The Anatomy of the Sin………………………………………………A Autopsy of the Forgiveness
Eyes, mouth and nose: the separation of the senses. That which comes out of the mouth, is what enters in the ears. Forgiveness and Sin, as the sides of a polygon. The eyes are the angle of the judgement.
So it occurs the possession: the image of the senses.
The Christianism, understood as the philosophy of the Occident, misunderstands completely its origin and its own functioning.
The eyes, the regret¸ also understood as the pleasure. The bathtub, the ears, the rest: it must be fulfilled with the tears of the suffering, for the rest to be obtained, in the silence of the senses.
It’s in the ear that the sex is converted. The bathroom possesses the structure of a box, belongs to the group of drawings The Black Box: and also integrates the group The Multidimension: a sequence of drawings that show all the dependences of a house, which are the feelings of a bedroom, the feelings of the living room and, in the case, The Bathroom: the bathroom possesses a special representativeness, for being about a core of processment of ideas: the feelings of the machine.
Not even Paul managed to contextualize so well the sentiment in question as the image of the bathroom.
The circles on the background refer to eyes and chains: are the safety and the fear: for this the sensation that is being seen, but that there you are protected.
The tongue is The Word, but it may become the Sin. It’s interesting and very important the observation that the structure of the will is mounted, is fixed over the rug, which represents The Desires, that which births naturally from the earth: but, for being over the floor, were already identified.
The same happens with the ear: it was also fixed on the floor, his roots with the Earth were cut. The eyes are the organs that would belong to Heaven: it’s interesting that the ears are turned to heaven and the eyes are turned to the earth: because the senses are angled: the structure of the will would be naturally stuck to the earth, just as the ears also.
Are part of the structure of the will: the sanitary vase, mouth, tongue, nose and rug:
Being the nose, the conscience;
The mouth, the will;
The tongue, the Word;
The rug, the Desires;
The tongue is rendered as The Word and also, The Sin. The tongue is something uncontrollable, because the tongue is something that wasn’t fixed. It is linked with the rug, the structure of the desires, for this, the mouth tries to control it. There’s an understanding that the word has the power to control the sound, and that speaking is a human differential: it fitted to the idiom the sublime work of tying, functionalize, limit the access to the sonority. Nor even when he sings the man emits natural sounds.
The tongue, naturally would be involved with the sound, with the taste, with the flavor: passages with the Earth: and this is its relation with the sin. The tongue is the organ that is associated to the serpent, it was how the serpent came until Eve, however, the tongue is involved with the will, fixed in the structure of the will.
Without the tongue, there wouldn’t exist The Word, there wouldn’t be an idiom, neither the confirmation of the image. Without the Word, the man would not be able to validate that which he believes.
To enter in this bathroom is a spiritual journey to the interior of something: is a place that every Christian knows very well: the bathroom is the technique, the method utilized, in the system of cleanup, where the impurities are eliminated.
Below the bathroom is the drainage system: and it refers to the hell, the sewage where the garbage is treated. It belongs to another drawing.
For the Christianism, on the example of what happens in the Judaism, the feelings are treated inside a box, where they seek an isolation of the natural. Many times I say that the Christianism has no passages, it doesn’t explains how occurs the exchange of feeling between the man, the nature, and the gods.
The conception of the bathroom, possesses it natural-relative: on it, the structure of the will would be a tree, the eyes would be a fruit, and the ears, the earth, where the seed felt.
The Word cannot be planted without the deserving, which only comes with the suffering: for another way, that which would be planted would be the sin, and not the forgiveness. But is easy to comprehend the relations, as if that which enters by the mouth was the sin, the nose will identify it: and will attribute a guilty conscience: and the Christian will throw up in the vase, in the same form that the vase will be putting out. In the same form, he will go to the bathroom to clean up himself with his own tears, regret, perceiving that he stepped away of the pleasure of God. Then, he will go to the bathtub and will take a bath of immersion: will dive his ears in his own tears: and he’ll fell clean, forgave of the sin he committed. It’s something that the Christian does all the time: he spends the most part of his life inside this bathroom: and I risk saying that, indeed, he never came out of there: but deep inside, this is about a posse over the senses:
A powerful system of conversion. Even though it’s not perceivable, it’s still a good explanation of what happened with the eyes, the mouth and the ear: a plain architecture,, the geometry of the senses: Picasso and Dali would like to have seen this drawing: it would give much sense to much of their works, of the much that they did, and the few that they didn’t see: of course, would find a thousand defects, because indeed I’m not a big drawer, neither painter, nor less yet an artist: but what’s of so special in a Mona Lisa or a Michelangelo painting, or even, of Da Vinci…? For whom these people worked to ? and how much of their art was only about a reflection? That their critics were always empty, and indeed were only seeking for a confirmation, a validation that nothing escapes the plain, that all their artistic content were and would be and will be always stuck to one unique dimension.
These drawings are intimately related: and for this initial phase, where the histories are being contextualized, will serve as support, once the geometry presented, the rationality in question, may seem strange, for more that the interpretation efforts itself, it will find untransposable barriers. There’s no vanity on expose them, only indeed there’s a difficulty on the understanding of the presented material: and marking once more that I get deeply upset with so many explanations. But if I don’t do it, others won’t do.
It’s something that I ask constantly to the artists: what’s their relation with the religion.
But indeed, this doesn’t explains the nature, only how the nature came to the ears, where the word was seeded.
The bathroom reflects the structure of the floor: something raised over the earth. But indeed, before being a bathroom, that was about a beautiful forest: and the desires sprouted from the earth, as simple germination. Is how the essentialities were treated: inside a Christian Bathroom: Between the death and the sin, a failured desire .
The sound redeemed itself, somehow… but its timing marked a compass and a rhythm well marked: the sound was also geometrized, and this may be called language, and that such a feeling so framed is indeed a sound that possess some representativeness along the nature: if this human feelings are indeed naturals. An artist lives in the bathroom in the same mode on which habitate a machine: the body uses it as a tool. There’s not for one to wait that anything produced won’t fall rotten of a metal tree.
Let’s think on David Gilmour: what’s the influence of the guitar, an instrument which he didn’t created…[?], how much of the sound was of Gilmour, and how much of the sound was of the guitar..?
What’s the influence of the death on his music…[?]: I’m not talking about Time nor of Wish You Were Here, I talk about his partnership with Roger Walters, another Christian… indeed that they imagined things while they were writing, while they played and produced their songs: but what did they felt in their hearts?
How many people have already committed suicide listening to Pink Floyd..? leaving a suicide note “ wish you were here”, “ hey, you..! ..have you ever heard comfortably numb..?” : how many times did you listened to Time and thought you were dying…[?], mainly, after listen to that woman screaming…? Many thought that she was coming, for understanding that she was in pain, she was suffering. There’s a special pleasure on Pink Floyd’s music: the death: Gilmour is constantly saying goodbye for himself, and don’t accept this separation. Inclusive, it was something that I’ve readed on the interview of David Gilmour, I mean, of the few times that he spoke, because, it was the guitar that spoke for him: curiously, he said that he would’ve given up on God because he wouldn’t have convinced himself of the immortality, that would have terrified him since his 13 years old. I won’t give source because this is an informal comment. The Pink Floyd is, for me, reference, as Kurt Cobain, that ended up killing himself: it’s strange how the death persecutes the artist, in the same mode that the artist persecutes the death: it seems that they’re running away from each other, but they’re meeting up all the time, as if there was no origin neither why.
Did someone ever got to masturbate in the bathroom listening to Pink Floyd? Have any one ever got to dance listening to Pink Floyd…? I’m not talking about moving the arms, I mean dance…[?] Or, otherwise, the music of Pink ‘ is only to relax…’, ‘ to sleep’ , or ‘to rest’ ..? and so realize that the music of Pink is not sexual[…]. In the same mode it’s impossible to not associate Pink’s music’s with the drugs [cannabis, acid, heroin, alcohol and cocaine]: you may talk about environment, on which the music describes….the music describes what, exactly..? forms..? some kind of pleasure…? colors…? Images..? words..? what reaches the ears, exactly..? and what do the eyes see, exactly..? we talk about the Creation as something finished, but the artist understands as part of something: and mysteriously, that he’s part of this something also.
This strange localization compromises him in his results: it’s not only about the limit of his expression: because the artist, on himself, is already limited, to his natural senses. But would the artist have the exact comprehension of his natural perception, as to his natural ‘talents’…? They’re enveloped by the conscience of his feelings: the understanding of a final.
There’s no single music in the Occident that escaped of the involvement with the death.
Nor less interesting that, in determined point on his life, the artist affirms that his art ended: and that now he’s going to live as an actor, representing all he did, even listening to his own music once again, will live of the past, because the end arrived: the art has a must of goodbye, and the seek for something which never lost, carries with itself the wounds that the earth gave you, and the artist, in determined moment, may lead to the comprehension that , having arrived there, was indeed a curse: wanted to erase everything he did: want to return to the beginning and live another life, maybe, or more yet, that all that was a moment of illumination: but what illumination was that…[?]: and that, indeed, nothing of that was yours: it was an interpret of something, equal to the instruments that the art gave you: and that, for this so, all of that should be delivered to its legitimate owners.
Is what I do nowadays: to Christ what is of Christ, and to the Earth what’s of the Earth. It’s how I do when I find a can of Coke-Cola in the middle of the forest. In the same form, is what I do when I find a plant in a vase: I give her back to the Earth. The artist, however, understands this as an option of life: it’s when the conversion occurs: and he passes to use that which the earth gave him, misunderstanding why someday, simply, his art disappeared.
But if we ask Gilmour what was the music that he didn’t sold, if there was any music that he would’ve made and didn’t do it, indeed all he did has its beauty, to the point of affirming that that doesn’t contains any defect, but: will it be that, for the ear of the artist, the perfect one day existed? Will it the perfection be something that the artist one day looked for, for this, trained and educated his movements? What kind of influence he received? And comes the point on which you ask yourself, “What are we talking about, exactly…?”: and I say: of the use, of the instrument, of the tool: that which he converted. Maybe it doesn’t explains that what he created, but that which he lost.
It’s what the bathroom refers to: it’s a tool that the man created to talk with God: in that moment, God will be listening to you. There’s no other form of talking to God that’s not through suffering, of the isolation and of the loneliness.