A Sarcastic Art Philosophy: "Atomism Aesthetics"

Is "Art is Everywhere?"  Should we have "Art for Art's sake?"

 

The Sarcastic Answer:  Only if it serves a progressive purpose.

Sarcastic Purpose of this Tract:

To create a unified belief system that properly gives voice to both individual creativity and the oppressed masses.  Aesthetic atomization theory plans society and abstraction in an equitable way while combining modern leftist ideologies.  It is the only way to get the public to have confidence in the truly moral re-ordering plan for society because greedy "right-wing ideologies" are already backwards, simplistic, and incapable of future thinking.  Atomization destroys oppression through emotion and thus, a revolutionary society will emerge because of the DNA and the expressionism of the oppressed worker.  The following theories are infinitely better than the horrors and oppression of the Republic thus far. 

With a diverse fellowship craving for aesthetic unity, atomism theory's stated mission is to reconcile individual creativity, aesthetics, Stalinism, socialism, Trotskyism, modern environmentalism, recent sexual identity trends, anti-Zionism, anti-Republic sentiments, and modern Progressivism.   Through art, feeling, and emotion, this way of life will probably change everyone's world.

Sarcastic Definitions and Grammatical Parts of Speech

•  atom= an individual mind (time + emotion), the subject noun.

• emotion=aesthetic= indescribable activity when you connect with art.  A feeling inside of the physical body of a person because perception is connected to a single person's nervous system and time (passive, internal verb)

• expression= creativity physical action corresponding to an individual's emotion (action verb)

• art=an expression of emotion that is detected by something else (object)

• form= all non sense information, oppressive to emotion, and negative emotionally to humans.

• stimuli= all physical evidence as detected by the senses of a person. 

• shared meanings= words and concepts in a language with the same meaning or definition.  They impose and thus are immoral.

• Revolution= state of flux, of perfection where the individual (atom) has the unfettered ability to express, therefore a never-ending freedom of expression.

• Mob= a group of positive expressionists.

• fascist= all negative expressionists.  A creatively expanded term evolved from its 20th Century origins to define all persons who oppress any expression.  An oppressive and immoral person who imposes formalism.
• bourgeoisie- The fascist Middle Class who seek 1950s conformity, discrimination, and false happiness at the expense of the oppressed masses.

Atomization Theory and Abstract Art:  

An idealist, individualistic, subjective theory where art and creativity are supreme.  Art is no longer a simple function of mass human culture, rather it is the only moral tool available to individuals seeking to enlighten the masses about social justice. 

Art is broadly defined as any expression, any detectable evidence of individual emotion.  It is used to break apart any shared meanings of the prevailing oppressive culture and during this process, revolution can indefinitely be sought.  Art is expression and expression is the tool by which the immoralities of the oppressive culture are purged. It is the act of emoting, of doing art that is indicative of the ongoing presence of Revolution.  Without art or aesthetics, there can be no moral, perfect world.

Revolution is an "atomized" idea inherent in all true individuals.  The true "atom" is opposed by a tyrannical force that resists their idealism and individualism. Art philosophy is therefore meant to be related only to individual expressionism and NOT to trends, tastes, or fashions that are in response to the bourgeoisie or their McCarthyism.  Such responses are legitimate and moral because they seek the annihilation of the bourgeoisie so that the individual owns all forms of his own production, including his expression.  In atomization aesthetics, you're supposed to lack understanding to search for a meaning of your own so you can express yourself somehow.

Sarcastic Implications for Gender Indentity: 

The foremost implication is total revolution and the destruction of the formal, traditional, and fascist way of life.  With total atomization of the prevailing culture, there will be no more shared meanings and thus no further oppression of the individual by the conservative and the capitalist. Common shared meanings of "Marriage," "Church," "common man," or "prohibited drug" cannot exist in an atomization system because people know to interpret these concepts negatively and thus reject whatever restrictions are part of them.  Why be a "church-member," a form, if under atomism, it is impossible to identify your sexual identity because time is variant or your alternating preferences for commitment, desire, or promiscuity shift because of emotions?   Why advocate for anything that restrains emotions if it is immoral to impose sexuality on the individual?

Yet such a horrific "Church" requires you to conform so. Why? In this case, your sexual identity is indefinable, yet oppressed because of a form (heterosexuality) imposed by the "Church" and Christianity and its dogmatic, discriminatory shared meanings.  Thus, you have every right to sexual revolution, to atomization including reverse repression against it to break apart its shared meanings and end its intolerance.   

A further implication is that there is an infinite listing of gender identity because gender language leads to shared meanings and therefore fascism and oppression.  Gender itself is an oppressive construct that limits creativity, places people into forms, and attempts to separate emotion and the subject from their previously labeled "gender" parts, i.e. penis, vagina, breast, etc.   

Past gender oppression is part of ongoing negative stimuli from sexist, homophobic formalists dominating Republic society.  Men were responsible for imposing all oppressive conceptions of gender (its terminology) on the world of unique subjects.  Furthermore, because of one's uniqueness and subjectivity--no one can be in your mind or experience your emotion at the same time  and place--gender identity can never be defined because that places emotion and expression into form, therefore becoming tyranny and oppression.  In order to counter "gender," creativity is required. 

For example, one such expression, (V), may be used by one person in time to express art while avoiding hateful gender forms.  (V) is used to intermingle all physical/mental expressions through art.  However, no one else can express (V) and have the same meaning, otherwise (V) would become a shared meaning and thus oppress.  And, (V) means something slightly different for every true individual (atom).  So, it's not a shared meaning and it helps to atomize the shared meaning of gender because "man/women etc." are removed and (V) expresses something for just one subject no matter how many people share the same body parts used for reproductive sex.  Therefore, body mutilation, (V), sex changing, cross dressing etc. are expressions of a subject's antigender.  Resistance to this art is also counter-revolutionary therefore prejudiced, fascist, and a hate crime, the only acceptable criminal label. 

Otherwise, the "crime" abstraction itself is an attack on the atom. Such forced conformity to gender and to expressionism leads to what oppressors have always called "crime" because laws are forms, those who fail at following shared meanings like gender are labeled "criminal" under that formal law, and thus people's emotions, their aesthetic capabilities are restrained by the dominant and fundamentally immoral culture.  Any form that restrains emotion and the expression of emotion is fundamentally immoral because it reduces ones' ability to participate in Revolution and destroy society's real immoralities.  Because "crime" doesn't exist under an atomistic system, behavior can never be controlled or discouraged in such a way as to make one way of acting illegal.  Thus, under this system, the only recourse is to allow every behavior that imposes nothing negatively on other individuals. 

Emotion Theory:   

A "normal" emotional state is something that cannot be achieved for people.  There is no possible homeostasis for one's mentality. Therefore, the person's mind is in constant change not least of which is the result of the movement of time and the alteration of the physical chemicals which make up the brain and the nervous system.  It is also dependent on the inter-connectivity with other vital life functions. 

Therefore, no mental balance is possible, nor desirable under this system and emotion and the magnitude of its expression can be heightened or depressed from some undeterminable level to achieve the desired creative, aesthetic effect.  

However, emotion is constantly altered because time cannot be frozen completely.  Thus while "under the influence,"  artists can create things of any sort that express an emotion that is only in their head for one moment in time, a duration and sense achieved only by the physical chemicals in the brain or those additives (drugs) that alter perception. 

In fact, atomism theorists encourage mental alteration to achieve maximum creativity.  This can occur because of voluntary actions, like using mood enhancers (drugs of any sort, especially the most psychoactive) or because of involuntary action that is recognized by viewers as being art.   

Therefore, because thought is considered temporal and equivalent to the indescribable emotion in the mind of a single person's head, any thought expressed to another person whose intent is to reduce one person's creativity to some "form," like the political labels "subversive or "communist," should be considered to be a formal thinker, depriving their argument of time and the direction towards a perfect progress of individuality and Revolution.  This formalism is also considered absurd because no person can enter the mind of another person because of inconstant emotional flux.  That means physical expression never exactly correlates to ones' inner emotions.

 

Proper Interpretation of Art:

Past art criticism reduced emotive expressions to symbols which destroyed the emotive moment.  Art therefore can only be experienced individually and understood in time through experience.  Attempting to "improve" art or achieve a similar mentality to the artist at whatever point in time is impossible.  To do so would be anachronistic, amounting to time travel or something like E.S.P./mind reading.  Therefore, it is impossible to interpret art accurately because to do so would make them constructions, shared meanings that bind artist, representing the past, and viewer, representing the present emotion, in progressive sin.  

When questioned about art, the atomistic self-created artist  may say nothing because his emotional moment has ceased.  Or, if this person chooses to speak, they must be creating.  It's not a form ("artist"), it's something a person chooses to create even though it shares some characteristics with other people.  It cannot be the same expression, an immoral form, because humans haven't yet achieved time travel to another person's mind and body (mind reading).  Therefore, separate emotions lead to separate expressions and therefore real art, with its moral effects on other people.  While appearing similar, two pieces of real art are actually different because no two atoms can be the same or in the same place/time and therefore can never create the same exact things.

For example, splattering feces on Christian symbols can be considered art because of the emotion that was involved in defiling those formal symbols.  In this case, the formal symbols of Christian culture are viciously attacked.  This wording alone shows that emotion leads to expression, which then leads to art that serves a moral purpose.  However, defiling Islamic symbols or any other non-Judeo-Christian religion would constitute a hatecrime and thus be worthy of street protests and revolutionary violence in response.  Judeo-Christian sects are responsible for all global religious intolerance because of their oppressive imperialist past.  Therefore, the artist appreciator understands the moral message of attacking Judeo-Christianity and knows by the mere act of symbolic destruction that art has been created.  It is action like this feces defilement that progress the globe towards perfection. 

Likewise, when looking at "traditional" and therefore "oppressive" pieces of what was once called "art," the atomist should throw away any past conceptions of what a physical object means.  For example, the painting "The Garden of Earthly Delights" by the imperialist-supporter Hieronymus Bosch should be attacked as immoral non-art because of its Christian symbology and because of the repression that the Catholic Church has consistently used to silence progressive critics.  Accepting such a painting as a "masterpiece of art" would take the viewer out of their brains and attempt to place them into the emotional state of Bosch during the slavery and repression of the Renaissance.  Without progressive context to educate about the repression of homosexuals, women, other non-Dutch, non-Europeans by the society of that day, a viewer accepting the painting as emotionally pleasing would accept and support Dutch imperial slavery because Dutch art cannot be separated from the immoral Dutch capitalism because of the illogic of time and mind travel.  Failing to act, failing to criticize the immoralities of the art age of Bosch is just as bad and immoral as accepting the atrocities of the age.

Therefore, because of the shared meanings behind such a painting, its value is negative and its impact fundamentally immoral.  Rather, acceptable art would take the right path, the path of individual equality and the emphasis on emotion above all else.  It is the duty of art critics to attack the oppressive culture of formalists like Bosch and deconstruct what they must have meant as their oppressive paint strokes hindered progress then and now.

Liberation Literature Theology (LLT)

For most of human history, trees and papyrus have been butchered to make paper.  Now, computers have alleviated this stress on Mother Nature and allowed the Blog to ascend as the right format for the conveyance of truth and knowledge.  But, let us look at a sample of how literature can be almost anything under atomism theory, how literature is universal and has itself declared its independence from even the alphabet, with all of its vile Western Civilization influences.

Look at the previous format of literature: the printed book on carbon paper.  In the old, backward way, ideas were conveyed on these pieces of paper.  Though important ideas spread in spite of this rustic format, the impact on nature was atrocious. So, what do we do with the remaining carbon paper that sits on this planet?

Well, use the remaining paper reserves for art and art that fits with the morality of the atomism theory. Take for example the average "novel."  571 pieces of carbon paper of an 8+_ by ₉^^& to a 4 $%^ size are the pallet for a self-described pamphleteer or novelist to use as an art canvas.  The altered page dimensions are meant to destroy the imperial form of paper dictated to the people by their overlords.  That form limits the creativity of literature within the bounds of a standardized, and thus non-aesthetic physical object.  

It is unjust and immoral to bound our emotions in oppressive formats or to conform to imperialist culture.

Furthermore, handwritten or spray-painted literature should be comprised of symbols unknown as yet to anyone and so that each copy must be individually hand-made because no corporation-produced printer can achieve true handmade unique symbols.  However, in order to spread the innate morality of atomism aesthetics, we'll suffice with non-formal page measurements in typed courier font on a standardized page for the purposes of conveying a progressive message.

With all copies handwritten, thus the new age creative author achieves a different copy each time art is attempted or so it is suggested to those who'd create as this theory requires.  It is implied that the reader must interpret the work and have their own artistic moment while trying to avoid creating a shared meaning.  Therefore, one should strive to create some new thought because time already dictates that everything a person does will be different (no mind travel).  

 

The moral reader can never recreate the art creation experience, so one can never explain what they created because that would amount to time travel, imperialism, and systematizing emotion.  Instead, art in literature can only be experienced by finding progressive ideals in the art and the magnitude of the non-comforming expression of the artist.  When reader and writer connect ideals, progress is served.

Revolutionary verus History Theory

The purpose of this theory is to connect atomization with social justice, because rather than being some indefinable term of idealists, it is in fact an innate part of every person as they seek to protect their ability to express.  

The act of doing revolution is equal to social justice and therefore the protective response against negative stimuli of the mind in time.  Therefore, revolution is inconstant, nonrestrictive, never-ending, and non-conformist. As with art atomization, you must express toleration, revolutionary expression, and a desire to change society and all of its wrong and oppressive forms.  You must support individualistic expression if you really want to bring about the inconstant state of social justice.

Because history places people and their ideas in a time that atomist theorists think is mentally impossible, traditional historians are expressed against as bourgeoisie formalists.  Marx's theories of historical inevitability still apply because the bourgeoisie class is the group with the shared meanings whereas all other individuals emote in time and follow atomization theory.  

Thus, the bourgeoisie class has the most shared meanings, which it imposes on the creativity of the individuals who choose to artfully entitle themselves as the "proletariat."  
True individuals will only choose liberation like that which emerges from working class people.  The proletariat are also often the most silent of an oppressed, formal society, requiring certain people to speak for them and encourage their creativity during the right moments in time.  Elections are the most opportune time for action because the masses need to be mobilized for a short period of time until responsible progressive leaders gain power and thereafter make the proper decisions for them.

Therefore, individuals (workers) express their outrage individually in a different way than their horrid bosses, who themselves disconnected from time because they dominate.  They act as terrorist factory managers because they won't pay more than the smallest agreed upon wage between worker and boss.  Work is not to be a contract between supplier and demander.  Instead, work is an expression of the individual's emotions and thus cannot be limited.  No price is too small for the art of one's individual labor. 

Bosses limit that price, they restrain the capabilities of the artist by constraining expression within time and pay limits.  But there is recourse for the proletarian.  Maybe the staff supervisor will be decapitated by a rebelling work staff who are really artists expressing themselves against low pay and non-ergonomically correct keyboards?  

However, a violent response is neither a violation of ones' pacifist oaths nor a crime, because "crimes" are constructions.  To violate laws made by the bourgeoisie is the epitome of this system.  The factory owners and capitalists seek to suppress the common man who is paid only minimum wage whilst being given some meager and inadequate state assistance to live a less than completely perfect life.  Overturning this great labor injustice is exactly the goal of atomists and it is something completely attainable for non-oppressors.

Thus with horrible bosses, oftentimes the only response is worker revolt and violent protest.  Mob reaction is a form of group expressionism and thus art.  All persons, through time and circumstance, react against some authoritative criticism of the individual and come to similar emotional moments and express through revolution, mob chaos, and possibly violence.  If violence results because of conflicting expressions, then that should be viewed as art so long as the individuals in the mob are reacting against authority and formality.

A Closing Sarcastic Note on Art Education Theory

How do we move forward with the message of atomization aesthetics?  The answer is educational indoctrination.  Formal culture stifles our message time and again.  But, our theory has an answer for the blocking action of the current terrible educational culture.

Atomization theorists think that there is no reason for organized education in the traditional sense.  In order to overcome the contradictory need to destroy forms while still celebrating everything progressive teachers and universities do, atomism theorists came up with the idea that rather than education imposed as formality, instead, the faculties and their labor unions are mob expressions. A teacher uses their presence in class as an emotional expression, creating art for the required duration of the class period (which is the emotional moment).  The emotional response (expression) is due to the authoritarian university and its limitation of creativity by imposing who, what, where, when, and how creativity can take place (classroom, campus). 
  

Thus the teacher's performance on the classroom stage is the aesthetic moment.  Most emotive revolutionary expressionist teachers sit in class in some place (depends on emotion and time) and may stay silent to not impose authority on the students.  Students for their part are allowed to emote however they wish as long as they feel creation.  

Thus, as the atomist teacher expresses their progressive beliefs to the classroom, morality is served and the individual lives of students who connect with the message are improved.  And atomization aesthetics is spread to another person and the world inches forward one step closer to total perfection.

A Required Imperialist Disclosure: this form of education might lead to a mass breakdown in communication to people with no skills because there can be no formal process of any kind, let alone training, which itself acknowledges authority of experience.  Food would be scarce, starvation rampant.  Also, garbage collection is fascist because no one's creativity seems to want to clean up that which smells and because waste implies that you are exploiting natural resources which violates environmental practice espoused by these theorists.  Most atomist theorists think the individual creator can overcome such conservative oppressions.

   

Let's get Atomization Aesthetics moving today!  (or not)

End Sarcasm.