game-over-cat-fish-stelly-riesling-2015-hmg-2-jaisini

And with advance to REALITY COPY there’s certainly no way of changing this perception only enforcing it, nothing in reality is good enough for “REALITY COPY” that is just another paradox that is not futuristic.
We might be still skeptical about the arrival of REALITY COPY, but its only before its sold at the supermarkets.
What would happen after “Reality Copy” when the progress of all possible levels of true “reality copy” (in technical sense, not psychologically-philosophical) are achieved. The reality hence is copied and sealed.
Technology won’t stop there… one wonders. What is next.
In political sense when reality in representation is something embraced by conservative social power than with “reality copy” the conservative power is the dominating from the social point of view having new level of reality and it’s copy to be controlled.
*seems like the only possibly alternative to REALITY COPY could be ultra radical Invisibility)
In principle the artist aims to deform the reality subjectively to create not the “reality copy” lacking such skills but to convey the artistic poetic goal of expressing whatever given artist wants to express.
In a matter of “reality copy” what is left for the artist to argue with and deform… to question and test… Nothing really changes socially except for more pressure applied to the issue of dealing with self-image and tools to “sell” When a person changes the image the higher the technology the more transformed is the final product.
The progress of mental growth is just as conservative as control on the “visual image of reality” and its copy.
The ongoing technological progress is irreversible as it carries percent of good with bad,
It is common knowledge how for instance internet is benefit and at the same time does damage. A person who knows about the addiction and suffers would acquire the knowledge and hope from the place the person suffers the internet of course.
Same thing is with photography and video. Reality copy would add more psychological problems to the present but create more visual attraction of true-life experience with whatever could be rediscovered in Lifecopy style. Probably is benefits pornography since it will continue same as consumption of food. The basic things… Consumerism benefits since it is super-trained for “instant reach” affect and will commercially exploit the “reality copy” to sell more of “reality copy” gadgets the phones, screens, etc.
New generation of people will repeat the cycle in new technological means of having “reality copy” as nothing new but similar to any visual information currently available.
The creative people are the ones BEHIND the time it seems in a matter of “reality copy” and being unable to have anything is an alternative.
The Invisible alternative is the ONLY ONE to question “reality copy”
That is the power of UNKNOWN.
Techno progress can deal in “reality” bringing higher resolution to the fore to sell new generation of phones and gadgets.
But it really doesn’t change the philosophical issue of questions asked by philosophers, what is life, what is art, why do we live. Questions remain unanswered when techno progress veils those questions with the promise that higher technology would bring the end to all unanswered questions and answer them for people.
So far the techno advance puts the artistic, literary and philosophical field out of business. As when people get the toys (gadgets) and the playground (the podium of internet) the art is irrelevant and completely disconnected from the social phenomenon of self-representation. Art is not interested to question something with no philosophical substance to it.
The commercial art is willing to supply more stuff for consumerism. If its reality-copy than someone empowered by financial wealth (born rich) would come up with more decorative solutions that could serve REALITY COPY in needed fashion, add more details to the “reality set” to those who can afford it.
Same way it is now when people with means live with more things.
“Reality Copy” of people without means would look just as it is in reality, gray and unexciting. To help people without means the software would offer “decoration” solutions to add the faux details able to transform the surroundings to less depressing. It would enter the person into “life copy” of vacation at Caribbean resorts… etc.
What in such situation could be philosophically questioned, if nothing changed in human morality, but techno advance manage to involve people into self-entertainment to such degree that a person is no longer interested to read books about other people or watch movies and hear news. Self-promotion is the ongoing and time-consuming thing. One has to research the “popular” topics.
As to participating in reality activities, there’s the issue of not having time for anything that doesn’t deal with self-promotion and earning a living.
ART commerce is growing commercially going Industrial since supplying consumer goods is always rewarding in sales. On the other hand this and techno revolution reduces interest of writers and philosophers to dig in depths where there is no depth. It makes such people disengaged with the process. When there are no critical voices to the established situation or some few art critics pretend to do what is expected of them – know about current situation not only on the art scene but at large – socially, and have strong voice against the trends that contribute to the lowering of culture. There’s no more liberal freedom since nobody reads the newspapers. Even if the working critics were principal enough to write articles and books they know their voice would not be heard. They are not vociferous about anything at all because there’s a concept of supporting and art endavour since art is in decline and anything that relates to art needs their support.
There are no voices to oppose the current situation for many reasons such as no younger people would be interested in such undertaking also for many reasons of being disoriented in expectation of techno changes or living their me-life.
The young ones are the invisibility movers, every day someone who is young, information and internet savvy adds the invisibility statement to their online identity. I saw it on tumblr and Iheart. (samples year web address – source)
Art consumer goods sell and make the seller get the goods since sale is the rule.
Art critics silently agree and actually it seems if they even try to disagree there is nothing in art that presently shows any direction against the established art situation.
There isn’t anything not saying a serious claim to deny aesthetic values of the art present and past, to turn away from any influence and history by the fashion avant-garde to question than resuscitate (bring back from death) art that lost vitality and practically is a dead art of dominating taste in an authoritarian culture and conformity.
Bring new blood to reinvent the art into weapon against the outlived old and positioning itself as direct opposition AGAINST art that represents culture of the present time.
Culture of consumerism that turned into visual consumerism with the help of internet is hard to oppose and challenge in any attempt of making bid public art spectacle, won’t challenge any concept but serve certain need for entertainment.

Invisible art of Paul Jaisini stands against all that is dominating and culturally regressive in the present, false visual multiplicity that imply democracy and absence of segregation in visual sphere, all inclusiveness.
On so many levels Paul Jaisini brings knowledge of how the present condition reflect on a mind. (non-linear thinking, information processing, constant analysis is the advanced state of high analytical creative mind /osd, adad is the side effect but there are more worse side effects) Shows the burst to create in manifestation of genius mind (can do any task without training) but unable to maintain the creative process as wholesome, bored with the immediate results. Invisibility is theoretical stability and result of high impact activity that gives fast result of creativity and genius realized in art. Then instability in the fact of the created art un–preserved and lost, destroyed.
On a lower level of people who start building some blog with enthusiasm dedicating time, research than abandoning it to become digital graveyard demonstrates inability to continue and search for new. Inability to face what yesterday seemed interesting and capture someone’s mind to give the creative boost.
(fast life, no sleep, high tech knowledge, constant search for new, unsatisfied… new is old – altogether supports “CONSUMERISM” when buying is haul more than physically needed, quantity is the need for new.
Invisible art as a concept seem to attract wide public and elite in such diametrically opposed combination, of people without high aesthetics in mind or the complete opposite illuminati-culturati. People with average or below average taste and aesthetic requirements are as interested and supportive as the elite. When it comes to someone in the middle- another phenomena, quite often those who are educated and intelligent take a stand against even one mention of the art being possibly somehow invisible.
These people respond very well and willing to agree with the concept as Invisible art is brought to them by mass media. In the beginning I was using internet to send out essays and saw the proof that as avant-garde wanted to reach people who never acquired artistically developed taste the invisible art was and now is more than ever suits their taste even to degree of obsession.
That’s adds insult to injury when nobody even pay attention and there’s nothing to offer as the alternative.
They want something tangible as the alternative, the grown philosophy to brew in the minds of people and artists as the sign of time.
The invisibility is the idea that has the power to antagonize the “reality copy” but not in a sense that is widely used in the present time. To express social isolation in case of the teens as seen on tumblr. (examples and variations of Invisibility trend in primitive pictures shared every day in such huge quantities no art publication ever knew, teens and pre-teens are those with passion among the rest of us, when they spread the word it goes far, same as the early internet time, when the word would go far distances to large number of people)
Historically known of the episodes when many artists tried to create the so-called invis art but it really didn’t involve much creativity except for the concepts they came up with, but in reality it involved the reduction of visual means and performance art when the audience came up with more ideas acting around the non-existent artwork than the artist.
Personally I discovered high interactive value of the “PRESUMED” invisible painting when I was getting a lot of responses with very interesting commentaries from the people who actually insisted I was sending them info about the invisible artworks. I never made any claims when sending written essays. People decided for me and probably this is the best way for the interactive dialogue to let people decide.
The only known versions of invisible artworks would be not something that can turn into a philosophical school of thought but random reductions of visual means of various artists. It all came to same MOA that involved frames etc., not the process of creativity or life long creativity that would show how such artistic philosophy develops and what various periods of the artist’s life produce by his belief in his artistic style.
The known precedents of exhibiting so-called invisible art were always random statements that never continued to develop in a distinct style.
What one usually expects is a blank canvas, a picture with some written ideas which is more a topography art, a picture that is in a wrapping of covered up and is a found object art. The only known artists who continued wrapping is Christo but his art is not considered invisible even though he hides or attempts to hide what is inside the wrapping….
Recently same as in more distant periods in time many artists are trying to reduce their visual means. There’s a difference though. In previous times artists ventured into reduction of visual means with more ease. The artworks from older times with reduced visual means had much less labor and look less worked on.
Now the reduction of visual means is something that doesn’t fall under the artistic philosophy when an artists trying to prevent an overkill of the visual imagery.
If Rothko worked on his abstract painting laboriously than in current standards his work would be considered not sale’s worthy. Now to be sale-worthy the abstraction is worked to show a lot of workmanship. Surely Rothko doesn’t want anyone to see a lot of workmanship quite the opposite, he wanted his paintings to look fresh and not overdone. And in current standards he would have to toil on every dot in his painting to perfect it.
Today’s abstract paintings look like very hard-worked on simulations of surfaces that look like some textures (varieties of plain or distressed surfaces /stone and whatever is the decorative surfaces of abstracts, patterns that are used in interior design.
Overworked, machine-like is expensive looking enough to sell in the gallery but it creates a certain amount of fatigue in time. The commerce knows about it, the fatigue would bring the art buyer to buy more to add some new life to the art collection ed infinitum.
Art commerce wants more art collectors in the times when art is selling and makes money and should be called what it is – decorative luxury items.
Art or luxury decorative items was always meant for people with wealth and they always wanted to get their money worth.
When abstract painting is done in a manner to be worthy of selling price it is not creativity of conceptual thought and has no abstracted meaning. The craft of simulating surfaces is widely known and is used in interior design. When it is unique that no other craftsman can repeat it is recognized nearly as jewelry and rag-making, etc. All the items that cost money due to the high workmanship and hours, months and sometimes years of creation. Same way was built the historical hand-made furniture. Same way the current abstract decorations will hold in time. It is made for someone as rich as royalties but it doesn’t mean that it has anything to do with artistic creativity, the most mysterious and unexplained human phenomenon.
So anyone who is interested to earn money as a maker of such luxury items and be able to place them in the store for sale – the art gallery, can come up with own recipe for surface replica and start working will find a paying job on the art scene nowadays…
It doesn’t involve questioning of morals, times and life. It involves many hours of working and ability to produce varieties of the same surfaces in good taste. Instead of questioning human spirituality, or questioning art means that someone considers irrelevant and outdated, not for any breakthrough to create something revolutionary new.

Posted by gig london on 2015-07-17 16:54:12

Tagged: , And with advance to REALITY COPY there’s certainly no way of changing this perception only enforcing it , nothing in reality is good enough for “REALITY COPY” that is just another paradox that is not futuristic. We might be still skeptical about the arrival of REALITY COPY , but its only before its sold at the supermarkets. What would happen after “Reality Copy” when the progress of all possible levels of true “reality copy” (in technical sense , not psychologically-philosophical) are achieved. The reality hence is copied and sealed. Technology won’t stop there… one wonders. What is next. In political sense when reality in representation is something embraced by conservative social power than with , It is common knowledge how for instance internet is benefit and at the same time does damage. A person who knows about the addiction and suffers would acquire the knowledge and hope from the place the person suffers the internet of course. Same thing is w , screens , etc. New generation of people will repeat the cycle in new technological means of having “reality copy” as nothing new but similar to any visual information currently available. The creative people are the ones BEHIND the time it seems in a matter of “rea , what is life , what is art , why do we live. Questions remain unanswered when techno progress veils those questions with the promise that higher technology would bring the end to all unanswered questions and answer them for people. So far the techno advance puts the artistic , literary and philosophical field out of business. As when people get the toys (gadgets) and the playground (the podium of internet) the art is irrelevant and completely disconnected from the social phenomenon of self-representation. Art is not interested , add more details to the “reality set” to those who can afford it. Same way it is now when people with means live with more things. “Reality Copy” of people without means would look just as it is in reality , gray and unexciting. To help people without means the software would offer “decoration” solutions to add the faux details able to transform the surroundings to less depressing. It would enter the person into “life copy” of vacation at Caribbean resorts… e , if nothing changed in human morality , but techno advance manage to involve people into self-entertainment to such degree that a person is no longer interested to read books about other people or watch movies and hear news. Self-promotion is the ongoing and time-consuming thing. One has to res , there’s the issue of not having time for anything that doesn’t deal with self-promotion and earning a living. ART commerce is growing commercially going Industrial since supplying consumer goods is always rewarding in sales. On the other hand this and tec , and have strong voice against the trends that contribute to the lowering of culture. There’s no more liberal freedom since nobody reads the newspapers. Even if the working critics were principal enough to write articles and books they know their voice wou , every day someone who is young , information and internet savvy adds the invisibility statement to their online identity. I saw it on tumblr and Iheart. (samples year web address – source) Art consumer goods sell and make the seller get the goods since sale is the rule. Art critics sile , to turn away from any influence and history by the fashion avant-garde to question than resuscitate (bring back from death) art that lost vitality and practically is a dead art of dominating taste in an authoritarian culture and conformity. Bring new bloo , won’t challenge any concept but serve certain need for entertainment. Invisible art of Paul Jaisini stands against all that is dominating and culturally regressive in the present , false visual multiplicity that imply democracy and absence of segregation in visual sphere , all inclusiveness. On so many levels Paul Jaisini brings knowledge of how the present condition reflect on a mind. (non-linear thinking , information processing , constant analysis is the advanced state of high analytical creative mind /osd , adad is the side effect but there are more worse side effects) Shows the burst to create in manifestation of genius mind (can do any task without training) but unable to maintain the creative process as wholesome , bored with the immediate results. Invisibility is theoretical stability and result of high impact activity that gives fast result of creativity and genius realized in art. Then instability in the fact of the created art un–preserved and lost , destroyed. On a lower level of people who start building some blog with enthusiasm dedicating time , research than abandoning it to become digital graveyard demonstrates inability to continue and search for new. Inability to face what yesterday seemed interesting and capture someone’s mind to give the creative boost. (fast life , no sleep , high tech knowledge , constant search for new , unsatisfied… new is old – altogether supports “CONSUMERISM” when buying is haul more than physically needed , quantity is the need for new. Invisible art as a concept seem to attract wide public and elite in such diametrically opposed combination , of people without high aesthetics in mind or the complete opposite illuminati-culturati. People with average or below average taste and aesthetic requirements are as interested and supportive as the elite. When it comes to someone in the middle- another p , quite often those who are educated and intelligent take a stand against even one mention of the art being possibly somehow invisible. These people respond very well and willing to agree with the concept as Invisible art is brought to them by mass media. I , the grown philosophy to brew in the minds of people and artists as the sign of time. The invisibility is the idea that has the power to antagonize the “reality copy” but not in a sense that is widely used in the present time. To express social is , teens and pre-teens are those with passion among the rest of us , when they spread the word it goes far , same as the early internet time , when the word would go far distances to large number of people) Historically known of the episodes when many artists tried to create the so-called invis art but it really didn’t involve much creativity except for the concepts they came up , but in reality it involved the reduction of visual means and performance art when the audience came up with more ideas acting around the non-existent artwork than the artist. Personally I discovered high interactive value of the “PRESUMED” invisib , not the process of creativity or life long creativity that would show how such artistic philosophy develops and what various periods of the artist’s life produce by his belief in his artistic style. The known precedents of exhibiting so-called invisible a , a picture with some written ideas which is more a topography art , a picture that is in a wrapping of covered up and is a found object art. The only known artists who continued wrapping is Christo but his art is not considered invisible even though he hides or attempts to hide what is inside the wrapping…. Recently same , he wanted his paintings to look fresh and not overdone. And in current standards he would have to toil on every dot in his painting to perfect it. Today’s abstract paintings look like very hard-worked on simulations of surfaces that look like some texture , patterns that are used in interior design. Overworked , machine-like is expensive looking enough to sell in the gallery but it creates a certain amount of fatigue in time. The commerce knows about it , the fatigue would bring the art buyer to buy more to add some new life to the art collection ed infinitum. Art commerce wants more art collectors in the times when art is selling and makes money and should be called what it is – decorative luxury items. A , etc. All the items that cost money due to the high workmanship and hours , months and sometimes years of creation. Same way was built the historical hand-made furniture. Same way the current abstract decorations will hold in time. It is made for someone as rich as royalties but it doesn’t mean that it has anything to do with art , the most mysterious and unexplained human phenomenon. So anyone who is interested to earn money as a maker of such luxury items and be able to place them in the store for sale – the art gallery , can come up with own recipe for surface replica and start working will find a paying job on the art scene nowadays… It doesn’t involve questioning of morals , times and life. It involves many hours of working and ability to produce varieties of the same surfaces in good taste. Instead of questioning human spirituality , or questioning art means that someone considers irrelevant and outdated , not for any breakthrough to create something revolutionary new.