Love takes off masks that we fear we cannot live without and know we cannot live within. ~ James Arthur Baldwin
Humanos, basura, dinero, cerdos y dueños.
Había olvidado este documental. Qué cosa tan impresionante y tan bien hecha
“Crystalline” by Björk, directed by Michel Gondry. (par bjorkdotcom)
HT : Estelle.
Björk
—Crystalline
We already saw Björk driving a car whilst listening to her forthcoming single Crystalline, but here is a better quality snippet of that new song. The single should be out later this month (June 30, apparently); can’t wait to hear this in full.
UPDATEAudio replaced with the full song. Björk reclaims whatever throne she used to have.
Helicón: Buenos días, Cayo.
Caligula: Buenos días, Helicón.
Helicón: Pareces cansado.
Caligula: He caminado mucho.
Helicón: Sí, tu ausencia se ha prolongado mucho.
Caligula: Era difícil de encontrar.
Helicón: ¿El qué?
Caligula: Lo que yo quería.
Helicón: ¿Y qué es lo que querías?
Caligula: La luna.
Helicón: ¿Qué?
Caligula: Sí, quería la luna.
Helicón: ¡Ah!… Y, ¿ya esta todo resuelto?
Caligula: No, no he podido conseguirla.
Helicón: ¡Que lastima!
Caligula: Sí, por eso estoy tan cansado… Helicón…
Helicón: ¿Sí, Cayo?
Caligula: Piensas que estoy loco.
Helicón: De sobra sabes que yo no pienso nunca. Soy demasiado inteligente para pensar.
Caligula: Sí. Pero yo no estoy loco, y aun más: nunca he sido tan razonable como ahora. Simplemente sentí en mí, de pronto, la necesidad de lo imposible. Las cosas, tal como son, no me parecen satisfactorias.
Helicón: Es una opinión bastante extendida.
Caligula: Es cierto. Pero antes no lo sabía. Ahora lo sé. El mundo, tal como esta hecho, no es soportable. Por eso necesito la luna, o la felicidad, o la inmortalidad, en definitiva, algo que quizás sea insensato, pero que no sea de este mundo.
Helicón: Es un razonamiento que se tiene en pie. Pero, en general, no es posible sostenerlo hasta el fondo.
Caligula: Tú, Helicón, de eso no sabes nada. Nunca se consigue nada precisamente porque nunca se va hasta el final. Pero quizás baste con permanecer siendo lógicos hasta el fondo. Y sé lo que estas pensando: cuantas complicaciones por la muerte de una mujer de la que estaba enamorado. Pero no, no es eso. Creo recordar, es cierto, que hace unos días murió una mujer a quien yo amaba. Pero, ¿qué es el amor? Poca cosa. Esa muerte no significa nada, te lo juro; solo es una señal de la verdad que me hace necesaria la luna. Es una verdad muy simple y muy clara, un poco estúpida para ti, pero difícil de descubrir y pesada de llevar.
Helicón: Y, ¿cuál es esa verdad, mi emperador?
Caligula: ¡Que los hombres mueren y no son felices!
Helicón: Vamos, Cayo, es una verdad a la que podemos acomodarnos muy fácilmente. Mira a tu alrededor. Eso no impide a los hombres comer y bailar.
Caligula: Entonces es que todo lo que me rodea es mentira, estos hombres viven todos en la mentira, y yo quiero que se viva en la verdad; por que sé lo que les falta, Helicón. Están privados del conocimiento y carecen de un maestro que sepa lo que dice.
Helicón: No te ofendas, Cayo, por lo que voy a decirte. Pero, ante todo, deberías reposar; estas cansado.
Caligula: No es posible Helicón, ya nunca será posible.
Helicón: Y, ¿por qué no?
Caligula: Si duermo, ¿quién me dará la luna?
Helicón: Eso es verdad.
Caligula: Escucha, Helicón, oigo pasos y rumor de voces (son los que conspiran contra él). Guarda silencio y olvida que me has visto.
Helicón: Comprendo.
Caligula: Y te lo ruego; en adelante, ayúdame.
Helicón: No tengo razones para no hacerlo, Cayo. Pero yo sé muchas cosas y hay pocas que me interesen. ¿En que, pues, puedo ayudarte?
Caligula: En lo imposible.
Helicón: Haré lo que pueda.
Caligula. Acto I, escena IV
de A. Camus
-Stone Music-
nostalghia
The Dull Flame of Desire
I love your eyes, my dear
Their splendid sparkling fire
When suddenly you raise them so
To cast a swift embracing glance
Like lightning flashing in the sky
But there’s a charm that is greater still
When my love’s eyes are lowered
When all is fired by passion’s kiss
And through the downcast lashes
I see the dull flame of desire
It is what Nietzsche also said with his story of the Eternal return, he said: it is not difficult to know if something is good or not, this question is not very complicated; it is not an affair of morals. He said make the following test, which would only be in your head. Do you see yourselves doing it an infinite number of times. It is a good criterion. You see it is the criterion of the mode of existence. Whatever I do, whatever I say, could I make of it a mode of existence? If I couldn’t it is ugly, it is evil , it is bad . If I can, then yes! You see that everything changes, it is not morality . In what sense? I say to the alcoholic, for example, I say to him: you like to drink? You want to drink? Good, very well. If you drink, drink in such a way that with each time you drink, you would be ready to drink, redrink, redrink an infinite number of times. Of course at your own rhythm. It is not necessary to rush: at your own rhythm! At that moment there, at least, you agree with yourself. So people are much less shitty to you when they agree with themselves. What it is necessary to fear above all in the life, are the people who do not agree with themselves, this Spinoza said admirably. The venom of neurosis, that’s it! The propagation of neurosis, I propagate to you my evil, it is terrible, terrible, it is above all those who are not in agreement with themselves. They are vampires. Whereas the alcoholic who drinks, on the perpetual mode of: ha, it is the last time, it is the last glass! One more time, or once again. That is a bad mode of existence. If you do something, do it as if you must do it a million times. If you are not able to do it like that, do something else. It is Nietzsche who said this, it is not me, all objections are to be addressed to Nietzsche. That can work, that can not work. I do not know why we are discussing all this, what I said. All that is not an affair of truth, it touches on what it can touch on, it is an affair of the practice of living. There are people who live like that.
Let’s continue to go into the night, there, and examine according to the texts what Spinoza calls the slave or the impotent. It is curious. One realizes that what he calls the slave or the impotent, it is there that the resemblances - and I don’t believe I’m forcing the texts - the resemblances to Nietzsche are fundamental, because Nietzsche will not do anything other than to distinguish these two polar modes of existence and to distribute them in very much the same manner. Because we realise with astonishment that what Spinoza calls the impotent … a mode of existence, what is it? The impotent are the slaves. Good. But what does the slaves mean? Slaves of social conditions? We feel, well, that the answer is no! It is a way of life. There are thus people who are not at all socially slaves, but they live like slaves! Slavery as a way of life and not as social status. Thus there are slaves. But on the same side, the impotent or the slaves, he puts who ? It will become more significant for us: he puts tyrants. Tyrants! And oddly, there will be plenty of stories, the priests. The tyrant, the priest and the slave. Nietzsche will not say more. In his more violent texts, Nietzsche will not say more, Nietzsche will make the trinity: the tyrant, the priest and the slave. It’s Odd that it is already literally so in Spinoza. And what is there in common between a tyrant who has power (pouvoir), a slave who does not have power, and a priest who seems only to have spiritual power. And what is there in common? And how are they impotent since, on the contrary, they seem to be, at least for the tyrant and the priest, men of power. One political power, and the other spiritual power. If we feel, it is that which I call to sort things out by feelings.
—DELEUZE / SPINOZA.Cours Vincennes : power (puissance), classical natural right - 09/12/1980 (via ajnabee)
