NEEDLEWRITER

I base my own opinion of it on my personal experience of looking at photographies of passed away authors, mostly from the literary era of modernism of the twentieth century. No need even to mention them, we all know who I mean, the artists of the twentienth century, mostly form the first half. Looking at their photographies and exploring on the internet about their bodies of work and their lives ad ofcourse reading some of their works such as novels, poems, dramas, essays, monographies and alike I came to an conclusion – that they are illussions to be solved, either by breaking out of it by force, or firstly breaking into the illussions themselves so we could later explore the illusion itself very keenly and in detail so we can actually transcend them as our authorities or role models or rivals in thought or similar. That could be done in many ways like making own frame of thought and body of work and entering something of a personal war against illusion they left behind. But we need to emphasise our frame of thought and work – what is good, what bad, where we lack, where we don’t and base it on firm arguments, tehniques and alike. And we base thereforeon it ourown body of work which we build upon the so called tradition and we ought to have contemporaries on our side if we want to subvert, or we need to simply know our contemporaries well too, to know what is going on today in Zeitgeist. And we have to have them integrated too in our art or science as our sovereign and contemporary set up alowes. We will therefore need a whole body of tradition lain before us in some sort of well organised structure and ofcourse we will need methodology and tehnique to pierce into with a sharp instrumentary of analisis to disintegrate and dissolve such a huge body as tradition is. That further means that we need to set up “new rules” based on “new settings” that will establish probably a new illusion that the later generations will need to put infront of them to subvert when the time comes, with new means of evolvement further. Could we be brave as to ask the question – will we ever be fully disillusioned? I firmly believe so. Why?
Because here in the 2026., the era of tehnology and the internet mass media keeps us fully informed 24/7 about the state of the World we’re currently in and we have nothing left but to embark on the path of disillussionment of the illussion we call life itself. Why? I firmly believe we’ve reached the end, so to speak we are on our deathbed gasping for a breath or two for a few more minutes of holding onto life as we know it. Wars on the front pages of media tell us so – and on the other end there’s mass evolvement of tehnology which we cannot longer control. not in the sense of A.I. taking over the world ( but it might be a possibility ), but mostly in stupidifying youth and on the other hand by means of war fighting over supposed territory and reducing our population slowly by spilling blood, and making us hounds pissing over borders signifying our territory. “So evolved” said the poor monkey.
It has become evident that history is repeating itself earlier than we expected it, in contrast of the concept of the internet and the global village theory it might have become not easier to communicate but harder in the meaning of the concept of humans as “social beings”, we do it over the internet, and are stupidifying in real life. And it might have become that Earth has become a too tight a space for us to live as a humanity so we are spilling blood insted of tea.
So why I in the end mention tradition – because the remebrance of the past and poor wishful thinking. We look at old photos with longing and we look at historical figures with wishful thinking “god I wish I was him/her” or “my god I wish I had that” and similar, and “oh I wish it was a different time”, “I was born in the wrong time/place” and stuff like that. And from that we are fully disillusioned out from the moment we open the internet, especially media and mostly embark deeper down the illusion itself – of what? That the internet is real life itself, which it is not – and ought to never be.