We have shown them that any problem can be solved between people if only they can trust each other. That is all it needs, no?

They fight a war and they don't know what for. Isn't that crazy?How can one man kill another and not really know the reason why he does it, except that the other man wars a different colour uniform and speaks another language?

"The love bite on my neck could one day be replaced by a rope burn."

Seeing all things purely as symbols leads to a state comparable to schizophrenia, in which all things resonate with meaning yet nothing has a clear signification. On the other hand, to banish the symbolic in order to see all things merely as signs, as recommended by reductive materialism, is to remove the dimension of meaning from our picture of the universe. The resulting state of being is the moral abyss of the psychopath.

Perhaps the use of the future tense in the phrase "beauty will save the world" does not refer to a historic eventuality so much as a moment beyond chronological time, a virtual event always in the process of happening yet never fully consummated. Perhaps the world has already been saved in beauty, and always has been. Is this the secret of art, whose power is to transmute moments in time so as to lay bare the eternity that inhabits them?

We need a faith to restore our capacity to feel, to affect and be affected with the same passionate intensity as our forebears, whose powers of feeling astound us so in the records and art of the past. The death of affect, to borrow a phrase from J.G. Ballard, is the true catastrophe of our spectral age, our spiritual Hiroshima. It makes questions such as whether life's riddles are answered at the Vatican, in Tibet, or by the Large Hadron Collider utterly meaningless, since it removes the ground we need to pose such questions in the first place. Neither religion nor science can give us back the ground. Only the imagination can. Only art can mend the rupture of the soul and the world, the body and the earth.

We have all met people who embody the New in their actions and words. We have all at one time or another done something so spontaneous and authentic that it suddenly revealed to us the wild potentialities that lie beyond habit and convention. The argument can be made that every mad, unwarranted act of love, becoming, or true self-giving is literally a work of art.

Creativity is freedom's most primal expression, though not the freedom we were sold under the banner of democracy. True freedom is less a license to do as one pleases than the power to be what one has no choice but to be, the capacity to follow one's inmost desire.

To create is to free oneself from the dialectical binds that keep the ideological in place. Thus, every act of creation is an act of resistance.

Since experiencing a work of art is as creative an activity as making one, idiology is not the prerogative of artists. In fact, trusting one's own experience over the dictates of Consensus may be all that is required to speak of artistic creation. While apolitical in itself, artistic creation becomes revolutionary the moment it is actualized in the world, because it transcends all that has been given as self-evident and calls on us to question and to seek.