Devemos ser gratos pelo Ser estar sendo e funcionando a todo momento, sem te cobrar nada em troca.Sentir isto é uma forma de afinar e vibrar com o Ser.

No matter what you think about mystic, or what mysticists say about everything: 
if you begin to think , you become aware how  misterious is  all that you experienced until now.

On Artistical Perfection

The history-makers did not manage to do perfect works,

They managed to let those works look perfect at a certain moment in time.

That’s the case of many paintings.

A genious makes it look perfect for a long time, because he got to meditate  about the source of perfection, that is, the eternal and universal sources of creation,and their expressions as well. 

That’s especially the case of great musical compositions: somehow you fell the nature moving, and the drama of the human spirit inbetween.

When a whole group or even population of artists work according to the universal plans of creation then you see things that looks like an second universe, a human mediation at the same time to ourselves and something far beyond. 

That’s especially the case of some temples and cities around it.

Principle of Substantiality ( in Music)

One very basic mistake among many musical pieces after 1950 is the lack of substantiality. That means, many works don’t even come to be a recognizable IDENTITY ( substance). They don’t become A DISTINGUISHED THING. Paradoxically , it seems that the more “avantgard” the composer is, the more it happens. No matter what you do, character and identity are fundamental artistical requeriments. I call that the principle of “substantiality”.  

If you do “just volk art” it is sometimes even wanted that things are similar to each other. If you hear jazz at the cofee bar while talking to someone it is already great so. However if you pay 20 Euros for a piano recital, it is annoying if the pieces sound like “what ever” , without any discourse. I don’t judge musical techniques here, but the lack of discourse, drama, process, meaningful happenings : those elements of the artistical substance that should lead to catharsis. 

I does not mean that a piece is a problem when it sounds similar to something. It is a problem when whey are simular by a lack o intrinsic substance, that means, as it were not a problem to exchange their title, composers name, or even sections.

You can avoid tonal substantiality, you can compose the most evanescent pieces of music , but should not avoid formal or discursive substantiality, that what a gives a simbolical and poetical value to your piece of art.

A composer never write how he plays, he write what he plays , and with the best attempt to suggest his 'how'. Noone master all decisions one have to do while composing. And that is even truer if you compose simple things.  Because what is simple, is ambiguous; and sometimes it should be so.

Music is life, and life goes not at a cristal precise tempo in every detail. 

Just musical signs are precisely equal, not musical events.

I perceive two fundamental positions  among conservatives: one seems to hate the present;  the other  loves it, because it is still expression of an eternal and expansive timeline. 

Just the second one enables the frame of really getting the sense of the past, because it was also presence and actuality  someday.

I conservative that hates the actual presence of the world without acknowledging the expansion and overwhelming variety of what is good is so bad as a revolutionary nihilist that destroys himself while spucking on the history and tradition over he grew up: both are cowards. 

And courage is an ultimate source of knowledge, isn’t?