For the "What" the "When" and never to "How to" I think this situation, call killeraggio, the principals have well-defined. There are names, last names, faces, and are strictly bipartisan. That nopartisan. Or no idea.
If I write is because I'm sad, disappointed, hanging on a ledge ready for the crash loudest in my life. The most disappointing thing is that I have faults.
When I finished high school I thought my life more, more real. I felt the world beneath my feet. After a few months that world longer existed. I thought big, I thought like a big, long thought finished didactic studies, poems memorized, thanks to its strong knowledge Enigmistica week. Quid tum. It is a song by Lady Caga, is not an MTV broadcast. It 'a Latin phrase. Now nothing has changed. I thought and still think that the academic world must inevitably be "different" from what it is instead the world of school, in the end we pay more to get to know more. And instead?
"What," "When" and never "How" These words have been treated with large doses in these three years, the only questions posed to the rest of us, treated as a showgirl performances of dubious variety. Yet the criticism should be the basis of our studies, our future "job" should indeed be the basis of all humanity. Where is the criticality in the "What" and "When"? Nowhere, in response rhetoric rhetorical question, the two questions involve the most objective answers. The "How" it should be more interesting, if nothing else should start some subjective element, should lead the debate and the pursuit of truth. I do not like Simmenthal truth, I do not like the microwave oven has become the Italian University (or at least what I know). Of course there are exceptions, cases that confirm the folly ccomunque and the flatness of the ordinary wave. There have been tests in which even I was referred to as an alternative application, perfect alternative. Almost punk. "According to you." I heard an adult, I felt mature, confident, aware of myself. Like the primitive that tens of thousands of years ago he left the imprint of his hand in a cave Alps (if I remember correctly).
Examples of an additional standard We come to the extreme case, the extreme consequence of what we are experiencing. The study of art necessarily involves a study of the image and I think this is universally accepted, even by myself. But how to study the image? It carries meanings, a story (sometimes more stories), a thought, a well-defined policy, decision making and pain. But if this passes in the second and third floor of what remains of that image? A name, date, and (perhaps) a place. A caption useful in many television quiz show, travel in the illusory happiness, packs of hope after work ... nothing more. We scholars of art but we need to move gracefully between these images, empathize with them, understanding their meaning and structure, history, the motive, the price paid, the model.
If no one teaches us? Five images in memory can also learn self-taught. And since there is no cost to Google image.
Conclusions illuminstica This is the lesson? This is the new way of "knowing"? Who do we thank? Diderot or Wikipedia? I am the only one to kill me in this sea of \u200b\u200buncritical thought?
