Unobservationism as an endpoint in painting.
Unobservationism is one answer.
Why? Because it can be a point of arrival by the human act of painting.
However, this is drafted as a premise and cannot be fully explained in writing, as it is partial.
The only way to fit it to the individual's senses is to have them look at my paintings and contemplate them.
Also, please remember that although this is an achievement, it is of course only a "point" and further progress will be permanent.
However, the end-point answer is not a point, it is the best and most admired answer.
I am not talking about a non-native sense of excellence or acclaim, but rather a bubbling expectation that at this moment in time, in accordance with its artistic history, it may be possible to derive an image from a place that is most like the very edge of the visible point, and that this is the most likely place to be found.
The artist is speaking out of a sense of naïveté, in the hope of stimulating the inspiration of others who might perceive this as lofty.
In order to sort out what I am saying, this slapstick social debauchee, I would first like to look at the 'flow' of the thing called painting.
What is the flow of a painting or drawing? People have sought to depict exactly what they saw at first and have developed their skills in this regard. He acquired and passed on the power and skill to paint more exactly as he saw it. Production is a completely meaningless act.
However, people continued to do so and, in response to the demands of the times (social development), they added their own emotions. This became art.
Art is a medium that forces society and non-society to warp, and it has had a very vague but precise effect.
That is why kings and rulers have always valued artists. Humans may have understood the projective nature of art from the beginning.
And before the dawn of the collapse of this super-coded society, when Descartes said, "I think, therefore I am." Descartes said, "I am what I think", before the dawn of the collapse of that super-coded society, and mankind began to produce works that were completely rooted in its own senses.
Subsequent innovative painters such as Cézanne, the Impressionists and then Picasso's Cubism all sought to depict their subjects more multifaceted, multifaceted and fluid rather than visually precise. People are not as they appear to the eye.
In any case, they attempted to extract the 'reality' of their own lives in an attempt to depict it.
It is clearly an escape and a struggle. It is one of the most noble battles.
It's also how Giacometti repeatedly crushes outlines and how Francis Bacon melts people down according to their muscular movements. But biting into this, a complete stream of imaginary objects emanating from surrealism was also created. This, I feel, goes to contemporary art and illustration.
However, it is more a kind of social game than an intrinsic pictoriality. I think that the depiction of the world (nature) can act as a kind of painkiller. It has become very necessary in our time. That is why it has flourished so much.
However, I think that the elimination of the depiction of nature is different from the mainstream of painting. So I turn once more to the heart of painting. In the course of studying painting, I came to the conclusion that one of the fundamental purposes of painting is to depict people (nature) in a way that is closer to the truth (substance) than what is seen with the eye.
In short, the act of "depicting the world as I perceive it" is the most natural depiction, or artistic painting. To borrow Heidegger's words, it is to move with the emotions that spring up as a ticket or a possible 'proof' for the transition from the non-essential to the essential, which is inevitable when the present being reassesses the world again after the precursor to death.
And if the point of origin and the process of psychological development are almost the same, even though they are drawn with their own expressions, methods and sensations, then it is possible to narrow down the destination.
The destination may be narrowed down.
As one of the destinations, "I want to draw the real (God)" may be a theme that has been narrowed down quite precisely.
Then what is the exact substance? I review philosophy and science in order to look more closely at the substance. Art is the study of art (from philosophy it is the idea that all things flow, that nothing is universal, and that people are as open as light), and science is the study of the structure of living things, quantum mechanics, and the nature of the human body. From science, the structure of living organisms, quantum mechanics and particle science show that a kind of "string vibration" exists as the essence of matter, and that it is the building block of our entire world. The answer to this question, which is derived from a combination of all these factors on both a micro and macro scale, is
In other words, nothing is fixed.
Everything in the universe is made up of vibrations (movement).
The result is that nothing is fixed and everything in the universe is made of vibrations (movement).
And if this is the case, it is necessary to depict "vibrations" themselves in order to describe them in a way that is closest to the reality of the moment.
Vibrations fluctuate at high speed and are constantly changing, refusing to stay in place or solidify. In quantum mechanics, if a numerical value is determined, the event itself will become partial and the whole will not be understood.
So why do we determine numerical values?
This is a discrepancy that has arisen because the mainstream of culture since the beginning of time has recognised matter as existing as a fixed essence.
This was due to the eye, the biggest contributor and the biggest deceiver. The culture was clearly the culture of the eye. The idea of our civilisation, if we chew it up physically, takes the premise that we worshiped the eye.
From there, things such as writing (mediation) were affirmed and fed into our society, as it is stated that "sight dominates the other organs".
But is it just me, or does it seem that society has reached such a boiling point that no one has been able to escape the mental trap, and in fact the prison seems to be growing stronger?
It is definitely due to our consciousness and perception of things as fixed objects.
We were driven out of Eden when we 'settled'.
I believe that wisdom against settling was the fruit of sin.
Is it an Oedipus complex against God or selfishness? But at least if we follow the extant accounts, the fruit of the wisdom we had in our hands was a lost paradise in the form of recognition.
This is precisely because we have ceased to be in flux through settlement. Settlement also fixes our perception of things, and with it it creates 'wealth and numbers'.
According to Yuma Ito, when the hunter-gatherer Muraburi living today are asked to count, they say that from four they feel that they have "too much" and that they no longer count. This is precisely because the degree of settlement is low and they themselves are in flux.
The "number" that fixes things in motion is not important.
In other words, the source of this societal frenzy is a sign that 'things are fixed'.
We humans have taken the ultimate detour by resisting the only essence of flux and controlling it with our wisdom.
But we should be relieved. This is a mistake and a vast learning journey. We need this eternal return to really push us to our most diminutive and vicious potential. We are a species that was created with the desire to understand and overlook this loop.
That is why now we can finally return to Genesis and fate has allowed us to dig back there. My actions are still only knocking on the door of the great rock inn, point by point with the demands of the times.
But this "Knock" will undoubtedly increase in future generations, and this movement will take place in different parts of the world. And like a waterwheel, once it starts turning, it never stops.
The most destructive and productive rotation begins.
Therefore, from now on it is not possible to determine itself as "this". Rather, all ways of looking at things will change, and rapid evolution and degeneration will take place simultaneously.
I write this picture to celebrate man himself as the cornerstone of this process.
But the act of writing itself is also dangerous. But I hope you will forgive me that this is the only thing I can do now, in this transitional period of matter and vibration.
This will change again in the future as technology changes. Anyway, if I want to draw a real image of vibration in my state of existence, first of all, I have to look at the vibration and see the "vibration".
I must not draw the vibrations as "vibrations" while looking at them.
That is why I am fundamentally changing the way I draw.
I have to change it!
After experiencing and observing things, I draw them without observing them.
This specific method has not yet been fully established, so for the sake of projection, I will keep a clear description confidential.
In order to demonstrate this in the depiction of human beings, each subject must definitely have a high degree of femininity (*I am not referring to biological women only). This is because femininity is the key that opens up to the whole (nature) and the whole itself.
To explore the important vibrations.
Spend time with the subject first. It is quite normal. Do not try to draw it.
The reason for this is that you only have the assumption that you are going to draw it, and then you create it from the vague movement of thoughts as much as possible in order to prevent things from becoming fixed.
However, we accept the fact that we will eventually draw it and spend time together. Touching. We feel each other. The contradictory nature of the object is strengthened by its unobservability.
Then contemplation is observed and observation is cancelled out. Again, the contemplation cancels the observation, and again the observation is cancelled by the contemplation, even as the contemplation is released from the rise of the observation. And with this repetition as the engine, the muscular brain and cells begin to process and depict. Countless vibrations spread across the canvas in abundance. But he does not just paint.
You have to draw while conceiving "folding".
This is based on the string theory, which is a prediction based on quantum mechanics, and according to the Calabi-Yau space, the dimensional plane is compacted again and again. That is why I describe the black line using the compactifying description method, which may be more like a description than a drawing. I am sorry to say that I cannot publish this image yet, but please refer to the following video for an image. The method is to turn the sphere inside out.
The folding method is based on this description. I invite you to think about the sensations and look at it. And if you have any thoughts, please feel free to contact me.
In fact, that is still only one side of the story after all.
To clear this up, we used 'Triptych'. And it should be done in the new day style (see below).
What is this?
It is a method of depicting the Trinity in the name of representing it in a way that was once taken from Christian religious paintings, and which, because of its balance, links the three pictures together to form a single one.
I agree and admire this very much.
The description or depiction from three planes makes it possible to lift the dimensionality from the line, the plane to the solid, and to finally connect it closely to us.
It can contain the probability of moving freely between the three-dimensional and the flat.
However, it has a dogma that cannot escape the nuance of being a viceroy.
Bacon first discovered the triptych in a painting of the crucifixion and decided to use it.
After I had also solved this structure, I decided to use it to deviate from the pictoriality, but I also realise that we have to break away from the biblical nature of the triptych.
Because we are the ones who have a history of Western enslavement, and the triptych itself is a completely Westernised technique. It may be possible to follow them, but is it possible to evolve (break away from them)? The use of triptychs is good, but the use of triptychs is not good.
The use of triptychs is good in itself, but it is not enough to keep up with the real world.
In fact, there is a risk of leaving. In order to get closer to the "real" thing, the conclusion I drew and used was the "manga" form of writing and the "multi-language" nature of the reading of it.
This is a Japanese element, which is why I chose the Japanese style. Yoro Mengji has previously pointed out that the nature of manga is directly a product of Japanese phonological reading.
The use of Chinese characters to convey the content of an event by showing a scene (image) and a speech balloon (sound) at the same time is the same as the use of Chinese characters in Japan, where a structure of reading (sound) is adopted for the pictograph (image) of Chinese characters, and the onomatopoeia characteristic of Japanese characters can be used to convey emotions. It is a special characteristic of the Japanese language that the content of a scene or thing can be grasped from a single kanji character or a single comic strip. The important point of this is that it also covers scenes that are not mentioned in the picture.
However, we can tell by the speech balloon lines, onomatopoeia and their display that "Perhaps Nobi made some kind of mistake and Doraemon mocked him for it and got into his jaws. Or maybe he was being disliked by Gota and Konegawa." This can be inferred from just one panel. This is beyond the scope of the display. Moreover, we can even understand the personality nature of the subject's emotions. In other words, it is possible to read places that are not depicted in the panels of the manga.
The effect of this manga is a locality of expression that was only possible because of the complex, bizarre and irrational language of the Japanese language.
This is why manga is now read all over the world.
The Japanese culture and language has an important feature of words with overlapping meanings, in which the same sound has multiple layers of meanings, and the meanings are expressed by adding to the aforementioned triptych.
For this reason, we decided to combine the three aspects into one.
At first there was some hesitation and no particular format, but now a horizontal line is drawn across the lower and upper thirds, and a vertical line is drawn perpendicular to the midpoint of the horizontal line.
I think this is the most fundamental and, so far, the most anti-virtual for a disembodied triptych.
But this is where I need to explore a little further. And I don't have a position on the viceroy and the antiviceroy, but rather an anomaly (animal nature) that reconciles the two. This unifacialisation at the same time as getting the nuances of the cartoon can suck up the elements.
Onomatopoeia need not be mentioned. Rather, the sequence of these three points has a structure that independently evokes onomatopoeia.
The three bodies in one picture, each taking its own form, converge into a single meaning, which is supported by multiple sounds. The sound automatically emerges from the picture, which also causes a high-contextual multiplicity of sounds.
The overlapping of these two elements pushes the one-sided painting to a more than three-dimensional level, while countless vibrations cause the dimensional phase to curve and fold, creating a visual movement of reciprocity.
What falsity! We have such well-developed sensory organs, yet we can never see the object as it really is. In fact, this sense organ even hinders us.
The object in front of my eyes instantly becomes a writhing black covering and touches me. Aha, where can I lament my pity that I find it so terrifying?
Because even if I want to run away, that black encompassing thing is including me. Sartrean vomiting. Is chasing fruit an act of nausea? I don't know.
In any case, I don't know and will continue the exercise of trying to know. I don't feel that this is necessary for the generation of energy.
But this may be the only trajectory (due to the vibrations) of this small part of me. It seems that I have to follow that path.
There is no doubt that the act of drawing the fruit itself is a kind of omnipotent prayer, and there is no way that there can be a right or wrong to it.
However, the question arises as to whether it is enough just to describe them. What I mean by this is that the materials used to describe paintings in general are too confined to the discourse of 'painting'.
Especially in Japan, is the existence of painting itself not a little too special?
However, painting is a medium. In order to pursue the real, we have to stop confining ourselves to the unreality of painting, don't we?
In order to get closer to more reality (life itself), we should use the most real material, the object.
By giving it a description, it can become more real. It is something that everyone uses and everyone forgets. A material that has universality and decadence, yet is understood on a flat surface.
It is cardboard.
It is a material that can be used by everyone, from the overwhelmingly poor, like myself, to the very powerful (as the decoding society's numerical standards dictate), to those who have abandoned their homes, to the so-called ordinary people who live somewhere in the middle.
It is used equally by everyone in the human race, isn't it?
Cardboard is the most universal flat surface because it is rooted in daily life.
Cardboard is also capable of thermal insulation, as can be seen from the side structure.
The wavy planes are sandwiched between the planes. This reminds me of the two compositions used in string theory: a flat space plate and a world connected by gravitons and vibrations (frequencies) that move freely between the two plates. I wonder how many layers of this mysterious insulating structure there are, and if there is anything better than this, will it be available? I hope with a smile.
The moment I carve the effort to create a real image out of this material, every piece of cardboard has the potential to become a real image! This is a new signification, no doubt Heidegger's 'disclosability'.
In other words, by placing the painting on such an artificial universal material, the effect of the vibration can be accentuated. The human race must come into contact with this card board, fearing that nuances will spread to the cardboard in the blink of an eye.
This is the moment when meaning is found anew.
This movement should function as a metabolism to destroy the current social fixation on context.
However, people do not accept it out of the blue: as the saying goes, 70% rejection and 30% agreement, and this is precisely the kind of event that falls within that range.
This headwind feels all the more powerful now that we are at the dawn of the transition between fixity and fluidity.
But that's fine. The value of doing "this" will seep out like wine. It must not become vinegar, but it can be avoided through endless open forging and destruction.
This movement appears to be my personal achievement, but it is also one of the achievements of mankind, due to the friends and subjects who have brought me so much knowledge.
And at the same time it is the breaking point of the current direction. Matter has been deceiving itself and blinding us. That is why it is probably impossible to observe the world from that direction (the material world) any better than string theory.
It is extremely difficult to confirm even the string as a reality before furthering the string.
Of course, this is where technology has evolved, but I'll try to shift things around a bit (for the future).
What is to be shifted? It is a way of looking at it.
I am aware of the feeling that the world is justified in the way it is constructed, but that is just a false image.
Factual society is an invisible and only concept, and is therefore bound only by the symbolic order of letters.
The judiciary can mobilise people to act, but there are always limits, and it is impossible for it to cover everything or to become a universal force.
In other words, our society is only constituted by the consciousness of society, and if we do not understand this, we have to use a considerable detour and distortion of the flow. I am talking about the prediction that it is possible to peel away this false image and that in the future vibrations will take on more significance than physics does today.
Mind you, I am certainly inspired by current physics, such as string theory and particle science, but I am also creating with a view to the vibrations and ideas that will emerge when the beastly dark areas of pre-Nietzschean (Socrates) and post-Nietzschean (Socrates) academia or dark areas emerge. The following is a brief description of the nature of the work.
It is not something (closed) that can only be derived from modern science. Of course, it is legitimate for creativity to use current knowledge to derive the latest (future) sensations.
But at the same time it is natural. It would not be true expression if it did not approach the double loss of looking at what has been lost in the past in addition to this.
And this sense of projection can shift the line of technological evolution. Isn't that what progress is all about? One such example is frequency and magnetism.
I try to include this element in my paintings.
One trend that will become clear in the future is that the human frequency and the earth frequency are the same, and that this is the basis of human life.
Various things will emerge that use it. This is also a proof that we are moving away from the fixed ideas we fall into and towards the 'vibrational frequency' of frequencies.
By reassessing things that are out of the field of knowledge, it is possible to circumvent the limits of existing expectations.
There is also the option of making the current perspective oscillatory from the outset, but it is not my role to verbalise this, and I leave that to philosophers and commentators whom I trust.
In any case, what I have to do is to inject "expression (language)" into the social consciousness in order for it to come earlier, including anticipating nuanced shifts (thought shifts) of displacement.
If this is done in a way that anticipates language, a path will always emerge.
Those who are skilled in this path will surely create language and a shift will take place. It will be a force that no one can stop. Naturally.
As a reaction to this, the current chaos has begun.
This is a definite 'apocalypse', which is not a superficial insight into the doom of mankind or anything like that, but merely evidence that a new era (as a definite change) will be ushered in.
In fact, it is not the case that old and new forms of society will disappear completely, but rather that they will continue to diversify and subdivide and downsize, so that the number of different types of society itself will increase.
However, this is not certain. What will happen if the community continues to shrink in this way? It becomes one while it becomes zero.
This is what we call cohesive re-communisation.
In short, a community is possible in which there is a realisation that the essence of all communities is nowhere to be found.
This is surely the most important movement to watch in the future.
At the root of such a trend is liquidation, which I use to describe it.
It may serve as a kind of bellwether.
However, it is of no importance at all.
It is only when you realise that everything is no longer important and there is only existence that you can engage in the most meaningful life activities.
There is a golden saying that a person only understands when they have lost something, but this is exactly like the feeling that Jesus atoned for all original sin from the beginning.
We, who have already been atoned for, are still guilty of this and that. In this contradiction there is true penitence, so that the two contradictions (emptiness and significance) persist as motives and act on each other.
The unobservationism I advocate overlaps eleven of these qualities within the scope of consciousness.
Realism and abstraction
Male and female.
Cartoon and painting.
Individuals and vibrations.
Faith and unbelief.
White and black
Flat and three-dimensional.
Vision and blindness
Society and nature
Wealth and poverty
Time and eternity
The number of contradictions may increase from an unconscious or different point of view.
I incorporated these eleven contradictions into my paintings because the structure of my paintings, which are created by overlapping and folding eleven human-perceivable and expressible two dimensions, is in line with the process of working towards a string theory that provides a unified explanation within the eleven dimensions.
In other words, the meaning also has 11 dimensional planes. The more the structure becomes pseudo, the more the aspect of the essence becomes similar. This is because vibration is the starting point.
The boundaries that have been set are defined only by the human disclosiveness, and are then removed, destroyed or given up on, until finally they become ambiguous and the same horizons expand.
The difference between the phenomena that are close to us through vibration and those that can be called properties when they are unravelled is only the difference in the way the vibration oscillates.
In short, if the structure (form) is the same and the relationship can be expressed in a language (part), then they are of the same nature and can be connected by an equal link.
This is because the expression is made with the understanding that the whole (Brahma) is accessible as a kind of Brahma-self-unity.
This whole-part case can be more easily understood if it is based on the point of origin, which is that it is all just a story in consciousness.
Some may consider such a leap to be a humiliating sophistry.
But it must be stated first that this is precisely the aim.
This reaction strengthens the implications of unobservationism. The world is transformed just when a person utters this in a single word, or even in a single consciousness. This is due to the openness and projection of the human being and the act of transmission, which is our mission in nomos.
As Derrida pointed out the difference, I would like to point out the realistic picture that is open to the outside of the realistic picture.
The method of painting and the way of thinking derived from the above is called unobservationism. The paintings that I will represent as real images will be called unobservationist realism.
This may be taken as gospel for the endless disappearance of universality.
Or is it an offering to the demons left behind in the old age?
That should be left to those who observe this painting. Those who paint it should engage in it and define life only by it.
For this reason I was born and raised in the weakest and most foolish way.
I still am. I celebrate the morning with my lusantimanes and I discipline myself at night. I cannot even obtain a commandment, I can only repent alone. But nothing understands this premise better than the fact that it is the soil of progress. The conditions have sadly been met.
If this work of mine is a humiliating deception against humanity, I must be a willing crook.
Or if it is innovative progress, I must be a clown with tears in my eyes.
I must do this work.
I must do this work with envy and perhaps even contempt for other lives.
Was this the state of Pascal's chimera, his moment of abhorrence and praise?
Does the wolf drinking water remain a dogma of human self-expression?
The panopticon of the world swallows this sphere and expands it.
We bury ourselves today, oblivious to the expanded horizon.
And all of this is for nothing as we cower in the face of the ridicule of nature (psyche).
After all, the structure of society through language has no meaning any more.
Where is there a stage to support the clowns who try to dance on the zero?
There is none. Nowhere.
The clown, the tools, the circus, the manager, the audience, are no longer anywhere and everywhere.
We are still there, even though the show was declared over long ago.
The reverence of the fleshly eye in anguish at the sight of it is a disgrace to blood and bone.
However, it is not worth waiting for those things that exist within the divine description, which neither the eye can see nor perceive now.
We must go on.
Even if it is a wilderness of nothingness.
Praise oneself.
One is obliged to engage in the vital activity of escape and struggle.
With the above, the most non-artistic orthodoxy of art, unobservationism, was born and put into action.
And as a declaration of this.
Unobservationist realism is one of the most orthodox forms of realistic painting
I reiterate that the real image is a vibrating movement.
Showing that the real image is an oscillating movement allows people to move, in other words, to 'contradict'.
I am convinced that if you allow it to do so, you can allow yourself to do so.
It gives more people more opportunities to allow themselves to live.
It is an offering for those who have gone without forgiveness.
For this reason I paint a realistic picture that is closer to the real image because of this non-observation.
