lux

Less than five? Impossible.

and I'll tell you more... criticism is the art that becomes self-aware... there you go!

Luzzato Fegiz?? But is he a critic?? I mean, I'm not really well-informed about critics, but if Luzzato Fegiz is a critic, Emilio Fede is Diliberto's number one fan... If he had written a review like yours, my comments would have been the same, since the reasons for criticizing your review would have remained exactly the same; I pay attention to the content, the author's name is the last thing I care about.

Then think about it, when you put on the Black Album and you dialectically silence the entire discography of Metallica... aren’t you perhaps making a critical judgment? Do you not take on the role of “critic” when you write a review? Let’s say that maybe you use a different criterion to judge, one that differs from mine, but it is still criticism.

But of course, my ideal of criticism should be free from any influence of power. It’s true that the artist is conditioned by the judgments of critics, but always remember that the artist shouldn’t think about the critic themselves and what they will express in their judgment regarding their work; rather, they should have an innate sense of criticism (which develops through experience). If now I start playing a redundant, baroque, self-indulgent guitar solo, like Petrucci, just to masturbate my instrument, the light bulb should flicker in me suggesting, "Hey, Lux, what garbage are you creating?" Awareness, that’s what’s needed. Criticism, then, is not homogeneous. If you adopt the principle of expressiveness, for example, you must judge based on that. As Weber asserted, the only subjective aspect of a method should be the choice of the principle you intend to use at the beginning of the “research.” Once that principle is chosen subjectively, it is mandatory to remain consistent with it and navigate and untangle accordingly. Always keeping in mind that every critique (and thought in general) completes and integrates the others. There is no such thing as Criticism; there are different opinions that interact with one another and complement each other. So, in light of various thoughts from critics, I can personally and individually rework my personal thought. I can also have my own idea without listening to critics, OBVIOUSLY, but the opinions of others always enrich. Criticism should be a source of further reflection, not a dictator of thinking styles.

Yes, but paradoxically when you talk about work you remind me of Marx and his relentless battle against the alienation of workers. Regarding the Genius in Art, here in Italy it is not recognized; there are no saints. This is demonstrated by the sales charts of records, with Vasco Rossi at the top, doing turnover with Laura Pausini and Gigi D'Alessio. The concept of avant-garde, expressiveness, and especially the notion of Critique does not exist in the mind of the average Italian. You are averse to cultural "critique," but thank goodness it exists. It is a reference point to cling to in this desert of artistic awareness. And I'm not talking about Scaruffi or Lester Bangs in particular. I'm talking about developing a critical approach in one's own consciousness. So that, when "notte prima degli esami, oggi" comes out in theaters, the cinemas themselves remain empty. And then instill in the sick minds of us poor Italians (experts in filthy rhetoric) that those who achieve success and celebrity are NOT the best of the bunch. In fact, they are probably mediocre and merely the most sellable and commodifiable. Thus, here lies the dichotomous relationship between Art and Mass.

Well, it was clear that Alias was Vic, as for Tabba, I don't know. If Vic creates 786 Fakes, it's not easy to keep track of them ;-) at this point, Sanjuro could be a Vic fake too (but I don’t think so). I greet you!

Sure, I agree (I have a medium cultural level, the fact is that we discussed things that might fall within my speculative abilities, but if the discussion had perhaps taken other paths, I might have just stayed silent due to a clear lack of topics). Regarding the idea that those who do not work do not eat, it seems like a statement that kills intelligence, but... without money, HOW do you eat? If you're supported, that's one thing, but in the contrary case??

for Tabba In D-Shirt: to "understand" Music, it’s not enough to have a vast culture. It takes (and is probably more important) the sensitivity to perceive a possible "art" in front of a record (the kind that helps you discern gold from shit).

Alias, do you really think you've enlightened us?? I mean, at least personally, you said things I agree with, but they're quite obvious, if I may say so. That the Italian political class is what it is, is well-known. That politics, fundamentally, is a joke, too. That wherever there are holders of power and subordinates, there’s always and anyway a perverse game, that's known as well. I am increasingly convinced that work (JOB, as you say) doesn't ennoble man, but limits him in every aspect of his existence. But unfortunately, there’s no alternative. You might be well-off, and that makes it easy for you to talk like this. If there are people who completely nullify themselves as individual beings for 1,300 euros a month, it's probably because there is no PRACTICAL ALTERNATIVE. You can keep feeding us esoteric practices and tantric orgies. Man is damned; he can't lose himself in the meanders of the spiritual infinite; he has to immediately think about how to get by to make it to the next day. Think about it, Vic smile (there's not much to laugh about, really).