http://www.archive.org/details/RipRemixManifesto

You’re right about RiP being morespecific about its claims and concerns and reasons than the kkoagulaa manifesto. This is one of the fine points that is behind why it’s taking a while to complete the next iteration. I’m thinking that examples and specific instances may need to be placed in addenda, or notes, so as to preserve the universal statement of the manifesto.

Meanwhile, what we’re doing with the video posts is sharing some of the input that’s informing our thinking. To make that endeavour more complete, we will need to post some documents and art as well. That shall come.

Now, after the initial shock I am glad, that all of this (the freedom of all these artistic expressions shown in the movie) is happening.

Still, the kkoagulaa manifesto has more ontological roots of its ideas compared to RiP, which is like more specific about its claims and concerns and reasons…

One more thing — this HULU player or site or whatever it is is not available in Bulgaria due to legal (copyright) restrictions…

kriegor,
I could care less about Marx’ drug induced theories, If they were even half-advanced they would calculate the human factor in which there are always people in power.
It has been and it will be. The theory has to start from here, like “Who and why should be in power, what kind of power should he have ”
You mention that National Socialism and communism fail, and here you are wrong again. National Socialism has never failed, it was destroyed by an outside force. The Roman Empire and USSR were destroyed by decadence of their own corrupt system. Not National Socialism.

Why can’t you see National Socialism as the third way that humanity is supposed to prosper? Instead of just capitalism and communism?

Bulgarian folklore IS art and it is unique to us, aren’t you aware of the kaba-bagpipe? Only the Scots have a similar instrument but it is constructed with different materials and produces a different sound. The only thing we lack is the classic period in visual arts.

What I have in mind is the following: as I previously mentioned, current art streams from classical art, which has been reconsidered through the modern art and the late modernity. So far — so good; but what has happened in the modern humanitarian discourse (philosophical, culturological and politological)? One has to go back and trace the history of modernity; modernity sets itself as a project, in witch throughout reasonable means people should be able to legitimize a fair existence for mankind, in which the subject (people) should be able: 1. to find a secure source of knowledge (basically the meaning behind all of the philosophy after Descartes up until Heidegger) 2. to gain the actuall knowledge about the objects around us 3. postulate rules to organize collective human activity 4. practically perform this activity and achieve a world, states or mode of being which is fair, just, and respectful to people and their personalities. So, modernity reached the state of implementation of what it thought to be these principles and failing in the real socialism and national socialism. But even before the failure of these political projects, in the humanitarian thought it was becoming evident, that they are bound to fail, culminating in the implications of the Heideggerian thesis and the post-Heideggerian thought. So, that is why, it is accepted, that the project of modernity and especially of the utopian Eden-like socialistic, national socialistic, communistic future is a failure, because rationality itself cannot legitimize it. This is where we observe and notice this failure and impossibility of our own plans for a future we want. And it is generally called postmodernity; a period of diagnosis. Of course, all of this said just like that is brief and pretty rough, and is too lengthy to present in details. It is just the premise from which all my previous and further thoughts about art and manifestos and modern art come. This situation, to me personally resembles the way ancient culture has ended; the way feudal society has dissolved and burned; and now modernity passes away and we are left in a period of uncertainty, in which western culture reconsiders the possibilities and de- and re-constructs its heritage, for example through hermeneutics it the humanitarians and through experimentation, in music, and art in general.

And here comes the kkoagulaa manifestoo: it has all the characteristics of a postmodern text; it states itself as a living document, it denies an ending to itself, it has the potential to dissolve the meta-narratives of the past, and reconstruct them in a non reductionist way, but in a way it which they are thought as different entities of a whole (greater than its parts); the art of kkoagulaa bears such characteristics, as it goes beyond common boundaries and does not strive to define, declare, judge. The manifestos of the past strive to define; (which means to restrict) the meaning of art in a too narrow scope, as simultaiously art has existed through radically different forms at roughly the same time; for example the futurism and art noveau. The futurist manifesto and the surrealist manifesto are restrictive, elitist, closed. My opinion is that there is no rational way to defend one form of art as more appropriate, more real or true, as there is no way to defend one essence over another (existentialism), because each one bears its uniqueness and because of that endless interpretation. The manifesto has enormous potential to include and enrich the meaning of art and its products, as a part of one, which is being itself.

Now, art as a calling would have to be elitist in the sense that worrying about the “universality” of ones work is precisely the process that has watered popular culture down to where it is about as flavorless as is possible. Design, be it clothing, household goods, packaging, advertising can be aesthetically striking, but is to classic art what applied and industrial science is to pure research. I don’t see this as a reason to denigrate either or worry about where the boundaries lie. Concern over that in connection with ones own work is a social conundrum, and therefore more connected with issues regarding carreer and livelihood than how we should process work of varying kinds.