Dear Ana,
Finally here I am. Sorry for not communicating several days, I was feeling very ill. Also at the moment I’m in kind of depression and during that phase I rather not to communicate with the people. I find I’m boring during that period. And also thank you for continuing our dialogues here…
You said a lot of things in your long mail that was reaction on mine post ART IS POLITICS. So, I’ll start from that topic. Actually I’ve already told everything I think. Now I can just say that all examples that you gave, the one with Romeo and Juliet especially, in my opinion, just confirm my statement that everything is political. Even the way we love.
Well, you said that Romeo and Juliet met each other at the ball under the masks. And, I think it’s not by accident. They fall in love under the masks on a very social event - and it’s not something apolitical at all! Having a masks on their faces they weren’t Romeo and Juliet, they weren’t Capuletti and Montechi, they weren’t ‘social beings’, they weren’t from the families in conflict, they were, let’s say ‘freed’ from that. So, they fall in love freely. But social constructions were their barrier to love. And at the end by killing themselves, by killing one Romeo Capuletti and one Juliet Montechi (their social beings) they become ‘free’ again. They killed themselves because they were social beings, social constructions which was a barrier to their love. Maybe more explicit situation we have in Wagner’s Tristan and Isolda. At the end, when they had already drunk a poison, that was the strongest and the freest moment of their love. In the time between they had drunk a poison (by doing that they knew that they already killed themselves, their social beings, their constructions) and the moment of their dead – the moment before the poison started to influence them self, it’s the only moment they experienced free love. The moment of their freedom and happiness.
And I know, now you would say: “I agree with you, art is politics, everything is politics. But where does that leave me or you or Breda or any audience too, or Romeo and Juliet for that matter? There is a reason Romeo’s face was perfect to Juliet, even before he unmasked it and it fell into place.”
I think answer is clear: that political situation leave them to death!
2. About this: “And, I do want you to individualise your experiences, as you say. Otherwise, how can I relate to what you’re really saying to me in any real way? Other than intellectually, of course. Which is easy enough on the face of it although it’s one of the reasons, at least it is for me, that you have to ask “ I thought you met me better after all this dialogues” and I have to answer. No.”
Dear Ana, for me there is no differences between intellectual and personal. It’s the same thing for me. If I said something that for you can look too intellectual, it’s really my personal experience. I am thinking about my experiences and also some experiences are intellectual. Also, the medium of this communication is on words, by writing the posts, and it’s something conceptual by itself. That’s mean that we are transforming any other our experiences into words, on thoughts…
3. About this: “I’m not going to interpret your prior line “Dear Ana, there is only one world!” as a sarcastic provocation but as a genuine offer of continued friendship or whatever our version of that is here.”
Of course that it wasn’t sarcastic, it was suggestive.
Big HUG
Danilo
