sold hundreds of copies, and some of his books have a very prudent and realistic characterization, much more like ordinary men and women of the beauty that we usually see in the movies to see and often described in some books.
And Romeo and Juliet is considered to be a great love story.
And Tom Cruise is adored by thousands of fans, as well as Brad Pitt is loved by thousands of women (and a lot 'of people), and I am sure that many people were hypnotized staring open-mouthed few inches of the nakedness (at the time, a very rough thing!) shown by the provocative overlap of the legs of Catherine Tramell.
And Tolkien in 10 years not only has written a book ... has created its own universe, with lots of languages, customs, legends ...
Get to the point, could you tell me, once you read this.
Congratulations, if you did it means that you have noticed how I have lasted far too long with examples and information without first clearly explained what I meant to prove or make yourself understood with them.
If they did, you're probably already on your way to understand and put into practice what I intend to explain. We arrive at
point, then:
The point is that we are so used to seeing certain opinions and certain fees to be almost universally just (the popularity plays a big factor in all this, but I'll explain more later) and do not know more hear our opinions and our fees.
To make you understand better, let me illustrate a situation.
you ever gone to the cinema to see a movie, a great film, full of important and famous names and expectations and had been praised as the greatest masterpiece of one of the most famous?
Let's pretend that you are in a situation like this (obviously fake, to be as generic as possible), we do now pretend that you go to the cinema to see Late Evening, the film stars Ewan Edgar, famous for playing a corrupt cop in Bad Justice, and for his touching role in the romantic film / drama I sells his soul that he won the Oscar for Best Actor, which was critically acclaimed; Late Evening is the latest masterpiece of Kurt Levin, director known for such masterpieces as White Ocean, The True Story Of Benny Bravo, called him murderous and The Song of the White Wolf.
criticism already Hosanna, your friends, you have strongly recommended, has been described as a masterpiece of cinema, based on the bestseller, translated in Italy as a night shift (we know that the Italian titles are always "very" coherent with the original ones ...).
So there you go, and started watching it.
And yes, the picture is very interesting, there are quite a bit 'of explosions, a villain who kills people supersadico more or less at random and torture young top mod ... er, I mean any girls from the great beauty, full of "slow motion" and special effects in Matrix, and car chases and shootouts ...
Yet while watching something a little bit ... it is lit, come on, has shone for a while ... and then it turned off.
And so, in that small flash quickly stifled, as questions arise:
But was it really necessary for the plot to know that Johnny Bonny wearing a pair of shoes All Scars and it shows?
One moment, but that character was killed in an explosion half an hour before?
Wait, but Johnny and Kate are not hated for the rest of the film? Why suddenly declaring limonano eternal love and copulating like rabbits in love?
excuse But what is the point that by connecting the wire to wire with the B instead of blowing everything off as rather the laws of physics say that I studied in high school?
But it is a little obvious that the Superbastard super villain has a dark past and who has been harassed and beaten throughout her childhood so that now we have "forced" feel sorry for him?
But why should listen to the angry mob that speech as deep as a puddle of the hero and join his mission rather than capture him and crush him without mass time to talk as would happen in reality?
and similar ...
Exaggerations aside, I'm sure that there is already a situation like this happened in reality, or a movie or a book, or anything else (say, the sample is could also be applied in different ways for a new luxury restaurant idolized in the city) ... and the flash that I have described will soon be turned off in most cases.
I'm pretty sure that, at least once in their life, that flash has also shone for you, with its flash of opinion, dispute, only to die choking passive acceptance of a truth most popular, and therefore deemed more credible review of our own!
After so many people liked it ... I will not understand ... I
At the bottom are not an actor ... I can not judge his performance
... In the end I'm not a writer / an expert in literature / a critic, I can not complain about this inconsistency in the story ...
At the bottom is a fantasy ... what if that happens TOTALLY violates the laws established by the logic?
No, no, no, no, absolutely and categorically NO!
These are crap!
Nonsense, nonsense, rubbish, heresies, rubbish, taken for a ride ... in short, mere excuses for the eyes of others, more numerous and more highly placed, and therefore intrinsically we consider the most experienced and intelligent and the custodians of all truth. One of the most colossal
bullshit of this world.
Oscar Wilde said in one of his famous quotes: "Everything popular is wrong ", that "everything is popular is wrong. "
Now, though perhaps this is not an absolute truth, it does contain quite a lot 'of truth, and is definitely light-hearted and intelligent observation, almost a parody of the common thought that says, "everything which is popular must be right / better / good etc etc ".
not need to be a gourmet to know if a dish tastes like shit, and if the rice and Scott, if the meat is burnt and musty cheese, where the wine is corked, and the apples are full of worms is ; clear that we are eating crap.
However, if this crap is served at a fancy restaurant in a table of 500, with French sauces unpronounceable name on immaculate tablecloth with silverware and crystal glasses, surrounded by people of high society and waiters in black and white uniform without a stain, the more polite and considerate as the ordered dish is expensive and generous tip, those who would raise and spitting with a grin on his face, throwing up dramatically on the polished floor marble and then begin with a "BLEEEAH SCHIFOOOO THAT"?
Who prevents us from to do so?
Good taste, the company, the label, the fears of others, modesty, fear of being excluded ... in short, the fear that sometimes turns into doubt to be wrong because the majority think in another way.
I say, my dear sirs, that I'm sick of all this hypocrisy, fear, to appreciate something that is not universally appreciated and to hate something that is not universally hated, of indecency tendency to believe that if many people believe in one thing, that thing is necessarily right.
Many people believed in Nazism and Fascism, you know, the period of government of a certain Herr Hitler and Signor Mussolini some, people who, backed by law and strong of an absolute majority, have fun denouncing, rape, torture and kill Jews, people of color , Gypsies, disabled, homosexuals, political enemies, and foreigners (and I'm sure I overlooked something, but I can not remember exactly all the categories that the Nazis and Fascists hated ... since there are few).
I would say that this is a great example of the fact that "everything that is popular is right" is a concept we we should very carefully shake by the collar and thrown out from the door with a nice kick in places where the sun does not beat normally.
learn to listen to our "sparks" of doubt, we learn to be able to criticize our second opinion before that of others.
learn to scrub other people's opinions, or at least not to our Prefix, if twenty people tell you who loved the bold aroma of roast duck with pineapple, and you're on the verge of vomiting blood, learns to stand up and say loud and clear "it sucks", instead of nodded trying to hide the grimace of pain in the stomach to nervous tics or smiles of joy.
learn to question what we are insistently repeated, hammered, as if forced ... to the point that sometimes we end up really believing even when we are not totally (or not) think ...
learn to understand what We take care of something before anyone else, and make us our opinion ... which may be changed, certainly, but not only because as the majority says "black" that must be black, dark gray. If we change our opinion we must do so for reasons valid and set, comprising a sense and a logical truth, otherwise it would be like she never had an opinion from the beginning.
This is what we learn, this is what we must keep in mind ... a critique is important, after all, not only for the recipient, but also for those who make it, to be able really to say his opinion.
So open your eyes. Be
's awake and not sleeping.
0 comments:
Post a Comment