Goblins, Ghouls, and Ancient tools

Is forgery art?

What a question to begin with I want to clarify that what Wolfgang did was criminal and that his imprisonment was justified, not for imitating art but instead for scamming the purchasers of his pieces.

In my opinion Wolfgang’s imitations were no different than alternate pieces of art despite the intention to deceive and scam consumers. This is specific to Wolfgang however because his “forgeries” weren’t actual forgeries they were unique pieces just made in the style of the artist. Despite his nefarious intention its hard to argue that his pieces lacked originality because they didn’t exist prior to his painting just the styles he used were uninspired. However I believe that with his ability to imitate any style Wolfgang essentially had his own style. Along the lines of a jack of all trades is a master of one but always better than a master of none, Wolfgang’s strength was in his versatility. His imitations are art in their own right because despite the intention despite the imitation of style his works ultimately were original. Original enough to be displayed in museums and fool art experts. Does them being imitations remove their originality? No, if anything the fact they’re so convincing adds to their authenticity. Art is subjective and if these art experts could not discern the imitations from the original artists, and if they could manage to find a meaningful message in a piece of Wolfgang’s art then it is art.

As for the question of value I don’t have much to say. It’s impossible to argue that the value of art is mainly based on the object in question. A banana on a wall sold for $6.2 million. That’s insane for an extremely low effort and gimmick-y piece of art. But what about classic paintings? I wholly believe their value is in the artist and age of the piece. That’s the reason the value plummets once it’s revealed to be a Wolfgang work, is the piece any different? No. Is the cost of making the painting and time put into it less? No. The value wholly comes from the fact that it was painted by a famous man and people say it’s worth that much. If the value of art was solely based upon the object itself and how good it looks there would not be famous names but solely famous pieces. Because a no-name artist is capable of making a masterpiece but without critics proclaiming it a masterpiece it’s essentially worthless and wont be given a value that corresponds with the quality.

It’s because of these reasons that I believe that Wolfgang’s art is art despite his intentions. Because at the end of the day art is subjective, until his pieces were discovered to not be from the original artists they were worth millions. So now is his art any less art? No it’s still art, it’s just not worth millions because of what people think it is, Art is art despite the intention even the worst drawing is art. And if all of the sudden someone needs a tax cut and gets a mediocre piece appraised as millions and then donates it, suddenly it’s a masterpiece. Imitation is art, originals are art, every piece is art. Something is only worth millions when someone says it is.

Golly I dislike the value of art so much the price of that aforementioned banana could let someone live a comfortable life if they used the money correctly but nah, let’s spend it on a banana.

Time is like a train, it continues onwards and although sometimes it loops (story for another time) it never goes in reverse. I don’t even think trains can go in reverse and for the sake of this metaphor making sense I choose ignorance. Now I’ve just been told by 3 others in my class that trains do in fact go in reverse. And I was happier in my ignorance. But other people get on different tracks, and some get to New York cities faster than others but everyone finds their way there. This is a battle between 4 men. Perhaps doing a blog this way is leaving the tracks, but knowledge and ignorance know no bounds.

Advaith raised his blade with the holy text of Genesis, claiming that in the case of Adam and Eve knowledge is the key that unlocks a limitless world of possibilities. Ignorance was peaceful, but stagnant, childish, and made life practically worthless. But then the question why, why is it valuable. As Luke pondered why is gaining knowledge good, it provides freedom, He’d rather die on a flagpole than a Luke sized hole. In this way knowledge provides a the framework for a complex yet thrilling and free life. Like a scholar discovering encyclopedia Brtitanica knowledge provides a drink of the spice of life. In the “Eden is that old-fashioned House” the narrator speaks of their fond time in Eden, in which they didn’t know how good they had it. But the ability to continue was necessary, in life we must move forward. And then in “Autobiography of Eve” the line “I blazed a footpath, the first radical road out of that old kingdom torward a new unknown.” In this sense knowledge provided a blazing passionate path to a new future. In these regards Advaith’s blade was aided by a gust of wind from Luke striking a blow against ignorance.

But then there’s Gilgamesh in which he struggles with the knowledge of his mortality, wrestling with it like crocodiles in Australia, much like Crocodile Dundee. But this is seen even more in Enkidu, the beast man. Until he beds the woman he is nothing but a wild animal. In the act he sheds his innocence entering the world of man which operated on different rules. But from his acquisition of knowledge he finds his soulmate, Gilgamesh. A perfect pair which was only possible due to the forceful exchange of knowledge. But much like a goldfish Gilgamesh doesn’t remember the beauty of knowledge as Enkidu found it. And when Enkidu died Gilgamesh then remembers shockingly the bliss of ignorance. think of Dory, an ignorant fish who forgets everything but she eventually became a fish who could remember and save Neemo. In Gilgameshe’s quest the same thing happens. Once so fearful of his hold on knowledge, the realization of his death he finds that knowledge is not to be feared. No instead it’s something to be cherished as although ignorance breeds bliss it also causes pain, especially to those around you. Gilgamesh uses his newfound knowledge as a brand new weapon, raising it in the name of his people. Much like how Dory campaigned for Neemo.

Much like time marches on so does the blog, now the time for Oedpius has come. The story is a metaphor for the downside ignorance. Think to when Thebes was plagued by locusts scorned by the gods for the death of their king. But then there’s Oedipus. An ignorant man who found the sun discovering the truth of his actions. He was the killer of the king, he was responsible for the suffering, and he had unknowingly fulfilled his vile prophecy. And when he obtains knowledge, through the efforts of others he takes the necessary actions, he blinds himself, and exiles himself away from the city he’s hurt so much. It’s like when a very friendly dolphin runs away after eating my pet fish and then brings me a piece of coral. They understand their lack of knowledge hurts others, and make amends, ignorance causes pain to others while knowledge offers the cleansing flame to absolve it.

In Lone Star ignorance causes pain through misunderstanding of the past. Since the start of the movie Sam isn’t fond of his father, BUDDY. He believes him to be a Sheriff responsible for an improper application of justice causing pain to others. Through acquisition of knowledge throughout the movie Sam is able to learn that Buddy was a damn legend and worthy of his respect. Not responsible of killing Charlie Wade he instead was the paragon of what an officer should be. When talking about fathers we must remember big O (Otis). His son Colonel Delmore believed that Otis never cared for him. But in time he discovers that the whole time his father was proud of him. Delmore’s ignorance caused a rocky relation between him and his father as both couldn’t express themselves well. This recovery of lost knowledge lets Delmore connect with his own son allowing the two to understand each other. But then there’s Sam and Pilar, the ignorance they shared allowed a guiltless relationship. Through the finding of the truth they realise that their related. But after learning the truth they choose to continue. Because the vices of incest are nullified by standing cirucmstances. Knowledge showed them the light and let them continue.

Because of all of this it’s crystal clear that knowledge is far superior to ignorance. Because while ignorance breeds personal bliss and pain to others. Knowledge offers a choice.

Chills… Literal chills.

One of the first lessons we learn as children is to do the right thing. Simple things like cleaning up after yourself or being polite. And we are told these are good things to do and by doing them we are in the right. You’ll never be sent to detention or timeout for saying hello but will if you hurt someone else. And as we grow older we can actually grasp the concepts of what things are good and evil. And we still follow the same rules set in our youth because it’s what nearly everyone was taught to believe.

By no means do I 100% agree in the sentiment that good should be rewarded and evil be punished. In a perfect world of course the people who do bad will find themselves facing a punishment equal to the crime, and those who practice goodness will be having an absolute blast. But unfortunately in the actual world things don’t always play out like that. Going back to my first example of being good or evil in our youth the punishments for doing something bad are very clear. You do evil, you sit out or get a talking to. But for doing good more often than not there isn’t a reward. There’s nothing besides the fact that you are not being punished. And as people get older this gap between the treatment of good and evil gets even worse, someone who’s hardworking is more likely to get more work instead of a raise, and someone who is actively pushing those around them down stand the higher chance of promotion. And this sucks but it’s something that happens far to often to disregard. In an ideal world it should just be a simple relation of Evil=Punishment and Good=Reward. But it isn’t really that in the modern world and because of that even though I want to believe in the consequences of actions I know it’s not practical to do so.

On the topic of how I justify my own good fortune I don’t really have much to comment on for it. I know that I’m pretty damn lucky in comparison with most, but I don’t feel any guilt or pride for it because it’s something that’s out of my control to decide. I like having good fortune, but know that there’s still always enough bad fortune to in a sense cancel it out. I’d like to believe that everyone has a finite amount of fortune in their life, in the sense that at the end of ones life the total fortune=0. Like when something bad happens you know something good will happen to maintain the balance and vice versa. But I also know that’s wrong because some people die at young ages and that’s that. It sucks and I don’t have an answer for why it happens so I cant really justify my own or their fortune because there seems to be no clear reason for anything happening.

As for answering why humans should act ethically despite the possibility of punishment and no rewards I don’t have an answer. My ideal for doing good things is that they help others around you and that can be a reward, but if your punished for it there comes a point where one needs to decide if its worth it. Not in a selfish way, but if someone were to somehow end up imprisoned for doing a good deed it’s a tragedy. Because when, and IF people realize that the person is wrongfully imprisoned and IF they are released they still lost precious time of their life, for something that possibly was not worth the lost time. I still think everyone should do their best in order to help the world and the people and even animals on it, but unfortunately there’s no way to justify this belief because no matter what you can say there will always be a counter. Just leading to an argument spinning in circles to a point in which nothing is actually decided, and then another time the same argument resumes to the same ending. It’s something I cant answer nor can I debate because its such an impossible question.

Just like god said, and what I just said there’s no way to answer why Job was punished it’s beyond our comprehension. He got twice of everything but lost all of his original family. In the context of the story its framed as a good thing with the line that he lived a full life, but realistically it’s pretty wonky. Because the reward did not match the punishment. In fact it kind of just made it seem that money made up for all of his struggles which is not really valid because he was already rich prior. I have no answer and that is all I can say.

Golly boys and girls, this was really a thinker, is no answer an answer, probably not because there should be an answer. But there isn’t an answer. Good and evil are like ligrk, two sides of the same coin :(.

The most striking thing about this poem is the usage of “Old-fashioned house.” How someone interprets this can easily change how Eden is described within the poem. I prefer to think of it as more like a childhood home. Somewhere in which a person grows up never really thinking much about, but despite what they think the home has history. Now this matters a little to the rest of this but I want it to be out of the way. Through the lines, “Dwell in everyday,” “Without suspecting,” and “Until we drive away,” the poem seems to be talking about how Adam and Eve didn’t know how good Eden was until they actually left. Not that they took it for granted but they didn’t know anything else whatsoever, and now, embarking into the unknown there’s a bittersweet feeling of leaving a familiar place behind. And just like that, with the final line of, “Discover it no more” Adam and Eve have separated themselves from their childhood. Through their eating of the apple and having knowledge of good and evil they’d progressed to adulthood. It’s now up to them to find their way in an unknown world instead of living comfortably, yet ignorantly in the garden.

Much like my take on Adam and Eve it’s soon time for me to leave my childhood and enter an unknown world by myself. It’s bittersweet as I’m excited for college but it’ll suck to leave my home specifically my cat, me and him are boys 🐈. But that’s really the only major drawback that parallels Adam and Eve. I’m aware I am heading into the unknown and am capable of making the conscious choice to do so. Unlike them who managed to make their choice before “being able” to make their choice. And through this I wont feel regret as I drive away because I made the choice. And unlike them I will always have the ability to return as I was not exiled from my home, that’d suck.

Aight this paragraph is about to be uber-short, and I mean UBER. My biggest fear is as I mentioned earlier, not being able to chill with my cat. He’ll be older when I get back but probably not dead but it’ll be pretty sad to see. Besides that I’m not really worried about change I’ve got a pretty consistent family. And as quickly as it’s started it’s over.

Golly Gee was that not one of the most heartfelt blogs ever! Just as the burns on my hands were healing their back once again, I tested the stove and I’m still cooking with HEAT.

Now let me tell you about a little boy. Now nothing about this boy was not very extraordinary, he blended into the background, got average grades, and was very shy. There was one thing that set this lad apart, he was a pathological liar. Now this boy had a big ole’ boot. He’d use it to convince strangers that his dad was a giant, and that one day he would too. More than anything the boy wanted respect not only for him but for his future. But his dad was not a giant, and he would never grow to that size. But at the time all was well for this little boy, people feared and respected him, he had many friends who wanted to be close to this boy with an extraordinary future. The boy was glad and never sad, until he enrolled into school and met his teacher. Now this teacher was a small old man, but within his eyes was a mischievous glint as he sized up the little boy. “Now I’ve heard so much about you.” he said, “You’re a giant some may say, but I’ve got a secret too if only you knew.” And as the man said this the smile ran from the boys face, as the mans gaze darkened and the lights dimmed, “Let me tell you boy in the times of gods, I stood for all that was dark and left a gruesome mark. Harken to me now foul beasts, for it’s time to add another giant to the feast!” As the man said these things birds flew in, and the boy’s eyes darted to the door only to see it blocked. A measly tear slipped from his eye, as he broke down and began to cry. And so the boy plead, “Stop! Stop! Please I don’t share the blood of giants and I don’t want to die!” And the teacher smiled as the boys friends backed away, and talked about how they never wanted to play. “I jest with ye’ boy but I’ve something simple to say, don’t bullshit a bullshiter.” And following that line the birds returned to a perch, the man revealed a light switch and played with the switch, and a desk was moved from the door. The boy never lied again for there would always be someone to catch you, especially another who lied.

Now don’t get me wrong this advice is from my dad, and golly has it stuck with me. I used the story to drive the point in, through lies no-one ever wins. The value of the advice is simple it’s better to remain truthful, lest you be caught on a lie and made a fool. The advice used above may not be a personal narrative, and I have no such stories of my own for I follow the advice, and don’t fear the unknown. The context of when I got it was simple, don’t lie to a liar for such an act can cause an internal fire. My answer to the question may be somewhat weak, but it’s important to remember some of the best advice works quietly, creeping through life with you. Like a mouse.

Ermmm check please we may have cooked this blog too much. 😈

One of the hardest choices a family, friend, or medical professional must make is deciding the value of a life. At what point is it best to let go? Or is the hope of someone recovering worth extending an empty or lifeless existence? The values people place on life vary, and such values are called into question at some point in a person’s life. Whether a loved one is in a coma, a pet living but in pain, or a life-and-death scenario, all of these situations are just some of the times someone needs to think of what a life is worth. Should a soldier pull the trigger when confronted with a possible threat? If they do does this mean that their life was more valuable than the threat? The answers to the questions will never truly be known, the same goes for when a family decides whether or not to keep a member on life support. If they choose to let the person go will they ever know if that was what the person wanted? The value of a person’s own life is easy to judge, you know what you want to accomplish, what would make you miserable to suffer through, and what you pursue as a purpose in life determines how much you may value it. But you can never know how someone else weighs their own life. What is their purpose and what do they do to find meaning? It’s a question that has a separate meaning to every single human being, some believe it’s what you accomplish, the memories you make, or just existing and being able to experience emotions. All of these are fragments of the purpose or meaning of life, pieces of the answer to the world’s most difficult question.

As I write this I currently lean towards a mix of the idea of making memories and leaving something behind to be an answer to the meaning of life. When I was growing up I believed that going with the flow was the way I wanted to live. Adaptable, unbothered, and free. By no means do I look down on that lifestyle now, but my perspective has changed. Like all humans I know I will die, I know that there is no knowing if there’s another step to life following that point. Because of the uncertain certainty of death, I want to do as much as I can with my life not just for myself but for others. Knowing that there will be an end has led to me thinking about what I can do with my life. As far as financial goals go I want to be able to buy something without asking the price, to be the one who gives his card to the waiter when eating with friends. I want to have a balance of work and my social life, I want to help others to a greater measure than just holding a door. I want to keep my body healthy for as long as I can. I want to be able to experience everything I possibly can instead of just hearing about it. These qualities are somewhat shallow, I know, I don’t think anyone can truly know what they wanted until they look back on it and have it. It’s like when you’re stuck between two choices and flips a coin, you realize which one you were hoping for while it’s midair. The same goes for goals and aspirations but nowhere as easily, you’ll only know what it is you wanted to do or truly accomplished on your deathbed.

Adding on to what I want to do with my life I also want to be remembered as a good person. I don’t want people to remember me as someone unpleasant to be around. I don’t want people to remember me as someone the world would be better off without. When I pass I want the things I’ve done to positively impact those who are still living. I’d like the things I do to, along with what the main intent was, always have the side effect of helping someone besides myself out. I don’t want to be remembered as a saint when I say this, just as someone who positively impacted the world. I think that the things I hope to achieve will happen. And I’ll become the person I want to be. My list of goals is important to me because they encapsulate what I want to be, without pursuing them I feel as if I’d be wasting the value of my life, pulling the plug with doubt on whether or not it was the right choice. I think that these ideals are valuable to humanity, as though they are targeted toward me becoming the best person I can be, they do it without needing me to push others out of the way to get there. As I discussed earlier everyone has different goals and ideals regarding the meaning of life, it’s a personal question. But the one thing I think is fair to say is that no matter how a person approaches the question there should never be anyone to suffer for someone to achieve their dreams. The value of a person’s life is up to what they want to do and how they go about doing it, it’s a priceless commodity that can either be cherished or squandered.

(Writing so heat I have third degree burns on my fingers)

The quote Utnapishtim tells Gilgamesh reflects one of the most simple truths of humanity. No matter what someone or something does everything ultimately gets lost to time, be it ancient ruins which were destroyed and never found again or artifacts are forever lost at the bottom of the sea, the majority of things humanity has built to be everlasting have failed to last. Even information that is believed immortal as its put into literary form ends up lost as seen during the burning of the library of Alexandria.

No matter what humans do the world will keep changing and in turn eroding things that are there to last. It’s in this idea that Gilgamesh decides that although he cant achieve immortality and although eventually Uruk will collapse, Gilgamesh upon his return does all in his power to make the best for him and his people, “He has given unexampled supremacy over the people.” (118) Despite knowledge that cleansing events like the flood are possible Gilgamesh continues to improve the life of his subjects, despite knowing that the world makes permeance impossible.

Gilgamesh’s way of dealing with a world in which all that is done ultimately will be forgotten is to live within the moment and live a good life. Through his actions he does not dwell on that which could be but instead that which can be done. And even knowing this Gilgamesh still is aware of how long actions can exist and how they can make life better even after the death of the one who did it, “See if it is not of burnt bricks; and did not the seven wise men lay these foundations?” (117) The length some things last in this world, although not permanent, are an important reminder that all actions are not pointless. In this blog I am referencing an ancient story which will likely be lost eventually but even after centuries still holds strong as a method to pass on ancient ideas. Even after the death of someone what matters is what they left behind and how it affects future generations is something that can give a meaning for life.

As touched upon in my previous paragraphs the only things humans can do to create some essence of permeance is to pass things on to the next generation. It’s through this process that humanity although forgetting those behind it continues to move forward advancing at an exponential rate, with generations using their gifts to create even greater ones for the next generation. It’s through this idea that Gilgamesh gives his people the greatest gift a king can give, the gift of advancement. It’s this gift that allows humanity to exponentially advance towards the idea of permemance.

Between all works of literature that feature a heroic character there’s often similar qualities that cross over between works. Qualities such as righteousness, strength against adversity, honor, nobility, compassion, bravery, and far more. The first question I plan to answer is the common nature of these works, The Odyssey, The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn, Star Wars, Harry Potter, Raiders of the Lost Ark, The Lord of the Rings, or characters like Achilles or Hercules. To begin with all of these heroic characters share at least one of the traits above, the most common being bravery. However that does not define a hero. Cases can be made that deny these characters heroism all together. Such as Anakin’s fall to the dark side, or Indian Jones role as what’s essentially a tomb raider. Despite this these characters are considered hero’s because they preformed heroic actions in their career. It’s views like these that cloud the actual character of such heroes, as considering a character like Anakin Skywalker or even Luke Skywalker, although designed to be agents of good in their own stories the two both made mistakes that somewhat undermined their heroic qualities. The separation between heroic actions and the less heroic actions of these characters is the same reason that women aren’t often featured as heroic characters especially in ancient literature. It’s somewhat unexpected especially in the time period of stories The Oddesy. At the time women were believed to lack some of the previously mentioned heroic qualities and that idea permeated all the way to modern stories. There’s nothing stopping a women from being a heroine besides the stigma created by ancient stories. If heroes had to serve as models of particular conduct I would believe that to be servants of the greater good. However that cause is typically overshadowed by the hero themselves. When people like a hero a lot they typically forget what the hero is actually fighting for and if they still are. Using Star Wars once again although Anakin is supposedly fighting for the right side few consider if the CIS was truly the correct enemy as they had just as much reason to fight as the Republic did. These heroes serve as ideals for people to wish to become and it’s because of this service that the bad side of heroes are often overlooked. Heroes are needed as they help some people strive for something they believe themselves incapable of until seeing someone else do it but they are not entirely essentially as some stories make them out to be. The quotation from Bertolt Brecht, “Unhappy the land that needs heroes,” comments on the superficial need for heroes themselves. Ideally a perfect society wouldn’t need examples of perfect conduct to guide them as they would already strive for it. Anyone has the ability to be a hero, the oversaturation of the hero industry is due to more people wanting to see what a hero is instead of doing it themselves.