L'Arte Ellittica nel tempo degli Equilibri Instabili Globalizzazione, IA

[00:00:01]Can we get started? Well.

[00:00:04]Good evening to everyone here, including those following us remotely, who are just starting to connect.

[00:00:15]As Carmelo knows, this is now a structural aspect of our business. There are people in the room, but there is a large portion of people following us remotely. And I would just like to post a few words to conclude this long and splendid exhibition. Long because in reality I lasted 6 months, an absolutely unusual length of time in the house of culture. I do n't know, I don't remember, how can I put it, another operation this long and then, well, I have to say this Carmelo knows that I'm saying something particularly beautiful and interesting, dozens of authors, artists from all over the world, this too is something unusual. I must say the car is not a place for exhibitions, it has had its own history.

[00:01:04]Few people know that when it was founded, one of the first things it did was an exhibition of Modigliani himself. So it started like this in the very first, we're still in '46. The Modigliani exhibition was then a big event in the city of Milan. Then, so to speak, these things moved to another location, as naturally happens. The cultural center has dedicated itself to its profession, which is that of spoken culture, as it says, in a place of reflection and culture through words. However, at the urging of some friends—I must say, at the vigorous urging of Carmelo Strano—we have decided to try reopening our chair for exhibitions as well. I must say, there had already been other artists who had come forward, who had given us, so to speak, works of various kinds, in short. So, in a way, we were going down this path, but Carmelo's eruption was a powerful eruption that he vigorously took over and decided here, so to speak, let's try to build an exhibition that also follows a line, a path with and maybe even small exhibitions that, however, fit within a plan, that have their own organic path and I must say I'm very happy with the choice we made because it has always been capable of provoking reflections that and with this latest exhibition, the one we're closing today, we have achieved a very remarkable result.

[00:02:32]So many different voices, an undoubted aesthetic quality. I can't comment on this idea of elliptical art, I'm not capable of doing so, frankly speaking, I'm curious, I've tried to understand, I have an intuition, so to speak, I'm curious to know what you're going to say, [laughter] so to speak, to understand if there's anyone besides Carmelo who can explain elliptical art well. This is my curiosity, but how can I say and this I am very curious about this thing, but how can I say I did my best to understand the concept, it certainly intrigued me. the result is what I had before my eyes for 6 months and then it transformed, it was also, so to speak, progressively modified, which I liked very much because you also gave me the slide of a work that was in progress and was transformed, it was very beautiful, very soft. I didn't let you do everything, mind you, but I was curious about where you were going with this, and I have to say the overall result is definitely very interesting. We are closing this operation this evening, but I am happy that Carmelo says that we will continue this activity in other forms. I'm curious, though, how can I say, the somewhat, how can I say, somewhat stormy way in which Carmelo presents himself on the scene is in some way a guarantee of a wealth of ideas, a desire to circulate real, interesting things, so Carmelo, thanks to you, thanks to all the artists who collaborated, to those who participated in many meetings that were intermediate, I was who contributed, then there was also an international network channel that, in short, a very complex thing, put together.

[00:04:17]Great, I'm very happy about this so thank you all and now we'll see how we do. Meanwhile, this evening, if I understand correctly, Carlo, we're dedicating it to reflecting not only on the concept itself, but also on a book in which he summarized a bit of all this activity and this one seems to me Yes, we can see. This is one thing, we also see this behind. Very very beautiful. I skimmed it quickly because it brought me well, I'm very happy with this book. Here's a really interesting piece of our activity over the past few months. Now Carmelo is illustrating it, explaining his things, but in short it is in some way a piece of a work that is precious, important for us.

[00:05:01]Thanks to Carmelo and thanks to everyone.

[00:05:03]Thank you Ruccio Cabelli, you were patient and gave me some encouragement too.

[00:05:08]I can add that I would also like you to thank Maurizio because he was truly invaluable. As if to say, if you thank him now he'll go away.

[00:05:17]No, no, it's not going away, it's not going away. No, no, no, no. But it's a request I'm making of you this time because you know how to say that I 've told you several times how to say why not the way Carmelo works, the way artists work is not exactly that easy to manage in a structure and so anyway I didn't take charge of it, eh, Maurizio took charge of it all and so as if to say it 's right that the thanks go to Maurizio for working well. irreplaceable and fundamental in the whole operation. Well, Maurizio, darling. Thank you. It's your turn now that you arrive. I'll take you into the audience and force you to look at the Senate.

[00:06:03]I would say Eleonora.

[00:06:06]Yes, it's my left Leonora. And I would say that it shows the images and you, based on what you read, your thoughts, etc., intervene, ask questions, whatever you want. Okay.

[00:06:21]Make a little excuse, they're giving me a microphone. Are you ready? Yes, they are going more than getting closer.

[00:06:30]Certain. [guttural sound] Then it also applies to those who are also connected.

[00:06:36]Yes.

[00:06:36]Oh, okay.

[00:06:38]So, this is the cover, obviously, and let's move on.

[00:06:51]I had to write the book entirely in English for understandable reasons, eh, because it will travel, after all.

[00:07:05]And as in all self- respecting books, this is the so-called frontispiece, which also specifies the dry title that was on the cover.

[00:07:16]And what does he say here instead?

[00:07:19]On the cover and I can't read it from here. Let 's put it this way in the center.

[00:07:26]Okay, wait. So we both read it.

[00:07:31]You want the microphone, right? Yes. Yes, I have it. The elliptical art, a new movement for the new area of ​​globality. God, ai and unstable equilibri inspired by elliptical thoughts.

[00:07:46]In short, there is a summary of the whole situation.

[00:07:49]What are the principles to highlight regarding our time and also the primary source of this artistic initiative? that at the same time an exhibition is also the birth of a movement, of a direction of artistic ideas, and therefore there is at its basis an elliptical thought of a general nature through which I have tried to better understand our moment, and clearly in this book I am not dealing with this, but precisely with this repercussion that the elliptical thought has on Anellarte. you too. Well, these are just a few usual recommendations. There is a dedication of mine to Pieranì that some of those present know and therefore there has been a cultural partnership of about 15 years and here is also Carrozzini and therefore and therefore I wanted to dedicate it to him because of an affinity, in short, more of sensitivity than of thought. Well, yes, I feel like saying that. And so I wanted to dedicate this whole operation to him, which was not easy, since, as will be explained later in the next pages, but from what I say we will not read them, on the exhibition level it is divided into two exhibitions. The first was held last year between July and October at the Mudima Foundation, also in Milan, and the second here. The first consisted of only European artists and is the first experience that then expands with this exhibition running for another three days, open until the 25th, which has been expanded to other cultures with the presence of representative artists from Japan, China, Africa, Indonesia, India, and the United States.

[00:10:07]Eh, maybe that's enough. Um, so these two exhibitions at different times, but also with different and different contents, but the substance is identical, the principles of inspiration are identical, so much so that this book collects both experiences, documents both experiences, therefore with overviews of the exhibition set up by Modima, overviews of the exhibition set up here with close-ups obviously of the artists and guests and so on. So there is precisely this, this support of two of two exhibitions about this movement. Why movement?

[00:11:02]And because because because because this this initiative was not simple and because if I do an exhibition of any kind, of a Daist type, of an Expressionist type, etc., etc., I put together things that more or less go together, it's all valid. Here the problem is absolutely new, that is, putting together figures who do not do the same things, do not create the same works of art. they even have different conceptions of art. So what does it have to do with anything? It's a fair question to ask. How do you put them together? Could there be something that unites them?

[00:11:42]Certainly. And now it will come out. All right.

[00:11:47]Here, are you speaking to me and can I also read it in English or not? Translate it directly. Okay. The ellipse is a new aesthetic and a social paradigm of hybrid values. Oh tell me if I say if I translate No, that's something else again I'm ah they're separate sentences. Flashes, detached sentences, not connected to each other.

[00:12:16]And you see them, right?

[00:12:18]on the big screen. Well, so they have been highlighted with different colors in order to separate them, to clearly separate them and each one enunciates an aspect of the whole elite thought. This first one, for example, speaks precisely of new aesthetics and new social paradigm.

[00:12:40]Social paradigm. So a social paradigm is a new aesthetic.

[00:12:48]Unfortunately, it is bold to say these things, but that is how they are. Whether these are trivial things or important ones, we'll see. The fact is that reality is this, that is, things are this way, a sociological paradigm and also a sort of aesthetic and sociological paradigm. Why? Because how can I talk about art that is capable of accounting for today's reality if we don't call today's reality into question? Artists may not even have to express ideas about today's society, but directly or indirectly they are bearers of today's sensibilities. If they weren't, they wouldn't be here exhibiting.

[00:13:39]Here, this is the meaning. So a first scream, as I'm calling it, is what we said. The second is an added hybrid value.

[00:13:48]Here, this ellipse is a hybrid added value. Hybrid in this case, as we now know well, is not a negative term but rather, at least that's how I understand it, an enriching value, that is, hybridization is now an innate condition.

[00:14:09]well on a sociological level, even on an existential level.

[00:14:13]Well, an exhibition from years ago, I think in the early 90s, I don't remember the date exactly, it's called Post Human, so obviously it presented, also based on technological presence, a management that was no longer human but post-human and based on books. Evidently it was a nice preview of the book, on an artistic level, it was a nice preview.

[00:14:38]So, if we interpret the hybrid condition as an enrichment, well, then we can also be happy about it.

[00:14:49]Well, on the other hand, there are much more serious things related to technology that negatively influence us, but I don't think the hybrid in itself is a negative value. If I have an aversion to certain mixtures, and that's fine, then I can't deal with hybridity. In short, it's quite clear that hybridity isn't just a problem of skin color, it's also a problem of hybridity at the level of ideas, at the level of cultural background, at the anthropological level, and at the economic level, because economies change locally, internationally, and globally— unfortunately, not—but they change locally because they have to adapt to local values. And anyone who doesn't do so would obviously be wrong.

[00:15:45]And let's move on, then if necessary we'll come back to the book again, whatever you want, in short.

[00:15:50]artistic work as a trace and not just as an object. Here, we have an idea of ​​art as something that either I see because the State bought it, because it's part of the public collection, I see it in my home because I took possession of it, it was given to me as a gift, I bought it or so on and so forth and... And and but here it says that it is not to be seen or not only it is not to be seen only as as eh an object, the work of art as an object, but as a trace work of art outw as as a trace. A trace means something that walks or makes someone walk or indicates a path. And so the track is not the fixed one. A question I ask anyone who wants to answer me.

[00:17:14]If I am in the presence of a circle, I am in love with the circle, I am not, but I am in love with the circle and I evidently think that the circle has the peculiarity of presenting a circumference that rotates perfectly in the same way at any point I place myself from the circumference around this central pivot that we call the center. And so a little while ago we burned the word vision to ashes and the vision is always the same and I can't do otherwise. Even before the idea of ​​the elliptical motion of the planets emerged, it did. Here I put the author himself on the back cover, which is precisely what plero is.

[00:18:06]And the idea was that the center, still the Earth, but then also shortly after Copernicus, the Sun was the center. And so the position was this. I remember a great- uncle of mine who used to explain these cosmological phenomena to me by saying, look, this here is the center. I walk around and I always see this center here that didn't make a wrinkle, the reasoning always circling around I always see this point of reference.

[00:18:48]But if things change with the elliptical movement of the planets, I no longer have this situation.

[00:18:57]But let's get back to this, I don't want to insist. However the problem now was the real point Eronorra, the point was the work of art as an object trace.

[00:19:08]Ultimately, for example, there's a work by Dario Buratti that clearly uses artificial intelligence, especially his own idea of ​​generative art, and there's a whole process that's expressed; no precise point is fixed, but the process is expressed.

[00:19:32]And a good example, I mean, in this case, of art or of work, let's call it that, of work as touch.

[00:19:41]Come touch. Let's move on.

[00:19:44]Elasticity, openness, intervals. No, I'm here. This green one was right away. Oh, okay. Yes, I don't see.

[00:19:51]Ah, elasticity, openness, intervals and not pervasive saturation. Here, elasticity is the first characteristic that can be derived from the ellipse because precisely from this condition of the ellipse which is no longer a circle like this, but is like this, it is called a squashed circle.

[00:20:13]By chance, yours, done at the Mudima foundation last year, was not entitled elliptical art, but the flattened circle, it did n't change anything. And so in this case I have the two foci, as they are called, and the vision is not around a center, but the vision changes based on what therefore imposes on me. The vision changes continuously and therefore this gives me a principle of elasticity that I then emphasized in every area of social life and also in art itself.

[00:20:49]Openness, openness, and well, if I stop at the idea of ​​the center, I have little to offer, I have little openness to offer. yeah yeah look at the center and that's my unique vision and it's around which I gravitate totally. There is no opening and I indicate closure very simply, now I indicate it with the center as expressed I apologize the closure as expressed by the circle and the story is all closed and also the social and ideological systems in general closed, I assimilate them precisely to the circle.

[00:21:54]But if one wants to say something different, that is, to counteract this condition of closure, the first word that comes to mind is openness, there is no doubt.

[00:22:08]But there is a catch, I fear with the word openness that how open, how open is this opening.

[00:22:20]And here the discussion becomes complex. If I make an agreement with Eleonora I say "I'm open to you" etc. etc. and she says to me "But how open are you?" "Well, I'm open, that's it, I'm open, and what else can I tell you?" But let's move this silly reasoning.

[00:22:42]She's not stupid, but let's transfer this shock reasoning.

[00:22:45]Let's move it, [clear throat] let's move it into the international relationship.

[00:22:50]Trump is an open character.

[00:22:55]Um I don't know. And how open is it?

[00:23:00]And is it closed? In short, do we equate it to a circle or do we equate it to an ellipse? Here's a first question we can ask ourselves.

[00:23:11]I mean, even in international relations, you're welcome.

[00:23:16]Well, I want to say that even in international relations, openness, if not specified, creates problems.

[00:23:25]It creates problems because I don't know how open I can be, nor how open he will want to be. And so I am dealing with surprise and if I am the victim of a surprise I aim to protect myself.

[00:23:42]I can do it with a knife, I can do it with a nuclear weapon, I can do it in a thousand ways. If instead you were to use what I suggest, not the word openness, the word availability, the word availability, moreover associated with flexibility, the starting point, because if there is no flexibility that's enough, at least stay at home, eh, banging your fists against the walls, nothing happens. But let's start with flexibility, I add, not openness, but availability. I am available. What does it mean? If I tell you I'm available, what do you think? [clear throat] That's available.

[00:24:27]Eh, but immediately I ask you Yes, open, yes, but if I say not open, but available, surely you think of something more precise than if I say openness.

[00:24:37]Hmm. Yes. Always looking at what's available.

[00:24:43]I am available to do something, therefore limited by a concept. It has limits.

[00:24:49]Yes, it has its own limitations and is distinct. It's distinct. If I say he's open, he's open is one thing, I say he's available, but either I already know what he's available for or knowing him I think about what areas he might be available in. So we have a boundary that facilitates the relationship, facilitates dialogue.

[00:25:13]Politics talks a lot about dialogue, but it doesn't engage in dialogue and facilitate dialogue. Dialogue is fundamental and therefore dialogue must be based on balance, hopefully not always possible, but if we don't have the conditions for dialogue to be balanced, that is, the scales can do their job of balancing, taking a little from here, a little from there, a little from which, but not always totally from one side, but rather having its own balancing game.

[00:25:45]Well, then dialogue is not possible if there is this balance, this discourse of balance, dialogue is certainly favored. And so if we said elasticity, openness, openness and interval interval.

[00:26:06]But in your opinion, do I find a greater range in opening or availability?

[00:26:14]Let's make others hear too. Come here so we can talk and because there are those connected so maybe if one of you speaks you can speak.

[00:26:23]In the meantime, I want to ask a question, no, if I can ask a question, but because maybe I didn't understand the concept of opening, professor, but anyway, the ellipse is a closed figure, that is, do you mean opening only in the nucleus or instead the closure of the ellipse contestement check and I'm happy that you tried and I tell you luckily the ellipse the figure is closed. Hmm.

[00:26:53]Why do I say this?

[00:26:58]Because it leaves no space. That is, what could be the figure that is opposite to the closure of the circle?

[00:27:06]An abstract figure, probably open, maximally open.

[00:27:10]Maximally open and hyperbole.

[00:27:14]The hyperbole.

[00:27:16]If the ellipse were not closed and were, for example, an open circle, maximally open, well, we would be in a condition totally opposite to the circle, but so opposite that it would have the same problems as the circle, that is, lack of dialogue, lack of understanding, lack of sharing, because this is the word to use in the end, lack of sharing. Luckily, indeed, beautiful. The figure is closed, but elastic.

[00:27:47]That's why he strongly emphasized its property of being elastic and then has the interval.

[00:27:57]Yes.

[00:27:59]In the 80s, with the explosion of postmodernism, there was a gentleman whose merits I have always underlined. In his kindness, despite his height, he sometimes did it towards me too, but I always did it towards him. his name was Girodorfes and he published an unusual book called The Lost Interval, that is, he had realized that he also said with the Greek word the diastematic value of astema is precisely the separation, therefore the interval exists when things are separated, otherwise there can be no interval, but he noticed that precisely in those in those No one thought about the interval, there was no interval, since it was a celebration, the f the festive condition explodes precisely then.

[00:29:05]The party certainly doesn't allow for a break.

[00:29:10]Here, the absence of interval and the absence of interval and it means that we are truly serial, well, let's say it in musical terms, we are truly musically serial, that is, it is a succession of sounds, of staves etc. that does not run out, it has no pauses, precisely, often it has no pauses and therefore it is a continuous race, almost not a breath.

[00:29:42]Um, interval is that moment that, well, if we go to the theater and then there's interval, eh, what do we think? Well, now we relax a bit, we rest and then after we like it a lot, we don't like it at all, we go back and tackle it again in the second, third and fourth act and so on. But these things are valid in all these things here. It applies to everything. The interval is the capital element.

[00:30:15]Well, but today the problem is no less. I was telling you on the 16th, perhaps the longest communication we have ever had, and it knows no intervals. you know no intervals. The break is a safeguard, a safeguard of breathing, a safeguard of behaviors, a safeguard of reflection, because without the break I don't even think, I don't even think, so I need the break. So here is the interval written there at this point and not a pervasive saturation.

[00:31:03]Well, what we call instead is a pervasive saturation, because as I was saying a few days ago, communication and elite thinking are based on communication.

[00:31:16]The word thought sometimes distracts from the matter and is based on the problem of communication.

[00:31:27]Um, it's not, it's almost never been like that. There are some philosophers who have started this possibility, let's say, this possibility of bringing thought closer to communication from a purely practical point of view.

[00:31:41]Now I'm trying in a concrete, detailed way, I owe it to them. I'm referring to Simel, I'm referring to Witchenstein, especially to them.

[00:31:54]Well, and so Gilodfas highlighted this interval problem. Now we can play it in another way, that is, by hoping for moments of intermission.

[00:32:08]the same problem is repeating itself, it's repeating itself because, well, it's the party-loving condition of the post-modern era that I experienced, I went through it but at the same time I fought it, that is, a paradox, if you like, I fought it ideologically because I could never accept that this situation, so slightly crazy and playful and based on play, was the condition that was succeeding modernity. It seemed to me, well, nonsense, but hey, I experienced it, I experienced it while also having fun, why not, in short, between discos and non-discos, in short, things were done in this way and the intervals were certainly quite short.

[00:32:57]But I must say that when I speak now of an interval or perhaps a precedent that in its time has almost been forgotten, that of having intuited at the beginning of the 80s that Western rationality, from the strong and tense that it had always been, was beginning to loosen.

[00:33:27]and I defined this condition now, that is to say docile rationality. I noticed that the Western rationality of Western culture was becoming docile.

[00:33:40]Docile means not stupid, not not susceptible to everything, it means that it has a certain flexibility.

[00:33:48]Flexibility brings range, there is no doubt.

[00:33:52][clearing throat] at the same time I was saying that the Eastern world, but I was referring especially in an essay for a special specialist, I was referring to Japan and well a good part of the Eastern Western world, particularly Japan, did the opposite, that is, it loosened the sense of deep spirituality and in favor of a certain slightly stronger rationality. Um, and so it was a bit perhaps the principles by which from then on the world began to dialogue on this position of elasticity and rationality made docile or Eastern world made a little more rational and therefore you say here interval and no longer pervasive etc. etc. which perhaps I anticipated with the previous question, a correction of the hyperbolic society of the spectacle.

[00:35:00]Here, yes, here. hyperbolic. Yes, it is the hyperbolic spectacle that was what had already been diagnosed, so to speak, but then also expressed in my book, The Society of the Spectacle, there, and this was intuited, it was precisely the commercial product, it was precisely the widespread economy and also the work of the hidden persuaders.

[00:35:33]in favor of the work to be sold or bought. It was precisely this condition that determined spectacularity, contributed at least to increasing the sense of spectacularity and but then the spectacularity, precisely, appeared precisely in the post-modern context, as I have already said, and becomes a whole condition, precisely, hyperbolic and which is certainly not suited either to dialogue or awareness and even less to the interval. I'm moving on. A new leader in a climate of unstable equilibrium.

[00:36:15]Yes, it is my belief, it is my belief, I think we all see it, in short, I don't think I have discovered anything by saying that we always aim to create balances and otherwise it would be a total mess in everything, but what has taken over is the awareness that the balances we are creating out of necessity, for survival, for whatever reason.

[00:36:45]These balances are however unstable by now, that is to say they do not last over time. The classical vision we had instead spoke of stable equilibria and just as there were stable equilibria in social behavior and there were also stable ideas also in relation to the aesthetics of art and therefore we could talk about a general principle to somehow approach to imitate, no, the principle of mimesis.

[00:37:22]And precisely because there was still the feeling, more than the idea, more than the idea, the feeling of stability, but we began to lose stability already at the beginning of not only with relativistic and quantum physics, but also precisely with that element which is perhaps more metaphorical than realistic, but realistic even if it were not for science, that is, the breaking of the atom.

[00:37:57]The breaking of the atom, precisely, this Sir Rafford who in 1913 I think has this experience of breaking down the atom which was thought to be indestructible and this begins to sow the seeds of things.

[00:38:14]Then the thought is accompanied by these things. When thought, which was absolute, descends to, I don't say to agreements, but to a close dialogue with social phenomena, with existential life, etc., and it is no longer classical thought and I am referring precisely to the aforementioned Simel and or how much one starts to play, so to speak, with the themes of the game, as VTIN does which however moves from explanation to pure simple representation, therefore without any more ideological involvement. And there things certainly change, they change and certainties begin to fade away. And then at this point a new guide was said in a climate of stable equilibrium.

[00:39:11]So stable equilibria are stable equilibria and they are like that.

[00:39:16]Guidance doesn't mean I'll take you by the hand and lead you to a place where there are no unstable balances, it means that everyone learns how to regulate themselves so as not to fall victim to instability. Let me be clear: I'm not giving any guidance.

[00:39:32]So everyone will surely be able to understand the problems, to say to themselves maybe it's better to do this thing this way or that way so that the condition of instability is reduced or at least not excessive and burdensome. Let's go a little faster, so we can move on to the next one. Eh, the ellipse as a catalyst for everyday interculturality.

[00:39:58]We talk about interculturality now because we eat it every day, right? Even with mine and so we are intercultural and there is no doubt.

[00:40:10]But intercultural no longer means that I can easily communicate with a Chinese person or an Indian person and so on. It is precisely the awareness that my anthropological culture or the culture of my anthropological condition is hybrid, precisely, as we were saying before, it is hybrid, it has hybridized.

[00:40:40]given with the interference of other cultures. There is no longer an indigenous culture that has remained intact. In short, some more than others, they have suffered. There will certainly be places on this earth where a little integrity is still maintained, but these are still negligible facts. And so this interculturality and daily bread, I was saying, a clear keystone of mine, that is, an idea that I often use is everyday life, which I then identified with the word deity to mean the daily condition. Everyday life is essential. I jokingly called myself a notary philosopher for the simple reason that at least someone else is capable of doing it, I am not capable of it, that is, of thinking in the old way of saying here I am now, instead of telling you the world of ideas is this or the worlds are these, etc. etc. there is none of this. Everything today, if it doesn't start from everyday life, leads nowhere.

[00:42:06]Everyday life is the primary reference for any action I want to undertake, be it practical, economic, etc., sociological, or even ideological or ideal.

[00:42:20]Well, and so everyday life is the starting point, which means that the starting point is a concrete fact.

[00:42:28]Because by everyday life I mean how we are behaving today in this moment here and therefore it is still an element of concreteness and from which a visionary idea can also be born.

[00:42:43]Usually we say moment, my vision is this, of course, but it can also arise from a concrete fact, the visionarity and then it's up to me whether to make the vision or the concrete fact the main element, it doesn't matter. In any case, vision always arises when one is projected towards the vision and therefore everyday life is a fundamental element in my opinion. Here, I say in fact that the ellipse has a catalytic function of this daily interculturality.

[00:43:18]Let's close. Come on, I'm going, I'll continue.

[00:43:22]A guide between two distant focal points. I had never commented on these shrieks, which I posted not for fun, but as a summary of some of the principles of this litical situation, and I see that it works because I am explaining them for the first time and I am realizing for the first time that it was the case that I should follow them more closely.

[00:43:46]a guide between two focal points far from the hyperbola and the monocentric circle that we have already said [snort] and the ambiguous but definable elliptical message. Here, I was saying that all lithic thought, art or not art, sociology, etc., is based on communication and therefore on the message.

[00:44:15]The main concrete principle to highlight about the ellipse is what kind of message does the ellipse send?

[00:44:25]Well, the answer is easy for a literary pundit, but then he explains it's an elitist message, obviously it's an elitist message. But what does this mean here? and it means it has to be elastic.

[00:44:39]And I add the word ambiguous. The word ambiguous should always be used in creative matters, not, as it is usually said in everyday life, something unclear, obscure, that tends to hide, that can plot traps, etc. etc. Amigo, on the other hand, is a positive element, that is, that there are artists here too, so they tell me that certainly if art does not have a note of ambiguity it is as if I were passively describing what I see. So these are the glasses of this heart etc. etc. and the temples that I made so I just describe them.

[00:45:22]If that's enough description, well, I'm doing other things that aren't art. And so ambiguity is a characterizing element of the elliptic message, but I distinguish the elliptic message.

[00:45:37]The idea of ​​the elliptical message was born when I first began to deal with the ellipse from an aesthetic perspective. the whole lithic operation was born years ago in an aesthetic context and my problem was this then that I had studied and practiced a very beautiful and interesting thing which was the open work theorized by Umberto Ecco, but which had nevertheless derived a good part of the thing from his master Luigi Parison and but I realized that from 62 in 62 when he was born to the 80s, in short, things the world had changed several times and that it was no longer suitable and so I came up with the idea of ​​presenting the idea of ​​the elitist work as an alternative. The speech was born as an elitist work and I gave the example on the level of the message, a hyperbolic message, a direct message and an elliptical message. The hyperbolic is that which is linked to the open work for those who go to infinity. On the other hand, he calls the work open that way, you see, only because it is open in its message.

[00:47:02]I don't see a specific message in the work, so it's enough to give an example of music by Silvano Bussotti, for example.

[00:47:11]The performer can start wherever he wants, from the third page, from the fourth, from the fifth bar, from the eighth and then turn again, go back, do what he wants freely or even more clearly is the example of what I know the informal art that Umberto Eco looks at carefully and in an informal framework, that is to say where the form is self-reflexive and does not convey a precise thing, nothing in a few words and that is an open message. I can read in a totally abstract, totally informal work, I can read what I want, what I like. But it will be the thought that the artist really had in mind when he made that work, we know.

[00:48:00]Perhaps even the artist himself doesn't know whether it was like this or not. However, to say that then there is a hyperbolic message to which I have associated the open work, a closed message and here the circle is immediately called into question or an elliptical message, precisely elastic, where the quality is this.

[00:48:27]I will capture the message in an elliptical message. I'll get the message. I'll get the message. I immediately grasp it as if it were a work of art from a circle, not a circus. From circle.

[00:48:40]No, no, because it exists because of the ambiguity we were talking about earlier and which is a virtue, a merit, a prerogative of art to want to be attractive.

[00:48:56]So it 's not hyperbole, it's not the circle, the elite message can be grasped, it's not grasped immediately, it's not rendered pathetically, right? nor was it expressed artificially. That's why I don't easily grasp it immediately.

[00:49:16]It's just that my thinking has become even more reflective and therefore it is even more ambiguous and therefore it cannot manifest itself immediately, but I will grasp the message, I will grasp each one at the same pace, each one in a minute, some in 10 minutes, some over the course of days, based on each one's culture, each one's sensitivity, each one's availability towards that type of work. There are many components that contribute to capturing the message, it is a matter of the time needed to get it and it varies from subject to subject.

[00:50:03]This is also a condition of elasticity that can be related to the ISS.

[00:50:11]Similarity beyond mimesis gradually with fractals and artificial intelligence and here many things are summarized they are fractals artificial intelligence there is there is yes the mimesis and there is the similarity mimesis I have done there has been a little while ago no so there is no point in saying more and [clearing the throat] I proposed as well as to the hyperbolic or open message or I responded with the elitist message. I have had some dialogue regarding mimesis and I have proposed an idea of ​​similarity.

[00:50:53]The word is not originally mine, it belongs to a guy I knew, with whom I talked, who taught me a few things and above all whose work I did, whose research, which is precisely what I did, and his name is or was called Menoit Mandelbrot, Polish but then French, then American, in short.

[00:51:15]Well, he studied fractals and then he was able to do it only because he had a computer already in place to set up the fractals and once again we had put them aside because we cannot understand them, we cannot order them and therefore they do not belong to us, we put them aside.

[00:51:38]But after that, Fractals became the protagonists.

[00:51:43]Protagonists to the point that he then also studied the processuality of fractals, for example the self-reproduction of the fractal. The fractal reproduces itself and reproduces itself while maintaining its characteristics.

[00:52:02]So the generating fractal and the generated fractal have the same characteristics in principle because then he specifies that at this point we would truly be in the condition of the circle and of classicality if it were reproduced very faithfully always in principle yes. in fact, he discovers that in this process of yes, let's say of self-reproduction, because it is still a question of self-reproduction of skipping a sort of parthenogenesis.

[00:52:35]So, in this case, if something unexpected happens and he calls it, not by chance, an unexpected thing.

[00:52:49]imponder means that I can neither foresee nor suppose nor weigh.

[00:52:55]And so I must finally deal with this accident, with this thing that happens, whereby the generated brother will not be exactly identical to the generator.

[00:53:11]This situation got me thinking.

[00:53:15]he did this wonderful thing on a scientific level. I took the opportunity to talk about a condition of a theoretical nature, namely the phatalic condition as elasticity, precisely.

[00:53:31]And here he calls this situation, er, self- similarity, he calls it self-similarity, self-similarity, self-similarity because, precisely, as we were saying, the generated resembles the generator, but then he becomes aware of this imponderable. So this situation made me think that if I can no longer relate because at least I can no longer in the sense that it no longer seems relevant to me than mimes if I can no longer relate to mimesis, what can I relate to if I still feel the need to have some reference.

[00:54:19]The fixed reference would still bring me back to mimesis, but a reference that is mobile is procedural. We said it before, right? It's procedural. It is a reference, yes, but once again an elastic reference, that is, to say I can take things, but I will never imitate something because I won't even have the time to imitate it.

[00:54:50]And so from the procedural nature, from the processes he tries to follow, I will take some cues, some moments, or perhaps I will become a proceduralist myself, and then you will understand what comes out. So, in short, this idea comes out, I'll make it short now, of similarity. It is one thing to be camouflaged, to be camouflaged and therefore to use camouflage. Another thing, however, is to use similarity. Something similar is not the same, right? Something similar is not the same at all.

[00:55:29]And yes, it is similar. Similar, but is it the same similar? It's not the same, it's similar. It looks a little like it. It looks a little bit like it, but is it the same? No, it's not the same.

[00:55:42]This seems to me to be a rather interesting point on a theoretical level to discuss this idea of ​​similarity.

[00:55:52]Um, several artists today do this, clearly they are not aware of it because they do it differently, but they practice this, that is, they do not imitate, but are similar. So, soon, if they want, if the lytic thought takes hold, they will realize that they are perhaps lytic, but the predominant condition, however, is not this. I'm not fooling you, nor am I fooling myself, this isn't it. At the moment, even now, the dominant condition is the one that is easy for the market.

[00:56:35]The market also plays a major role in influencing the production of art, and so a large portion of artists, whether through cunning or because they lack an adequate sense of self-criticism, succumb, in short, to habitual modes of expression, the predominant one being neo-expressionist.

[00:57:05]So I'll tell you something very crude, if anything, the artist Anziel Kiffer, who some may have seen recently at the Royal Palace, but who whenever he wants can be seen very well at the Bicocca where his famous towers are, which are simply fabulous, stupendous.

[00:57:35]Well, he is an artist of great strength, but it 's not because he isn't an elliptical artist, but in any case he doesn't give me notes of expressive originality.

[00:57:50]He is a great artist. He is a great artist. For what? For its compelling expressive power. Does it have any original qualities in terms of ideas? No, this is to tell you that the neo-expressionism I was referring to earlier is the dominant one.

[00:58:12]People generally like it.

[00:58:16]You know that the market is dominated by a few [clears throat] large galleries in harmony with the big ones, I use this word a little ironically, the owners of global finance and just as there are the owners of global finance, there also exist for a few months certainly large galleries that determine the art market determine it, but it is already significant that just a matter of months, certainly not of many years, some of these galleries are starting to feel the weight of the financial commitment and perhaps even tiredness from what they are doing and things will probably start to change anyway.

[00:59:15]But the fact is that there is a prevailing principle of homologation, whereby there is this neo-expressionism that imposes itself and dominates and which has nothing to do with elite art. This doesn't exist and therefore the brothers we were saying certainly the brothers we said artificial this long speech we dealt with it on day 16 speech and um what can I say artificial intelligence can be approached from many points of view, you can talk about it for two days, you can talk about it in 2 minutes, you can do many things and certainly the absolutely new condition in which man finds himself living. There is no doubt about this, nor can anyone doubt it. Well, with its positive and negative aspects, as in all things.

[01:00:17]It is also easy to say that every new technological contribution has positive and negative aspects.

[01:00:30]And the deep truth is that we have moved from a specific communication to a global communication.

[01:00:46]We reason, we feel, we communicate globally, even if we don't want to, we communicate globally and therefore we inevitably fall into the negative aspect of artificial intelligence, that is, the attenuation of our critical sense in using artificial intelligence.

[01:01:10]And this is the time when the expression I feel like using is this: every man for himself, that is, beware of harmful burdens because there are artificial intelligences, whoever can, whoever cannot will evidently succumb to this. And I wonder who can practice this critical sense. The people, what we once more easily called the populace.

[01:01:45]I don't think so, in short, I think it's with great bitterness that I say this, I believe that the people, more than ever before, are destined to remain people, because in these new conditions of global communication, of an artificial intelligence that homogenizes everything and we are all immediately available to be homogenized because it saves us effort among other things, the people first of all must have the economic means to practice critical thinking. Let's start by saying something banal, if you like, but if I have the problem of how to support myself every day and this will happen more and more widespread, I'm not even faced with the problem of whether I should treat artificial intelligence with a critical spirit, etc. And so people are destined to succumb.

[01:02:50]Who can afford to practice with money or without money? No, you have to be rich to practice critical thinking. If I were, I would have already given up.

[01:03:02]Then do it and maybe infect someone who can't say proselytize.

[01:03:08]It means not hiding what one does. Because maybe sometimes we can be pervaded by a little modesty in saying that I have some reservations about artificial intelligence. No, you are not up to date, then you are not in line with science, you are not in line with technology. No, no, no, I'm online. Yes, I'm online. Yes.

[01:03:29]Nowadays, I can read a text and tell if it was written by a human or by an artificial intelligence. I 'm hardly wrong, and many texts I read tell me that they pass for human texts.

[01:03:48]At least there's a strong collaboration, let's put it that way. But strong collaboration is not that I listen to a suggestion because, be careful, when it comes to suggestions, artificial intelligence is more capable than us, much more capable than us, there was no doubt about it. Intelligence has enormous data that we don't have and I say when we look for suggestions you give us something that is magnificent, wonderful. What problem do I have with it?

[01:04:17]I am able to distinguish between fake and non-fake, reliable and less reliable, plausible and implausible. Well, there it is a question of culture, evidently, and also of training in artificial intelligence.

[01:04:32]I often, evidently, close down when I receive texts that I can already see at first glance are, if not entirely, the product of artificial intelligence. Yes, if intelligence yes, it is intelligent. Yes, artificial intelligence or artificial hand, etc. etc. But they are also the result of an encounter. I accepted suggestions, I made my own, but the suggestion is a given, it is not a stylistic draft. The suggestion is a given. I take a piece of data that suggests things to me and so on.

[01:05:16]But then what I write is what I think, above all it was suggested to me by artificial intelligence. I share it.

[01:05:28]If I share it, that's fine. So, look, it's as if I wrote it.

[01:05:33]Thank you but it's as if I wrote it and that's fine. The game looks ridiculous, but it's not that simple, it's not that light. This game is very important. It's very important because, well, it's easy to fall victim to or succumb to this condition.

[01:05:58]And if fractals can help us play, artificial intelligence can help us play too, but with very little. There was a guy who, on the other hand, even before artificial intelligence was even talked about - and I'm certainly not referring to the 1930s when Mr. Turing was already starting to get a little carried away by artificial intelligence - but instead there were thinkers who had one thought - he talked precisely about risk society.

[01:06:35]Risk society means that, gentlemen, be careful, society today, so from now on is under risk, that is, it is continually exposed to risks.

[01:06:48]You say, "But has it always been like this, war or something else?" In short, yes, but the observation was more subtle, not only these blatant risks that may be similar to those of the past, but also unpredictable risks, above all unpredictable, risks in the most unexpected places, in the most unexpected situations, in short, a disturbing condition of risk. Here, this is the relationship we can have with artificial intelligence. But let 's close with this question.

[01:07:25]We've already said this, we've already said it. So the last, last scream, do you know what it says? Firstly, peace everywhere. I did n't just post this shout about peace to promote peace, especially since there's someone better than me at promoting peace, but hey, why does peace have to be our daily bread?

[01:07:53]If up to now I have mentioned the problems of dialogue, the importance of dialogue and I have also said that the basis for peace is dialogue, well, this lithic condition between flexibility, availability, dialogue, well, it is an interesting premise for peace. It facilitates, however, let's just say this, it facilitates peace and peace certainly compared to all the discussions we can have and perhaps certainly the most important thing that we should aim for as long as they allow us to.

[01:08:31]So, once you've done that, well, I'd say scroll really quickly and then I'll have a way, maybe. Here.

[01:08:40]Ah, go back. Here, he first drew a parallel between the open work and the elliptical work. What did he want?

[01:08:47]That right where the exhibition was held, the squashed circle at the Murima Foundation and the president of that foundation [clears throat] was a friend Roberto. That's also why together and with others they had founded that magnificent magazine called Alfabeta and therefore wanted to dedicate one of its showcases this tribute to Umberto Eco and the person who took the photograph had this idea and so he took this this photograph in which I hold the book on the elliptical work and there it needs no comments.

[01:09:25]Here, this one again, this one is really about harmony. Good old Kepler was not just a cosmologist, but he was many things, he was also a writer of fiction and horoscopes, he also dealt with horoscopes. So he has tried many fields. This is based on harmony because he really saw a special harmony in his vision of elliptical cosmology and this is precisely the cover of his book. Let's move on.

[01:10:05]This is what I was telling you before when I told you about gentle rationality.

[01:10:10]This photo takes us back to a restaurant that was in Milan. It's still there now, but it's no longer called Leo, that's what it used to be called.

[01:10:19]I was telling director Capelli about this lion before, and he had the ability to attract me because, among the various dishes [clears throat], there was one that was stimulating: the boiled potato, boiling hot in the oven, or rather boiling hot, which was split in two and then covered with butter and then caviar. It wasn't bad, I assure you. But why was it born? Because he had a cellar, I say, I had started some evenings that we called cena d'ora, that is, short dinner to talk about this lady who was of the hour, the voice of rationality I say, why aren't there spirits down in the cellar? And so we went downstairs and it's a moment in this cellar that had only one window because you know those were the years when smoking was allowed, so 20 people etc. in a cellar with only one window and everyone smoking, more or less everyone, in short it's fine etc. etc. The climate was certainly widespread. There was a small problem that this window was the only one that was simply painted, it didn't exist at all crazy, crazy. Let's move on.

[01:11:40]Here, this is about DAD, which still DAD brings us more artistic problems to Dada, to Dadaism which I then cut, I removed the final D, it made me become Dard. On this subject, there was then a dialogue with Pierre Stanini in which we discussed this proposal I was making about a DADà that no longer existed and a DAD that was establishing itself and an artist gave me this gift. I remember it was after the conference with this Dad in the form of a tie etc. etc. This was an evening [clearing throat] Dad spent in Rome.

[01:12:24]in a nightclub, the Fenice. This is my basic text, which you can then read from the book, so obviously we're not going to read it now.

[01:12:33]That's why it's somewhat likely that we'll be able to read it all in one night. It is true. Then there are the ellipticals, so the elliptical artists of the m are together those of last year and those of this year who are all together forming the elliptical art. So, let's write Caria very quickly, Acaria first who is Indian, but maybe you've already seen the exhibition, so you realized Japanese on Rai and she's here, you have her here in front of you, in short, this one is also a Polish girl who lives in electric Switzerland and starts first we mention Davide Buratti.

[01:13:17]Here, it's turned off now, but there's the computer itself which is a video made on the works and which gives further meaning and significance to the two works that are nearby, but the video can also stand as an autonomous work always based on the process.

[01:13:39]This was a Kimoko Indian.

[01:13:42]This African Zimbabwe, an Austrian.

[01:13:50]Here, did you see before? Yes, that's fine. And then this one is okay, she's a German girl who lives in London. This here is the date gallery. Oh, and then we move on.

[01:14:03]This is another Polish one, you'll see it at the bottom. This is a Chinese guy over there.

[01:14:09]If I'm going too fast, tell me, I'll slow down.

[01:14:12]Tiziana Lorenzelli, the cover you see there, is a maker.

[01:14:18]We talked about farming, by the way.

[01:14:19]The blue one installed on the left.

[01:14:22]On my left.

[01:14:23]Oh, that one.

[01:14:24]Yes.

[01:14:24]Oh, okay. The all blue one, no, the all blue one.

[01:14:29]If you show the photo they can also see it in the photo.

[01:14:32]This one was behind.

[01:14:34]Yes, this one in the foreground. Yes, the one in the foreground down at the bottom.

[01:14:37]Then there is also an overview where you see Google and then this Greek manetas.

[01:14:45]Here, this is American.

[01:14:48]This is an Italian woman who does opera.

[01:14:50]This one here on the using not using but close to the art of augmented reality, here, but which also in this case appropriately does not succumb to the procedural nature of the art of augmented reality, but appropriates it when it likes or even imitates it perhaps even better. And then this one here is a French girl called Chenber.

[01:15:20]that sends these messages all based on are honey-treated works.

[01:15:26]Hmm.

[01:15:29]This is a Chinese way. This, this here, is the left page and right page of one of my books, but you saw a time like this where there is a reading of our time before artificial intelligence. Here are the data I was talking about where the dialogue with there is published and this is the redemption for Europe because in addition to having held an exhibition, the first ever dedicated to a united Europe, 80 European artists who had a primarily European character rather than immediately Italian, German and so on. And then here they are, these are the banner on the ground was the spinsters, on the top left there is the cover and then the move moves to Cefalù and changes guise. It will always be a relationship between Europe and the United States based on fractals. Here, there is a collection of essays and also, at the same time, the catalogue of the first exhibition in Cefalù. You have these right here next to you.

[01:16:40]Here, this is the opening day of the exhibition.

[01:16:45]Here, we compared ourselves a little.

[01:16:48]This is still Mudima, a little behind, a moment behind Mudima where there is Daniele Lombardi, [clears throat] composer who sadly passed away a few years ago who left one of his compositions directly on the wall of the Mudima Foundation and this thing I brought closer to that poster that surrounds Animprosive Art, the exhibition held at the Biennale in '97 and with a by the way say interval and breathing which is a poster where the writing breathes because you see that it widens, it narrows, it widens, it narrows. It was poor Cesare Casati who did this work, a masterpiece, I must say, which conveyed the meaning of this principle of non- implosion. Not implosion. I was talking about non-implosion, not explosion and not even implosion. Let's move on. Here I am, I was telling you about the Ellican work before, right? Or the testimony of Rosario Genovese, Cristina Cari, Mander Brop, whom I told you about, and then Mongelli, Marina Vita, who made works that were close to elliptical opera, not necessarily elliptical art, but elliptical opera.

[01:18:10]This is dinner time, a dinner time event.

[01:18:14]A moment of dinner now. This too, yes.

[01:18:17]This one, on the other hand, is a conference held in a somewhat sad place, Chiazzano di Mezzegra, a somewhat sad place, in short, in the sense that some bad things have happened in the Mezzegra area and there was a conference held there on the international level on DAD, on the principle of DAD and there are very high notaries even from outside, there were also the Italians Mimo Rotella and several different figures. we discussed it extensively. Do you know what the paradox is?

[01:18:49]It's just that I keep the documents that have never been transcribed and never published. All right. And then and then this is precisely that exhibition Implosive Art was an integral part of the Venice Biennale catalogue.

[01:19:06]This is the general catalogue of the Venice Binale and inside there is also a space dedicated to this Anipo Art exhibition and there at the bottom right you will find the list of artists, about forty architects and artists. Artists who also played with new technologies and architects who were largely so-called deconstructionists, therefore suited to non-inclusiveness. You do n't know this, it's the one that And then finally instead there is this work that is preserved in Padua which depicts the figure precisely with this ellipse in his hand and it indicates the two foci and it indicates that one of the two foci is occupied by the sun and the other in my theory could be occupied instead by the Beautiful One.

[01:20:05]If there are questions, other things, or just a few comments to make, I'm happy to do so. What time is it?

[01:20:10]It's already 8pm, but yes, it's already 8am. Just a quick thing, greetings to everyone present and to the friends connected who also had the patience to perhaps follow or finished early and did well.

[01:20:25]So, thanks to everyone and thanks again to Maurizio Cadamuro.

[01:20:31]Thank you all, though, since this thanks is not limited to this circumstance, but to the entire initiative of the elliptico with Carta of this exhibition on the Ellis, and therefore I truly thank all the members of the steering committee and the executive committee, and then of course the president and the director Feruccio Capelli, a friend of the rights holder named Elio Franzini, whom I warmly greet, and all the other members of the board and then also the technical staff. Thank you all for this beautiful, enthusiastic, and, I must say, comforting collaboration, and for your patience with me because the topics are not easy, they are not simple, and I am not simple.

[01:21:22]Thanks again.

[01:21:23]Thank you all. Yes.