And Yustas, about those 125,000 characters of writing on invisibility. Perhaps you lump them together in large groups? And I have another question or two. “Many people come to you looking for the answer to your art form.” —What kind of answer? Why would they come to him asking for an answer unless his art form completely baffled them? Or is that the idea? “Not many people understand the ideas presented are to achieve greater understanding of human nature.” — —That’s understandable if his writing baffles them. And if they don’t understand anything he says in his writing, it’s hopeless to expect them to learn how to understand human nature from it. Or anything else. It’s possible that the discussion has strayed into such an elevated plane that I’m still crawling around here in three dimensions. But about the concept of invisible painting: I can’t shake the story of The Emperor’s New Clothes.
Those 125,000 characters is just a part of huge archive on Invisible art of Paul Jaisini. There is a chapter that corresponds to each essay on invisible painting and those documents together make 710,000 characters or 125,000 words of comments. The organization of the book that has essays and the comments is finished and undergo some additional revision. Your reference to the tale of the Emperor’s New Clothes is irrelevant dealing with the children’s art. To argue the new art theory and what people find captivating as art that certainly is worth to be called new art of 21 century you need to find more substantial polemics. EYKG