There are today among us too many people who have grown lazy through antiquated mental habits, [and] who will use our orientation towards traditional thinking as a way of attempting to impede the course of spiritual development and 'history'. With stupid and preconceived references taken from the storerooms of academia, they will attempt to cloud the waters. Like the fortune-tellers in Dante's Inferno, these people meet the future with their heads turned to face backwards: not through wisdom or in order to experience that which has been created, but only because they are urged on by a desire to deny every new enterprise. But since this is by now a vulgar axiom where intelligent people are concerned, we must examine what originality is. Perhaps originality constitutes the greatest most disquieting misunderstanding to emerge from the studios of the artistic peasantry in recent decades. It is considered bitter for the sensitive man to see how arrogance, ostentation, snobism, frivolity, vacuity, wantonness and every excess nowadays are the most positive characteristics of today's artists. It is precisely this mania of trying to seem original that prevents contemporary artists from realizing the varied graces of linear relationships, so essential in the production of that magic enchantment which used to be familiar to us and which is the foundational ground for any possibility for genuinely original artwork.
So it happens [that] while on the one hand we consider irksome the closed orders, the arthritic systems and the dead forms of the past, which the academic world of art seeks to put back into circulation, and on the other hand we see those artists who neglect the most elementary awareness and absolutely every necessity of study to follow their own fatuous whims. To run joyously towards certain intoxications shouting "long live" or "down with" according to one's sympathies or antipathies is to lose contact with actuality. Therefore it must follow that if one cannot reasonably isolate the examination of a single part without considering it's particular effects on the whole, the idea imparted by all the parts, then one cannot form a general idea of actuality. This general idea that bears such truth is understood by few, partly because it is of very little advantage to those who use it. It is obvious that technological civilization corrupts men at their birth and consumes them, letting them believe [that] for them, sweetness is reserved for the future, for their retirement into old age. Thoughtless natures like this imagine art and life to be divergent and contradictory or they even consider the aesthetic of true art to be an ill omen. If this is not admitted openly it is because no one dares to do so, it is through pure courtesy towards the few men of [real] value who have preferred study to the movies, television, sports and sensory indulgence. Apart from this — what on Earth can this, our prolonged effort, our subtle intellectual work, so in contrast with worldly ornamentalism and sensualism — possibly mean to ordinary humans? And [then] of course, to smile at this grave labor is easy, costs nothing and endows the smiler with a knowing air.
Women, children and the primitive natures of worldly men are subject to puerile criteria of value, and can ask nothing of 'ordinary things' apart from a certain immediate utility to fulfill the mundane. In fact, when the eye of such a person rests upon concrete objects his diatonic indifference towards everything appertaining to pure taste would soon lead to an abundant dose of boredom and monotony. Hence we must affirm that the spectral eidetic vision of reality is reserved for rare and completely rational individuals; phantasmagorical illusions are for artists of minor psychological discipline and spiritual vision. Nonetheless, we too adapt ourselves to these deformed times, and almost without visible repulsion we attach tendentious labels to all things just as contemporary customs and traditionalism demands. We know that it is unbecoming to lead one's own defense but every hour that passes reaps words spoken or judgements cognized which resound malignantly against us and our undertakings. And so here we are again to declare that it would be a great fortune if one could succeed in discovering the essential motives that inspire and move a true artist — who, incidentally, seems to be the most fragile soul among his contemporaries and the one most often beaten in the [social] competitions of life. And this is partly due to the very nature of the discoverer and is even more the result of a false elaboration of values to suite the expectations of today’s people accepted without insightful examination and this is what has led to so many gross misunderstandings that should be eliminated. The consequences of these grave misunderstandings will go on making themselves felt for a long time in the present Babylon unless we learn to distinguish and divide for ever things that are different [by nature] just as the true is different from the false. As is obvious, to those not suffering amnesia, we see that the new tyranny has already vanquished the old one. Well away from all conventiclers we can discriminate the true and the false better than most, but since we do not feel inclined to reprove the childish lunacy of those who inflict witchcraft and superstition onto art, we do not ask ourselves whether the present conditions in which we live, as unworthy as they are, will presage the abundance or the total decline in spiritual art. But, for God's sake, these are things that frenetic imbecility cannot concede even if they hurl stone after stone of fuming acridity [by] stinging us with that incipient scurrying about and tossing of crude and incontinent judgments. The same one's [will] return again later to give credence to words of wisdom for the sake of mirroring their own spiritual ineptitude, the same way a man attempts to remove sawdust from another mans eye even when he unknowingly has a log in his own. [Clearly] the fact that we represent anything [at all] is evidently one of our many faults.
All the somnolent zombies felt duty-bound to convince us of the insane use we were making of our time. The ridiculous exaggerations, the explosive anathemas, the shrieks of all those pretentious and licentious dwarfs, were merely the external manifestation of the attitudes of the rest of that educated mob which attempts, in scholastic silence, to destroy our aim to give back to the [consumptive] massess that spiritual consciousness that originated in us and was robbed of us. Such mutinous passivity displayed by [commercial] critics speaks of jealousy as well as alienation from the works of genius. Among them are the usual angry little academic lackeys with their convulsive shudderings who, instead of keeping their impotence to themselves, devote themselves to covert and overt intrigue, and seek to mask their spiteful intentions from those ordinary men who, though their souls may be alien to distinguished achievements, nevertheless show an appreciation of those who toil for spiritual art. Among them [too] is the usual deadbeat who is authorized by those jealous artists of perfected snobism who are currently full of Moslem fury against the unfamiliar images of new art and who [instead] uphold with frantic and immoderate love the impulsive aesthetic which pushes every dead matter the artless weight of the painter as the highly skilled composer, engineer [and] craftsman of decorative painting. But, my God, these are people in almost every country in the world who possess as much imaginative power as they do vigorous good sense (see the smart one's are listening.) You no doubt had your eye on this rabble of young monkeys when you attempted to express what was most immanent, what came natural to you, and slipped up on one small necessary piece of information for the sake of conciseness, as it was demanded, and that no doubt nourished misunderstandings and lead to all kinds of troubles.
See I, like many others today, don't mind 'throwing' pearls to swine but I do refuse to go through any undo effort to 'deliver' pearls to swine either by a [so-called] professional art career or anything else belonging to the current dying market system. If it isn't going into the history books as official progress following a mature assessment, and since there is no longer such a thing as an ‘official art establishment’ to make such an assessment and write such a history then it's a waste of my output and energy to bother with even the most menial venues of exposure. But speaking of pearls, you can always leave it to the swine to misunderstand everything significant that you attempt to share or bring to illumination, even the simplest and most irradical things are misinterpreted and something of the opposite is projected onto you as the perceived response. And then all of a sudden they're having an argument with an imaginary villain, an imaginary father, mother, authority figure, an imaginary boss, an imaginary whatever you can imagine. Once they detect a weakness, something that can be misread will be taken literally and unreal figures [are] projected onto you the further from [social] convention and closer to [real] integrity you approach. Only because they interpret the world through the grammar of their own [doxastic] self-deceitedness does it make it impossible for them to home-in on the whole, wider, collective instance of what one actually intended. But [instead] great acts of love, sharing, integrity and heightened grace are interpreted negatively as engendering bitterness, alienation, egoism, prejudice and condescension.
There are, however, men whose greatness is inevitably associated with certain misunderstandings that arise during or after the evolution of their work. These misunderstandings are created by false interpretations of their art by prudent or unintelligent critics and admirers. The commonplaces born of such misunderstandings, the tone of the praise paid to the above-mentioned men, and especially the category of men who pay such praise, leads to these men acquiring a reputation for exceptional intelligence, and a good nose for talent. Those affected by such compromising praise are regarded with diffidence and kept at a certain distance. The shrewd avoid speaking of them because of a sort of prudence, or rather through etiquette of a cunning clique. The market has become so overpoluted with the opinions of these straw dogs and mindless sheep who are incapable of making anything but the most baneful decisions when it comes to fundamental moral aesthetics.
Of those scattered, itinerant, wandering blighters who can hold to important memories just as irregularly as they can be expected to keep to the very social order they would profess to be natural, when in truth; one would assume they were socially handicapped. With fumigant and mighty slothness these yawning idlers expose their truly extravagant hubris and brashness in the bitter effluvium they eject in every self-assured polemic against what is, otherwise, absolutely rational. After every facet of a debate has been covered these apathetic mules refuse to come to terms with themselves and all their numerous errs. With their mulish souls posed like a cobra ready to attack they sing the hushing lullaby of negation with soothing antipathy assured that this can sedate [all] reason and subdue the will of thought. It is only because of their exhausted efforts [to stand] against absolute reason that reality passes through their little minds like a porous media. Their expectations for providing rhetorical proof against their accepted notions are infinitely greater than they [themselves] can fulfill in a lifetime. Like a sponge they absorb all social information in the world as culturally relative value so that their tolerance to [real] value is an illusion of their tired attitude towards objectivity. Substantial value, meaningfulness, true art, real social dynamics; everything morally defensible is put on equal par with everything morally bankrupt. But having placed the moral authority into the hands of indiscriminate infants one cannot expect no less than even the most basic human perceptions of value — for what is worth defending — is going to be followed beyond an immediate and passing recognition of our corrupted culture.
The repetitive experience of being misjudged, the recurrence in life of the same obtuse, faulty perceptions, the incontinent judgements and outbursts passed over our gracious intentions by these folks, whom encompass all levels of society from the [brutish] snob to the refined and [appearingly] virtuous elites, makes real people sick enough in the inards to crave their own death. And that is the end result, the remainder and dividens of them: death and self mortification [is] what reflects them most appropriately. Is it not then that being graced by wisdom and genuineness, by what is truly of balance, and not misjudgement of us on their behalf what ultimately disgraces their petty egos? [And] is it not the quality of an intolerant anality of resitivistic sapience, with all its confused and distorted 'sociocultural' principles, of traditions, the opposing end of a mentality which engoverns the petty ego allowing it to inflict all these self-mortifying acts upon the enshrouded individual whose laws of freedom have been rebuked by it? Surely the repressive act to deny [natural] thermal law its right, to be repressed by the disestablished, deconstituted law of societal authority, is a [sociological] phenomenon whose ethical principles certify a long dead historical recreation of what are [ultimately] Medievalish values of leftist domination. However, history has repeated itself in reverse symmetry this time as the scholasticism of the theocratic Dark Ages is now a [postmodern] scholasticism of technocracy. (The postmodern, techno-social codes of moral intelligence.) Today these scholarly [academic] values of materialism are continuously proven through direct injections into human society by posh-academic authorities who collect their cheques from the wealthiest financial Empire of a now decaying ultra-elite (the House of Rothschild.)