RepublicWhat about it?How do I send people back out to (re-) the public?What people?You know, the people—the people who come and visit me in my mind—Why are they here? How do I send them back out?You put them there.That's how.Post-novelty is about the part of life after it loses its glo and lustre, in aged Wisdom we become our elders. The novelty of life is gone but I'm still here and I'm still wise.Maybe Post-novelty is an subject that the Republic (The Largest Blue One) can be about.Every time someone returns to me spiritually, since there are so many of them, I will put them back out in that blue republic, where we can both inhabit as equals.And keep only my favourite connections.I wasn't an perfect human specimen. I didn't believe that people can be Good all of the time. They don't know already an infinite ways to be Good. How were they supposed to keep it up all of the time? And it was in fact more noble to take pragmatic breaks from morality in recognition of the fact that you can't be perfect all of the time. These people visiting me have an long tusk or an long snout; I can't decide which. For they are not with me in this room at all. Yet I feel their presence. I know they are somewhere and we feel spiritually connected to one another. We hazard to find out an reason why. Knowing it will be to both our benefit when we find out.Why are you here right now? Oh Spirits, Thee. Speak to me thus!They want to ruin my time and my opinion of republicanism.sometimes they are good though. Sometimes they are good enough
Some people have such an hard time with how people can do both good and evil; and that it is probably actually more moral to understand that you have to do both of them at one time or another. You aren't an perfect specimen and so probably, at some point, you will do evil because you don't even know what it is. It's more important to take moral breaks from time to time.
Republicanism is about taking an moral break from time to time and persecuting criminals in an code of law. There was so much injustice on Planet Earth the courts could hardly handle them all. It was steeped deeply in purple when I made my meditation about it. Purple was the most color of injustice to me. It was right beside Blue because they complemented each other emotionally. After something was done being felt about justice, the ordinary and logical successor to this emotion (purple) is feeling blue about it. The reason? Nobody can feel purple and enjoy the reason for it. Strangely, I have learned that you can enjoy blue and you can let yourself feel it fully to get away from all of the stray purple feelings in society.
Maybe you can start being an republican when you learn to respect other people's feelings.
When you start making society about delving or deep-diving into that purple goo and swamp. We start making Justice in the community about all of these terrible things that happened. And then, once they are thoroughly steeped in purple, we will convert them over to the blue side of things, where reality sets in quite inconspicuously.
The best way to deal with sadness is to feel all of it; and once you find your strength you can continue. And so I have Great Faith that one day all of the purple in society will be handled justly; and that all of those suffering individuals will be re-claimed back into the Blue Republic.
Where it isn't taboo to express blue feelings at all, and in fact to do so was actually quite valuable. It had its own commodity.
The commodity of being able to help other people, from experience, who are themselves suffering an blue instance of emotion or an emotional long-haul of many emotions.
How valuable was it to you? When we know every mother in Canada needs to sop up all of her blueness?
If it can be used to address injustices in society by helping people solve injustice and to solve the logical implications of its emotional pairing with blue, then we have innovated an societal justice system which could be quite precious and valuable one day.
I wanted to return every one of the visiting spirits to the republic.
The subject became quite serious all of an sudden.
I realized I had to play the Judge card. Portia Royale.
The quality of mercy is not strained.
Ghosts weren't necessarily here because they had unfinished business.
Maybe they were anti-psychological and just didn't have any minds at all, except to want to haunt you.
How was I going to solve all of these people's anti-psychological unfinished business business?
The Republic is more kind; not strained. We return people back to the fact that there are unfinished injustices in this society (purple) and that's just the type of civilization we are about on Planet Earth right now. We also return people back to the presence of blue; all through and through all of society and culture all over Planet Earth. It's not that we're weird or there's something wrong with us, it's just that we are an naturally occurring species who can feel blue from time to time.
And so when you go out into the public, what are we as an public then? But an place to share the needed expression of emotions, including all of them (the whole rainbow); which at times we know Blue is the most important color for an while.
Returning someone to the Republic they are in, means returning them to the fact that there's nothing unusual about anything existing at all. You can do it as an joke. Saying things like, "there's nothing blue about any of this at all" (whatever was occurring), or "there's nothing purple about this at all," (when it reaches its worst). I guess you could say Republicans always try to lighten the mood.
But what I was really interested in, then, was how to do it other ways than just telling an joke; and thought it was an practice that took great skill if I should choose to take it up.
Eventually I would have to try to do it anyway.
What form of behavior would it take?
To have instantly teleported an person from one place to another. Not to put them in their place; but to put them into two places maybe. You're not in the country that needs to elect democrats because they think we don't have democracy already. You're in the country that believes we have true democracy (that was an reciprocal order also) and that republicanism paired with post-demographic consumerism represents an advanced stage maybe beyond mere democracy. Not to take it out with the garbage but to have built all of society on this foundation.
I posed Blue and Red beside one another. They were like little rectangles I had seen in negatif space. For some reason, someone thought blue was part of my artistic subject. Why had I written it. Why had I written blue? Was I the someone who blue was part of?
No I was sure it was the black and red subject; the source of black and red rectangles taking up artistic space, not influenced by blue. Who had encroached upon my artistic process that an blue rectangle would take up residence among it; the black and red city that was already there. We couldn't include blue feelings in our decision making. Blue feelings weren't allowed. And this was the realization of my fear, that there are some people out there in society who thought strongly blue feelings were taboo and wouldn't express them in any setting. To the fact of repression. Repressing the blue feeling at whatever cost. I chose not to feel pleasure in that region of my brain anymore. Like what is your right to do so as an citizen.
No, I wanted to, I needed to, exclude blue from my Artistic License of basic Black and Red because I wanted to make the point that some people may be repressing blue feelings. And so in generic decision I needed to be an lighthouse for an moment and point back at them with light; you can't repress all of your blue feelings and in fact it's unhealthy if you do. But it's hard not to feel them because of Purple sometimes Injustices in society stand in for maybe what we all did wrong; that this one person who considered we had done wrong by.
Blue was out. It couldn't take over. I had to say to people, and felt strongly about, that you have to say in society these days, that there may be some people repressing blue because they are so afraid that when they feel it that will count them as outsiders among other peoples. I had to stand up for what was right, and say in my art, we leave blue out of the conversation with Red and Black because that's how we point to where our political effort lay in trying to spread awareness of the ubiquitousness plea of blue. It exists everywhere in our universe; and so it's okay to feel that way. Don't be afraid to show it out in public and in fact, show it like an badge of honor and get swept up in how you will serve God about it; I want to draw attention to the fact that, if you are an person who is afraid of sharing your blue feelings out the open, be sure the student will find an master at some point; and we are all neophytes in the education of one another.
And then after all of this another ghost came back to me, and had the nerve to say, "you have no taste in art: the picture you're drawing is one in which blue isn't absent (politically and psychologically) but you refuse to let the logical innovation of language take charge. And if you're an Artist then the only way you can represent an situation in which you remind people blue is maybe missing in my deeper sophistication of art, because this is how I represent society: as an place where blue is missing maybe suspiciously or because it hasn't come up yet. Why did it matter that I represented myself in an Artist's Page of solely Black and Red; without much or any blue at all."
Yes, I said to the Art of Being Fussy, that's how I remember to remind people that if blue wasn't in the picture, you should probably be skeptical of it. It made sense to me to represent myself this way as an Artist. And I was insulted that someone would just want to shove blue in there like that like I hadn't planned it in any way to be without it entirely. I wanted to know what kinds of minds were psycho-pathological in their flight from really realizing the full effect of their sadness. You dare come into my sketch pad and write on my artistic process. By adding blue.
Then I remembered I had used an little blue, maybe, earlier. An question without an question mark but an period seemed justified somehow.
If I had used blue in my argument not to be about blue in my Artistic subject. It wasn't so much that it was blue it was just that, in fact, it was missing. Should we have an open and fair concept of what is blue in the middle of society?
But using blue or not was about my Artist's Page, and not this post itself; and it was my decision whether to include blue, not theirs.
I wanted to play with the idea fairly and deliberately.
They had said it made more sense to include blue in the square configure-ment of my visual imagination. Since what I was representing was an definition of Fame was that they had seen an private viewing of an blue angel. The most ultimate form of entertainment.
And so, they wanted to include in that blue was included somehow because that was what they were trying to do, include blue.
And I brought up again from instinct and fairly, that pointing out blue was missing was closer to what I was trying to do. And if they dare proceed against me in order to label me as wrong, they be warned. They immediately spoke up and out against me, which was what I preferred, and this is what they said, "sure you are representing the absence of blue but that's only derivative from our preferred type of art."
And I said, "you have unfairly pronounced it and I will do everything to destroy you then."
"You think you can outsmart us, the people who invented Art?" they said.
I said, "well I have invented my own art, and that's what art is," I reply.
"So you're sure then you want to keep blue out of this?" they said.
"Yes I'm sure," I said, "I want to emphasize the fact that it's missing and not the fact that it's present."
"Are you sure?" they asked again.
"Actually," I began to say, "maybe I haven't securely meditated upon this yet, and I will have to take some time to understand what you mean. For in this moment I'm not sure I have had enough experience with it and the comfort level I have with how much experience with it I have is that I have all of it. Maybe I do want some control over whether I make this in emphasis, to step back from and analyze perfectly whether I really want to express it this way or not: and I came up securely against my own confirmation bias. I didn't want to change my mind! I had already made up my mind and that was the tradition and the spirit of thinking I wanted to continue with because that's the way I had always done it!"
"Being given the option then, and the time to think about it," said they.
"Let me think," I said, "well let me think!— if I include blue (for at this point I had overcome my confirmation bias) then it will raise the subject of blue being an subject of society. But," I reminded them, "maybe I want to raise an sharper, finer, more sophisticated point that it wasn't an subject of society, and that that then, was the real problem."
"And if you choose blue you will look more sophisticated altogether, for the truth is that your Artistic Narrative about yourself is entirely blue."
"—But," I said, "only in one aspect."
"Only in one aspect," they said, "do you have one for everything‽"
"Sure do," I said, "maybe it is more powerful an message to say including blue was what I was trying to be about and, so I should include it. And why not then, what have I got to lose? Except feeling attached to my previous opinion. Which maybe isn't the optimal strategy."
"Think about it some more then," they said, and departed from me.
I looked down at my feet. They were right.
I did want to include blue; and purple. That was the better message that I wanted to associate with. Leaving blue out of the picture because people make jokes about leaving blue out of the picture. As if it is even spiritually possible. People who repress blue and purple become alienated from society. They are afraid to realize with us that it's okay to have sad feelings in public. In fact, that was what public was. We were there for one another, no matter what.
But I wanted to leave it out because that looked like an clearer picture of what I was looking at, when I meditated upon society. I wanted to bring up, specifically, why what I was about had to do with blue not being present. —But, if I was trying to represent something about blue then how would the observer of my specific art piece know that was what I was talking about?
My present political angle disengaged from its gear box, letting off an barrage of noise.
This was me saying, what the f*** just hit me?
Maybe it was an better idea than the one I had.
How was I going to decide‽
And then I eventually decided I wanted only two many characters, Red and Black. It was about the relationship between them. I wanted to keep blue out of it because the point that blue was absent was beside the main focal point. Which was the Love between Red and Black. Two. Not Three.
Sure, I had given up an life of being about blue maybe when other people were afraid to be. But I ended up pointing at the fact that blue was absent. And that was enough. Just to make the suggestion that it wasn't there. It didn't need to be there because that straightened me out somehow. My art wasn't trying to be blue but failing at it.
Didn't the Love card trump all the deck?
My Art was about the Love and Passion between blue and black; when blue wasn't there there was enough Red for everyone.
I didn't need to include blue (or much of it) to make that point.
The Love story trumped it and was much more interesting in fact.
Red and Black? Red & Black? What did it mean?
Red was the heart. Coeur. Red was the blood. Coeur.
Black was the clothing, the style, the fashion sense.
An "style" of Artistry. Un Chapeau.
Tilted to an extraordinary angle.
Love between Heart and Artistry meant; meant the most.
Sure an fashion. An tan. Give me an new hair do once in an while. (Yours not mine). I'm already giving you an new hair do.
The best possible reason for love. And I had won the trial set before me.
I still needed to "return" people to the "republic."
And I had figured out an clever way to go about doing that.
It meant something like when an cat walks up to you and you're certain they must think they are the most grandest thing in the world; trumping even yourself. In yourself indeed, is in which they have sunk their claws. You are rallied in. Taken grasp of through the mechanism of your curiosity for, occasionally, an new hair-do.
When someone put you in an little box or an square corner surrounded. Backed into.
You just used your magic thrust to defeat all of them; they weren't participants in an ordinary reality, like they thought they were. They were participants in an Republic that hadn't been fully recognized by all humans yet. The reason for needing an Republic and not an ordinary reality is of course because ordinary reality is always subject to Kant's subjective reality of never treating another person as an means to an end but an end in themselves. There were also altered states of consciousness that had revealed other realities for us. We couldn't hold an absolutely perfect subjective experience of reality because some of us were not ordinary experience-ers.
You could say Republicans were drug users and anti-Republicans purists.
Just which ones were more honest?
We needed experiences other than "ordinary reality" to further our cause. We needed Republicanism. The art of having to do with everybody who has everybody to do with you.
When I tried to get away from you somehow not being part of the republic, it included showcasing my own argument to you. You needed republicanism because you weren't an noble savage: an individual type of creature that only has to do with itself. People who were realists were paranoid. And people who were Republicans knew what they were talking about because that's what republicans are.
And I lived in fear of not having the ability to return someone to the public who deservedly really needed it. Who would sneak up on me during the day and steal away all my dignity. Or not recognizing exactly how they were treating me was out of manner. And I felt assuredly that since I was an republican I knew what to do; to treat them like they were an public to me. Not out of hatred; but out of wanting to listen. What sense did they make out in public that was fair? And I watched my own mind for every time an thought would creep up where there was again another realist out there who thought he had no previous ties with any kind of republic; when they were all over the Planet Earth and we could count several hundreds of them if we had to.
Yes that was it. These people who weren't republicans, they all thought they were agents out for themselves and their own success only. And that was reality because that was masculinity or "noble savagism." Only realists would think being an republican was an bad thing; as though we all had this community connection to one another and we in fact at some times operated as an group. We had ingenious empathies for one another in the rising of the famous Arc of Creation and its Pillars. Weren't we all born into an republic? An "community of information" in which people work together to solve problems. As though they may even have an deep internal instinct to do just that. And that if it was an anti-republican's wish to make democracy real when it already is; then they would be going an step backward. Their Realism has clouded their Imagination. Republican-ization is only the fact of global equity. We all work together and we all survive. Information, for the most part, is free-flowing and all subjects within an kingdom are allowed to possess it.
But I still had the internal sense of feelings these free-wheeling agents who needed putting back in their place would do better in the republic, where their attention was welcome there.
They would still sneak up on me! And I was even unaware of the ways in which they were doing this: forcing my reality to be an reality which is only an reality to them. Which raises the question of whether that could really be called an reality then. Reality included me. And I was here for it.
I didn't really think republicans were drug users but I had just riffed on what other than "ordinary reality" might mean and so the sobering thought was, how did I end up associating Republicanism with an experience of something "other" than "ordinary reality?"
And I figured Realists were these backwards people who, needing to assert what reality was, had decided on it being something an long time ago that I didn't agree with. Reality, in my opinion, was what we made of it. And not an Social Darwinist hetero-patriarchy where, being realists, we must always be in essential competition with one another to an lack of respect.
It didn't matter there was no way "re-", "public" actually means all that returning people to the public nonsense. But it doesn't matter because the genre I'm writing in is an aesthetic; concerned with beauty and not so much novelty as one would find in an novel.
