VENUS DE MILO IS AN ENIGMATIC ICONIC marble statue classically dated to the Hellenistic period between 323-31 B.C. This window of Greek art was the bridge between the Classical period ending at the death of Alexander the Great in 323 B.C. and the emergence of the Roman Empire shortly before the birth of Jesus. At least part of Venus’ arm(s) went missing upon the re-discovery of this lost statue in 1820 on the Greek island of Milos (wikipedia). The other parts of her arms are history. Though this statue of a topless, armless woman is referred to as Venus and hence Aphrodite, the Greek goddess of love and beauty, according to the Louvre website, she could have been any number of related goddess figures: Artemis, Danaid, Amphitrite etc. etc. She may even be a copy (replica) of a copy (replica) of an older Greek statue from the Classical era (~500 B.C.). Hence, we of the 21st century don’t really know where/when she came from (Venus, perhaps?). Plus, she’s not the only armless statue in the world. And we will never know what she’s hiding under her drapery. Or what she keeps in her drawers. Except for a hiccup during a socialist uprising during the reign of Napoleon III, the first president of France, and again in 1939 during WWII on the occasion of the Nazi occupation of Paris, this particular Venus de Milo has been on constant display at the Louvre museum in Paris since 1821. The Louvre–originally a palace fortress built amidst the 12th century–was converted into an art museum in 1793, and is now the largest and most visited art museum in the world, housing “approximately 38,000 objects from prehistory to the 21st century” (wikipedia). It wasn’t until 1989 however that entrance to the art and artifacts was rooted out as an underground atrium and topped off with a glass pyramid.
DISCLAIMER: Inevitably, bringing up pyramids and Mona Lisa within an obviously occult setup smacks of The Da Vinci Code. Truth and fiction aside, it’s a novel which I have not read. Nor have I seen the Hollywood feature presentation of it, nor read any other Dan Brown books for that matter. So in these disrespects, I am ignorant, and have no intention of referring to those stories other than to say that I am not going to refer to it anymore than I already just now have. Conspiracies aside, however, I highly recommend the recently published (May 2018) book Dark Star Rising: Magick and Power in the Age of Trump, which mentions in the introduction a possible “hidden hand behind a new “psychogeography” of Paris, responsible for the pyramid in the courtyard of the Louvre Museum”, possibly issuing from the “synarchy” (total government) movement which emerged in France and other areas of Europe during the 1930s and 40s (p. xx).
One thing probably most if not all of us are inevitably ignorant of is the Venus de Milo‘s arms. No one that we know of seems to know what happened to them or how they were originally positioned. A popular but not necessarily accurate speculation is that she was holding a fruit. However, since her arms are flat out gone, they could be anything and anywhere.
In 2018 it doesn’t seem like the Venus will need to be physically removed from her pedestal to prevent her from being stolen by an occult-driven nationalist-socialist fascist-totalitarian-imperialist regime. Instead the latest hype orbiting the icon goes something like this:
The screenshot above is from the recently released surprise video titled APES**T, filmed entirely in the Louvre by the recently released surprise duo act “The Carters” (aka Beyonce and JAY-Z), from their recently released surprise album titled Everything is Love. (As a side note: Oscar the Grouch may have green fur, but he’s got a white trash soul). But just HOLD UP right there:
Its ok, Milo, you are exempt since you don’t have any arms to hold up…but as for everyone else: Is Everything Love? Is racism love? Is ecological destruction is love? Police brutality? How about colonialism? Cultural desecration? Sexism? But HOLD UP–again–“to bring the beat back” a la Katy Perry: what’s Katy Perry got to do with The Carters? I dunno, maybe it has something to do with consumerism and art, both of which are implied however explicitly in Katy’s 2014 video This Is How We Do. Both Perry’s and The Carter’s videos demonstrate how “they” do:
Meanwhile, everyone else on planet Earth who visits Venus de Milo (goddess of Love) does so with if not love, at least a sense of admiration and a little respect. These are basic human states of being which both The Carters and Katy Perry are not interested in demonstrating. Maybe it’s because “everything is love”: hence, everything goes (out the window….)
I visited the Louvre for the first time at the beginning of May this year, which–synchronistically–happens to be the most probable time APES**T was filmed at the Louvre. During my two-week stay in Paris I trolled the Louvre for five days on May 3rd, 4th, 5th, 12th, and 14th. According to bustle.com, the only reasonable date(s) Bey and JAY could have done the shoot, based on their *busy* schedules, was either May 8th or 15th, both being a Tuesday, the day of the week the Louvre is closed to the public. Since APES**T, the accompanying album Everything Is Love, and “The Carters” appeared out of the blue in June, the general public was blissfully unaware of any Bey and JAY presence in the Louvre at that time (and reciprocally, I humbly bet they didn’t know I was also there during that time). The suggested story goes that the duo must have dished out a decent $um to privately “rent” the Louvre for the shoot (although this is not a verified fact). According to Vox.com, “As the New York Times has pointed out, it is not actually that expensive to shoot a video in the Louvre (about $17,500 for a full day’s shoot)”. What a rip off! I only paid $6o for a pass that gave me admittance everyday for a week, and I could shoot as many pictures and video as my camera could hold. And still these people think they are $pecial because they visited the Louvre 4 times over the past decade (thefader.com)? Come on, with a supposed “net worth” of 1 billion and a $40mil private jet, and they’ve only visited the most visited art museum in the world 4 measly times (and always for selfies)? Like the worst of tourists, these cultural “icons” come in, snag some selfies with a few recognizable works, leave, and instantly post it up on their social media (in their case, the Beyonce VEVO). I literally combed the Louvre for five days without taking a single selfie and in comparison the best these people can do is film someone shirtless getting their hair delicately combed in front of Mona Lisa. Oh, and need I point out that this image (which is also the cover of the album) is obviously a reference (rip off) to (of) a Carrie Mae Weems (real artist) photograph from 1990?
Meta-referencing requires meta-criticism, the latter of which is perhaps best left for the viewer whose eyes are opened to that fact that none of which is being shown to them is “original”. Also, whatever that means is up to you. However, I guarantee that the makers of APES**T–whether this is the brainchild of “The Carters”, or perhaps some hidden hand behind/above them–had specific intentions for the specific inclusions of specific works of art and imagery. As complex.com states, “Rest assured, nothing The Carters do is by accident”. There is a certain (sur)reality to it all–and upon close(r) inspection, this “reality” is not limited to what your two physical eyes perceive (i.e. are deceived by). I admit I am failing to see with my own two eyes how the pretentious appropriation of the Weems photo is delivering the same message as the original photograph. The comb in the video just so happens to have a handle in the shape of a clenched fist representing solidarity with Black Power–a racially driven “resistance movement” which was not in solidarity with the civil rights movement (a la Martin Luther King Jr.), but rather in opposition to it, essentially promoting segregation, racism, and violence. The original Weems photo does not demonstrate these values or perspectives, not by a long shot. Like many shots in APESH**T, this appropriation is an inversion of the message of the original artwork. And it is cleverly whipped up seamlessly in the rich cream of a fancy expensive music video “created” by billionaire “artists” in an art museum which they possibly rented (invaded with permission). So colonialistic of them! I’m just glad I didn’t accidentally wander in on the day they filmed, lest I might have walked in on this unique demonstration of “victory”:
A popular explanation narrative being propagated in the Media at this time is that APES**T is a video which pays respects to black history which has been excluded from the context of European art history–and also so much more. Some brief cross-sections of media around the world wide web explaining the meaning(s) of APES**T reveal a thread of narratives running parallel to the video, perhaps in an attempt to fabricate a Mandela Effect into existence to serve some ulterior motive.
An online article from The New Yorker (whose html reads https://www.newyorker.com/culture/culture-desk/what-it-means-when-beyonce-and-jay-z-take-over-the-louvre) explains: “The six-minute “Apeshit” video is a feast of juxtapositions…it opens with the image of a black man, in fashionably torn jeans and worn sneakers, with giant white wings attached to his back.” The article forgets to explain what it means when a young black man with white angel wings squats at night outside the Louvre.
Instead the article draws attention to the fact that the dude is wearing fashionably ripped jeans and “worn” (Nike) sneakers (though I dunno, they look pretty new and spiffy to me…). But what does that mean?!?!? Could this have something to do with the JAY and Kanye track “Niggas in Paris” released in 2011, in which they “got my niggas in Paris and they goin gorillas, huh” followed by “I don’t even know what that means / No one knows what it means, but it’s provocative”. Could it have something to do with JAY-Z’s song “Lucifer” off his Black Album released in 2003, the ending lyrics of which state: “And if you feel in my heart that I long for revenge / Please blame it on the sun of the morning / Thanks Again”?
Thelily.com states, “It’s also critical to note that traditionally in museums and galleries, art is displayed on white walls or in white spaces to allow the art to be viewed without distraction. In this frame of the video [Nike of Samothrace scene], skin color is one of the main subject matters. For black women to not only occupy, but move fluidly, comfortably and naturally (to dance!) throughout this white-centric and male artist-dominated venue is a major power move.” I don’t know what kind of cultural/mental straight-jacket the writer of that article is in, but I think its critical to note that the “dancers” lying down on the white staircase are not moving “naturally”, and any comfort or fluidity they may exhibit seems to be the affect of hypnotism rather than choreography. Though 12-year-old Regan is not comfortably dancing, the staircase scene cut from the original The Exorcist in addition to the levitation scene has some uncanny resonances with visuals in APES**T. I wonder why?
HOLD UP: didn’t Bey’s younger sister Solange already do a stint of occupying a white space with black bodies at the Guggenheim, nearly exactly a year prior to the filming of APES**T? But maybe that didn’t count since “high priestess” Solange ordered a dress-code in which everyone in attendance had to wear white–and also temporarily give up their iPhones (time.com). *Gasp*, I hope no one had an attack of separation anxiety (how are they suppose to exist if they can’t take a selfie to affirm that they are still in control of their image?!?)! At least if anything bad like that happened, or if Santa Claus showed up, the general public would be ignorant of it since no one was allowed to film. As to why Solange was putting on this whole secret ceremonial show, lyrics to a song performed revealed that “this sh**t is for us”. She further explained: “I’m not settling for being allowed in these spaces but for tearing these f***king walls down…We built this sh**t.” (time.com). It’s an unfortunate blatant contradiction that she seems hellbent on tearing down walls that she also apparently built. So long, Solange! Such is the nature of self destruction.
Artnet.com relays: ““What does it mean to host a black cultural moment in a traditionally white space?” asked Kimberly Drew, the Metropolitan Museum of Art’s social media manager, on Twitter.” Since the article doesn’t really give a definitive answer, perhaps the title of the article (which is from @TabloidArtHist) lays it down: “I May Need to Lie Down”. Like the bodies on the staircase?. In addition to the usual cacophony of birds, this reads like some effective resistance to oppression, no?
“Apes**t” is evidence that despite the commercial success of The Carters, they have not assimilated into white culture…Jay-Z reminds us to protest against injustice, even if that means to take a knee like Colin Kaepernick or to challenge the people and institutions that enact racist and classist policies just as Barack Obama did as president.” (dailyutahchronicle.com). HOLD UP: is the syntax of that statement actually confirming that Obama enacted racist and classist policies by becoming President? In addition to that, by becoming President, he was, after all, assimilated into the white culture and status quo (quid pro quo) of the American government incorporated. As admitted in this The New Yorker article about a prominent artist’s high art portrait painting of Obama released in February of this year (yes, this year, not during his terms in office) “Obama proved himself ultimately powerless to make radical, concrete change commensurate with the message communicated by his face and his name”. Maybe that’s because “concrete change” is an oxymoron, moron. And, sadly, this assessment is on par with the face and name–the visual exploitation of race and power–The Carters present to you in APES**T.
As explained by James Smalls, a professor of art history at University of Maryland Baltimore County, “In a way, Beyoncé is exploiting/marketing her blackness as creativity — as a kind of weapon — within and against the very Eurocentric system of culture and consumption from which she has benefited,” (vox.com). Is it just me, or–in a way–is this pointing out the fact that she is actually exploiting her race as a weapon (i.e. racial violence), within and against (i.e. civil war) the system she currently benefit$$$ from (i.e. capitalist imperialism)? Smalls continues: “That painting is an anomaly because it presents a black person as the sole aestheticized subject and object of a work of art”. Is it just me, or is this–in a way–a promotion of the aesthetic objectification of an anonymous female black slave or servant (painted by an aristocratic white female)? The conclusion Smalls makes regarding the painting is that “The portrait “reduced” a potentially radical icon of liberty for blacks and women to an aesthetic level of sensualism for male consumption…Benoist’s portrait is part of high culture that is positioned against feminism” (www.19thc-artworldwide.org). The painting in the context of APES**T faithfully follows suit: it becomes an exploitation of race and gender inequality framed within the context of the high high culture presented to you by “The Carters”. In no way does its inclusion mean anything to the tune of The Carters supporting woman’s rights, black lives mattering, racial (in or out)equality in a Eurocentric art context etc etc. It is a trigger image which exploits, objectifies, and subjugates ideals which are emotionally, psychologically, and politically sensitive topics for the worldwide population at this time–topics which the video repeatedly plays up/on by bombarding the viewer with images of separation, difference, repression, and inequality.
Inequality is highlighted relentlessly throughout the video except when it comes to the publicity image for the film: Beyoncé and JAY-Z standing smugly in front of Mona Lisa. As stated by a Twitter user with an undergraduate art history degree (who is falsely labeled “art historian” by the Media), “People from around the world flock to the Mona Lisa to take their picture with her…Beyoncé (and Jay-Z I guess) is visually asserting herself as Mona Lisa” (dailydot.com). So I guess I really missed out on “visually asserting” myself “as Mona Lisa” when I chose not to take a selfie with her. That’s too bad. Still…I wonder why The Carters chose not to pose next to the portrait of the anonymous black woman who supposedly is a representative of “their history…[and] all the oppression that they’ve faced historically and currently” (buzzfeednews.com). I don’t really know who “they” is referencing in that statement, because historically “The Carters” have not faced the kind of oppression black people have historically faced in the real world. (As a side question: I can’t help but wonder how the black refugees that sell water and trinkets to tourists for 1 Euro outside the Louvre would feel about this video. Do you think its helping their life circumstances?).
Nope, Bey and JAY exist at the top of some kind of proverbial pyramid, and “they can’t believe we’ve made it”. To celebrate this idea, they pose, flail around, and “rap” (talk s**t) in all seriousness in front of paintings and statues as a demonstration of “winning” which is–contrary to the popular narrative–not actually opposing the power structures embedded in the institution known as the Louvre. Paying the average cost of a 2015 Prius to rent the Louvre for a day (if indeed they delivered dough at all) is not a “radical” takeover by black bodies in a white space. There is no “resistance” involved in transactions lubricated with pitchforked over $$$ (most likely laced with ulterior motives), and the only solidarity they are showing is with their own minority group of the 0.666%. Plus: the notion that the Louvre is a “historically white space” is true in a 1950’s sense. But really, get with the times, this is 2018, folks. There’s a lot more diversity than just black and white in the broader frame of reality. Ignoring this fact is not social progress, but rather ignorance.
What a lot of this boils down to is narrative dictation: people telling other people what it is that they are seeing, rather than letting them see for themselves. This is what fake news is all about: Media shows you something, and then tells you what you are witnessing. What you are shown and what you are told may in fact be totally at odds. This generates cognitive dissonance, and essentially creates a division in one’s perception between logical and emotional comprehension. This explains why said fake media makes people so upset: it utterly confuses (and subtly brainwashes) them. By all un-narrated (raw) appearances, the billionaire art
stars poseurs known as “The Carters” (Bey and JAY’s surname, which uncannily coincidentally brings to mind the Carter Family: a white American folk music group that influenced many genres of music–there’s some cognitive dissonance for you) use tactical inversion to falsely appear to be representing the opposite of what they are actually promoting. Could the recent proliferation of blatantly inverted interpretations have to do with The Carter’s “undeniable control of their narrative” (racked.com)? OK, so lets look at their “narrative” via the lyrics of APES**T:
“Rah, gimmee my check” / “Bottomless check” / “I got expensive habits” / “Get off my dick”
Can’t be toppin’ my reign (c’mon, c’mon, c’mon)
Poppin’, I’m poppin’, my bitches all poppin’
We go to the dealer and cop it all (cop it all)
Sippin’ my favorite alcohol (alcohol)
Got me so lit, I need Tylenol (Tylenol)
All of my people, I free ’em all (free ’em all)
Hop in the whip, wanna see the stars
Sendin’ the missiles off, trickin’ my inhibitions off
It should be as clear as the glass pyramids on a sunny May day in Paris that the song has nothing to do with the imagery presented in the video. In addition, the imagery appropriated, juxtaposed, and created in the video has nothing to do with the fabricated narratives that are being spun and propagated through the Media web and directed at the consumer population. And even though artnet.com admits that there might be occult references in APES**T–references which also appear heavily in basically all other Beyonce videos and performances–the article writes off these deliberate aesthetics as nothing more than a way to help the video go “viral” (because apparently the (ill)uminati “mess” attracts the attention of “hateful nerds” who supposedly ratchet up the #views lol). However: art deliberately deals in the aesthetics and meanings of images, and for an arts publication to overtly blindside the hidden-in-plain-sight aesthetics and imagery saturation is simply deliberately swallowing the blinding pill of ignorance (I guess they are just covering up one eye? See no evil hear no evil!). But I guess it’s no big deal, right? After all, as the article goes on to mention, we’ve got the “soaring art market” (is this a ignorant reference to Icarus?) to deal with, which is apparently in opposition to the “internet’s tendency to reduce everything to free”. Freedom is just so tragic, aint it? Apparently Bey and JAY’s stunt in the Louvre not only immediately overcomes the beast of dominance of whiteness in art history, but it also balances out the check$$$ and balance$$$ too. What a deal!
And as can be deduced by the Louvre’s follow up creation of a 90 minute guided tour in which visitors can “Follow this trail to discover the iconic artworks from JAY-Z and Beyoncé’s music video “Apes**t” (louvre.fr) (because apparently The Carters virtually lay claim$$$ to those works now), this pyramid topped and bottomed institution is playing an active role in narrative fabrication (step right up to your free fake history lesson!). So much for the academically correct post-narrative narrative of post-modernism! (I don’t have a Twitter account, but trust me, I graduated from art school before the world ended in 2012, I’m educated on this, no nuclear bluff). I only recommend following that guided tour if you want to have your perception of art and reality covertly subjugated like the heads of these two women below:
As we paradoxically dig deeper and deeper into the shallowness of APES**T, what is being hidden in plain sight is simply not what is seems. Paradoxically, to put it simply: there are no hidden meanings: they are showing it as it is.
As for resurrecting dead bodies: of all the hundreds of paintings on display in the Louvre depicting all chapters of Jesus’ life, The Carters chose to include Pieta (1538-40) by Rosso Fiorentino. As I gravely dug up in this article about the (de)evolution of pop music since the turn of the Millennium, the mainstream music industry avidly and explicitly promotes themes of death.
Speaking of red, white, and blue: at least the President and his First Lady faced the Second Coming:
Whoa, are they straight up trying to trump the President? Or just being copy cats? It’s hard to tell by appearances, but apparently their “politically charged album” featuring the
Planet of the APES**T theme track has a bonus track titled “Salud”, which pays some sort of toasted wafer to President Trump (breitbart.com). Can we deduce that IF Beyonce is, from some “different angle”, positioning herself as being equal to Mona Lisa, then Trump a year prior promoted himself as equal to the Second Coming? Is it “radical” that the President of the United States got photos taken of his non-Catholic body in a Catholic space? Since neither of those ideas were promoted in the Media, we may never know. However, it is apparent that all of the people pictured above (even Mona and Jesus!) seem to share the same sentiment as expressed by the lyrics of APES**T: “I can’t believe we’ve made it”. But HOLD UP: Made WHAT exactly?!? As I pointed out in the very first article I posted on May 29, 2016 titled “The Problem With Image Over Substance“, Beyonce posing in front of a work of art in a museum does not mean anything other than that: simply, that all she has “made” is an Instagram post of her posing in front of a work of art (what an instant literal poseur!). She could have just photo-shopped herself next to a photo of an artwork and it would mean just as much. In other words: its just another load of APES**T. It’s just the tip of the pyramidal iceberg, folks, and it melting fast! (Is this the real threat of global warming? Hellfire certainly burns hot…). As depicted in this painting on display at the Louvre, even a basic monkey can demonstrate more artistic skill and finesse:
Since they named their video APESH**T, I don’t see why they excluded the painting above from the film. Perhaps there were just blissfully ignorant of its existence–like they clearly are of most
humans on the planet art in the museum. (To all you apes out there: why aren’t you protesting misrepresentation of animals in anthropocentric art institutions?!? After all, haven’t you ever seen the crowd goin apes**t?). Instead, they did what everyone else does when visiting the Louvre, except in fancy clothing:
All s**tting aside, lets get back to the movie, shall we?
In my experience of 90s American public school, children were first initiated into the ritual of daily morning Pledge of Allegiance in 3rd grade, at approximately age 7. This new ritual certainly made an impression on me, in the least because it was an instant and inexplicable addition to morning routines of previous grades. Learning the Pledge was a demonstration of an upgrade in behavior, a proud step towards maturity guiding us into the adult world–or at least, it set us 3rd graders apart and was one more thing we had to “memorize” (mesmerize?). It was like we were suddenly in the know, whereas those in previous grades weren’t. This daily ritual would continue through High School until “graduation” into the “adult” realm of “choice”. Ironically–though we were not told this–most adults don’t do the Pledge of Allegiance at their workplace, do they? (Silly adults, the Pledge is for kids!) In 3rd grade, we were simply all guided to “Just Do It” (as the Nike slogan goes): and so every morning before lessons began we would stand in unison behind our desks, hands over hearts, and repeat the words of the teacher at the front of the classroom. Since it was such a paradoxically novel yet boring experience upon my entry into 3rd grade, I remember vividly to this day what the Pledge of Allegiance ritual “looked” like. To the left of the American flag which hung eternally limp in the windless classroom on its golden metal stalk protruding from and bolted to the wall (and which we were supposed to keep our eyes fixated on), was a standard public school black box television with VCR, positioned high up in the corner of the room. To the right of the flag was the green chalkboard upon which lessons would appear and disappear, and which hadn’t yet, at this time in the 90s, been replaced by white boards (later “smart” boards). However in my classroom, deviating from those standard required public school amenities, happened to be a poster of the Mona Lisa–which, I was told, was famous and important because her eyes appeared to follow you everywhere. Though I liked the mysterious image and often looked at it instead of the flag during the Pledge, I not only didn’t like the idea of her eyes following me, but I didn’t see that as being true. She seemed to be staring off eternally into some etheric space much as I did during class.
Just as how I didn’t really grasp the significance of the Pledge in 1997, I couldn’t even begin to fathom what the Pledge could possibly have to do with the image of the lady whose eyes supposedly followed you everywhere. Now in 2018, there are some eye-opening clues hinting that Mona has more to do with the Pledge and its flag than previously could have been imagined or made up.
Around 1937 Hitler de facto declared war on certain types of art–broadly, Modern art, the avant garde (“advance front”) movement at the time–by inventing a Degenerate Art exhibition featuring more than 650 works of art that were deemed unworthy, to say the least, of the Nazi’s totalitarian dictatorship vision. Ironically, in the same breath, “In their possession were 16,558 priceless original paintings and sculptures, many of which were later auctioned to finance the Reich, or rather, the Nazi individuals who used the money for their own gain” (warhistoryonline.com). So like, what’s with the #trend of people in power being perversely obsessed with art? Is is because, I dunno, art is important or something? Ironically, The Carters taking possession of the Louvre in APES**T is also financing their own gain/game. And the gains/games of many others as well. But what is their game?
Like Bey and JAY rapping and flailing around in front of masterpieces, Hitler probably suffered from a massive case of an inferiority complex (though rather than going apes**t, he was more the anal retentive type). After all, his realistic watercolor paintings of buildings are nice, but they’re aren’t the Neoclassical masterpieces that he revered, the same type that Bey and JAY did their jig in front of. Just as Hitler spun the narrative that certain artworks (and the artists that made them) were “degenerate” while simultaneously getting benefit$ from this public denouncement, The Carters are framing art (literally, within the frame of the Youtube or Vevo window) in a public display for their own gain and to further certain ideologies and agendas. After seeing APES**T, I realized that Hitler and Co. don’t need to come back from the dead to attempt to steal the goddess of love and beauty, Venus de Milo: it’s all already been stolen, perceptually speaking. And again, not unlike the Nazis, they–whoever they may be–fashionably like to promote the Apocalypse:
But wait, it gets better (worse!). JAY-Z is shot multiple times rapping in front of The Raft of Medusa. (What a sight to behold: I’m frozen as stone and can’t think for myself I better ask Google). According to Jstor.com, “Raft depicts the tragic loss of life after the ship capsized off the coast of Senegal in 1816. The Medusa was part of a fleet of ships trying to reclaim Senegal from Great Britain as a French colony. There were not enough lifeboats when the Medusa capsized, so the carpenter on board engineered a raft for 147 of the lowest-class soldiers and settlers. At first one of the lifeboats towed the raft, but eventually the now-infamous captain abandoned it in order to save the boat…Only fifteen people survived (five of whom died soon after), and these survivors told harrowing tales of death, cannibalism, and a fight for survival”. (This is so like Planet of the Apes a la survival of the fittest…in which we must eat each other to survive!). Wikipedia states that the ship Argus rescued the remaining people, but the Louvre website says the ship “sails away without seeing them” (how tragic).
Interestingly, as pointed out in the “Description” section on wikipedia, “The pictorial composition of the painting is constructed upon two pyramidal structures”, which, as can be further pieced together from the description on the Louvre website, “The whole composition is oriented toward this hope in a rightward ascent culminating in a black figure, the figurehead of the boat. The painting stands as a synthetic view of human life abandoned to its fate.” I don’t know what “synthetic view” the viewer who wrote that interpretation has, but propositions for humanity set forth in APES**T are grotesquely $ynthetic (i.e. man-made–as in “I can’t believe we’ve made it”) and grotesque to boot. The inclusion of this painting compounds motifs and themes referenced throughout the video: colonization, conquest, conflict, racial difference, human suffering, and death.
…In the meantime, “history” continues to implode…
In the screenshot above, “The Carters” appear in shadow form in front of The Sphinx of Tanis, bathed in fake blood red light. According to the Louvre website, this stone sculpture has been dated by archaeologists to be from 2600 BC (…or earlier). On its leonine personage are carved inscriptions which “are all “usurpations“, i.e. traces of subsequent modifications to the monument…The original texts (traces of which are still visible in places) were deliberately erased and replaced. It is therefore impossible to date this statue with certainty, especially as the face does not resemble any known, well-documented royal portrait”. True to its character, this sphinx is a riddle. Regarding the original Sphinx of Giza, there’s an important detail (among many) which The Carters may be aware of but which most people are probably ignorant of: it most likely did not originally have a Pharaoh’s head. Short of being beheaded like Nike of Samothrace, its original head was usurped. Anyone with two eyes and some depth perception can see that the head is incredibly disproportionately small compared to its massive, though heavily eroded, body. There is no concrete (pun intended) evidence that the Sphinx we can visit today is the Sphinx it has always been. And like the very Sphinx of Tanis whose inscriptions have been re-carved which they pose next to, “The Carters” are presenting to you a type of perceptual usurpation in which they are “visually asserting themselves as” (i.e. playing dress-up as) Pharaohs of their culture and art (I guess). However, like the “royal portrait” which the Sphinx of Tanis and the Great Sphinx of Giza supposedly are (aren’t), there’s a lot more hidden in plain sight in the sands of time (granted your head is not in the sand).
Some geologists (scientists studying the physical realities of planet Earth) have determined that the obvious erosion of the Sphinx was due to water. This contradicts what Egyptologists (academics piecing together ideas to fit a progressive timeline of history) have determined as the age of the Sphinx: 2558–2532 BC (wikipedia), coinciding with the reign of Pharoh Khafre, of which the sphinx head is supposed to represent (though–like the Sphinx of Tanis–“the face does not resemble any known, well-documented royal portrait” of Khafre). Geological studies inconveniently conflict with the mainstream timeline of Egypt: water erosion would mean the Sphinx was built pre-3000 BC, since Egypt has been a desert without much water since at least 10,000 BC (bibliotecapleyades.net). Everyone’s all up in arms (except Milo, of course) about fake news (and gun control to boot)–but what about fake history? Simple physical scientific facts aren’t enough apparently to erode the infallibility of mainstream textbook “history”, as the written Word is impervious to revisions of its progressive narration of reality. After all, accepting new discoveries that don’t support the Darwinist (i.e. dogmatic religious atheist) model of human evolution would mean “history” would have to be re-written. And then what of Planet of the Apes? What happens if you “ever seen the crowd go apes**t”?
Just as the Sphinx looks to be not originally a human-headed monument, The Carters are not what they appear as. APES**T is a demonstration of usurpation in which Bey and JAY attempt to re-carve some sort of history into some sort of image of/for themselves. How incredibly…fake of them! What happens when we all realize that Beyonce and JAY-Z are Queen and King of nothing but their own APES**T?
Now lets make a case demonstrating fake reality vs reality:
2-D ILLUSION (i.e. fake reality):
3-D REALITY (available to all):
Fake over-painting via lighting “effects”:
In space-time the view is actually very diverse:
Some creepy pointless ILL(sick)-USION:
3-D SPACE-TIME REALITY:
I mean seriously, you #call “The Carters” standing at the top of the stairs in APES**T “music artists”?!? They aren’t doing s**t except posturing in few areas of the Louvre in fancy clothing doing some (c)rap gimmick and arm flailing equipped with a gang of faux-nude demonically possessed women. Is this what music/art actually looks like? I thought it was supposed to look more like this:
IF, by chance, what has been laid bare in this article is still incredulous within your current reality frame, I suggest watching the official video of APES**T–first with the sound on, and then with it off. As a remedy to any psychological damages incurred, I suggest watching the 1972 Afrofuturist film Space is the Place, featuring music magician Sun Ra and his Arkestra. The “Interpretation” section on wikipedia for the film states, “Ra’s greatest adversary in his quest is the Overseer, an incarnation of evil in the Black community who poses himself to be a community leader and a man of charity, but who, in fact, is a tool of the white power structure. On the other hand, Jimmy Fey is a representative of black people in the entertainment industry and mass media; he means well, but his intentions have been co-opted by the normalizing, status quo-reinforcing forces of white-led capitalism.”
Outside of the film in real life, Sun Ra, having identified closely with black heritage and black liberation in society, expressed his sentiments in 1970: “At one time I felt that white people were to blame for everything, but then I found out that they were just puppets and pawns of some greater force, which has been using them… Some force is having a good time [manipulating black and white people] and looking, enjoying itself up in a reserved seat, wondering, “I wonder when they’re going to wake up.” (wikipedia). Game over, folks. The physical form is a mask which is not reflective of Whole Truth. (As a side note to fellow Americans: If you voted for Obama on some basis of him being black, that was a racist vote. If you voted for Hillary on some basis of her gender being female, that was a sexist vote. Sorry if you have been unaware of these facts until now). It’s really not black and/or white. The truth runs deeper than skin. Can we all please just flush down the APES**T to send it where it belongs/came from and be real in the world with the Promentalshitbackwashpsychosis Enema Squad?
After having thoroughly trolled the Louvre a few months ago–at times listening to diverse music on headphones while looking at all of the diverse art–I find myself at the end of the mess of APES**T yawning from how boring the
music noise was and how unconvincing these people are in their presentation of what they want you to think they are. Kool Keith sums it all up as usual in his 2017 video for the song “Tired“:
The lies are sad in many ways. Remember when Beyonce could actually sing with a 4 octave range in Destiny’s Child? But I guess once you $ell your voice (soul), you end up vocalizing like all the other demonically possessed autotuned pop parrots. Oh well, just one more fake image going to end up in the dumpster of eternal hellfire. But if you still insist on watching a music video promoting a whole new world order featuring pyramids and a Sphinx (but which is truly about love and sung with actual voices and meaningful lyrics) I recommend this movie clip from 1992. In addition to that, please, let’s not have Sympathy for the Devil, as the “The Rolling Stones” promoted happily in their 1968 hit song. I recommend not listening to the original version–its so like 1960’s Margaret Thatcher. As the lyrics narrate: “Pleased to meet you / Hope you guess my name / But what’s puzzling you / Is the nature of my game”. Is the game still puzzling you after watching APES**T? REMEMBER: the Devil wears many guises. So I suggest instead watching the video below–for in this post 2012 world, the cover of a song can actually be more original and honest than the original.
The painting above titled Salvator Mundi (Christ as World Savior) was “found” sometime in the 21st century by supposedly removing a hideous painting covering up the “long missing Leonardo original”, thus “restoring” it to its “real” image–which could now conveniently be sold for millions of dollars under the code name Da Vinci. It was “authenticated” (Christened) as an original Da Vinci in 2011. To date it is the most expensive painting ever sold, selling at auction by Christie’s (again, Christened) on November 15th, 2017 for $450.3 million. It was subsequently put on display, as it now is, in the Louvre Abu Dhabi in the United Arab Emirates: an “art and civilization museum” established November 8th 2017, by a “thirty-year agreement between the city of Abu Dhabi and the French government” (wikipedia) (sounds like some epic collateral being established…and I wonder who else is in on it?). “US $525 million was paid by Abu Dhabi to be associated with the Louvre name, and an additional US$ 747 million will be paid in exchange for art loans, special exhibitions and management advice”. These kinds of trans-national transactions give the images of the Trumps looking at the Second Coming and The Carters looking at Mona “a different angle” from which to view the world. Though the painting has been officially “authenticated” by “experts”, not everyone mirrors that conviction: one sphere of doubt orbits around the angle of the reflection in the glass world Christ is holding. Da Vinci remains one of the most–if not the most–meticulous and perfectionist illustrators of the physics of reality–and yet the orb and its reflection are not painted to those standards. Leonardo was not ignorant to the nature of reflections, as his pages and pages of sketchbook studies attest. “Solid glass or crystal, whether shaped like an orb or a lens, produces magnified, inverted, and reversed images…Instead, Leonardo painted the orb as if it were a hollow glass bubble that does not refract or distort the light passing through it” (thisinsider.com). Defenders of the authenticity of the work (the same people who sold/bought it) claim that Leonardo did this on purpose to make a point about Christ, or to not distract from his image. The orb could indeed have been depicted as such to represent that Christ would reflect the world as it is, not its inverted image (but couldn’t you say that in this sense Christ is reversing the reflection from how it naturally is?). But at the end of the
transaction day, a Christie’s spokeswoman states that this is just their “opinion”. So, to be just: just as they are entitled to their “opinion” (which generates multi-million dollar sales), every individual who looks upon the reflection of Salvator Mundi is entitled to determine for themselves if it is real or not and what that even means to them. Since Christie’s does not offer a reason for the treason of an over-painted Leonardo, the viewer is left to their own reflective capabilities to figure out why someone would paint over a Leonardo in the first place, especially in the manner seen below:
This little node of current art “history” circulating in the mainstream is perhaps a microcosm of a multitude of inverted reflections being painted out in the world sphere. In addition to the US having pitchforked over to the large $um$ to the Louvre Abu Dhabi–or something like that–there are suspicions surfacing that the advisor to the United Arab Emirates (home of the Louvre Abu Dhabi) funneled money to Trump’s “political efforts” (in addition to Putin doing so, of course). It gets even more swampy: According to nytimes.com in an article published on March 6th, “The United Arab Emirates, which Washington considers one of its closest Arab allies, co-invested together with Mr. Dmitriev’s [a Russian fund manager and a former Goldman Sachs banker] fund as part of an effort to build close relations to Russia as well”. In 2013 the government of Abu Dhabi under the fund committed to give $6bil to Russia for “projects”. However the tables turned under the Obama administration when sanctions were imposed on the fund “as part of a raft [of Medusa?] of economic penalties” as a response (punishment or reverse collateral?) to the Russian infiltration of the Ukraine in 2014. At the end of the day, another Trump advisor (here today, gone tomorrow puppet) stated, “Whether in Russia or in the U.S., I think there are a lot of common objectives”–including defeating “radical Islamic fascism” (in other words: fighting fascism with fascism). Add to that commonality France and the AEU (sans the “Islamic terrorists” funded by their government and America). I can’t help but wonder to what fanfare the pure and Holy Roman Catholic Church farts its final trumpets amidst this putrefying swamp of a stinking ass made up of double images and fake over-paintings. Like the Sphinx, these current events are woven as riddles bound to be unbound in no time. Like a fatefully flammable tapestry, things are unraveling exponentially.
After all we’ve been through and through, the arms of the Venus de Milo remain a mystery. If she were real flesh and blood and bone, she wouldn’t be able to make music–except with her voice (too bad she can’t talk to tell us who stole her arms/tarts!). After seeing her sans arms in the Louvre, I decided I’d do a little painting to give her back her arms which are rightfully hers. Synchronistically, I had drawn the sketch for the painting the night before I discovered and subsequently watched APES**T. Did a part of me sense the s**t was about to hit the fan(s)? Consider this painting a post premonitory antidote to all the APES**T:
The image above is of a real oil painting of the Venus de Milo statue, with her arms restored. Her right arm apparates in spiritual form bearing the star Venus. Her left arm is as solid as her body and disappears above her head into infinity, only to immediately reappear out of no time and space as the ankh, which is also the symbol for Venus, woman, and is the structure of the Tesla oscillator. Just as how the inverted pyramid and the inverted pentagram represent spirit fallen into matter, the inverted ankh becomes the fallen star of Lucifer. The ankh upside-down places the cross of matter (death) on top of the world sphere (life) as illusion. Venus as ankh in upright orientation places the world sphere (life) above the crucifixion of matter, representing the reality of immortality. The inverted reflection in the glass sphere is the illusion (false image) of matter over spirit. Venus materializing the ankh upright out of infinite space above her head is demonstrative of the return and triumph of love and life-giving energy in its rightful, creative orientation. The green ankh is the real life current-see in the blindness of the all-seeing eye. In the same direction, the unsubstantiated idea that the substantial pyramids were tombs for the dead is being uprooted and uprighted, as physical evidence manifests demonstrating the electromagnetic function of the pyramids as power generators. Even with her arms missing for centuries, the eternal light upheld by Venus cannot be hidden from humanity forever–for that light is forever itself.
Love, Life, and Truth returns as the fake over-paintings are wiped off the face of the Earth, restoring the eternal kingdom which reigns forever and ever. We must individually free our Consciousness from the ever-revolving carousel of fake history and identity which is not representative of our true, present existence. If we do not do this for ourselves, we will continue to be beguiled into the inverted game of separation, division, subjugation, and defeat: down an ever-tightening spiral away from creative existence, driven down by a constricting serpent of ignorance who tweets in tongues. To grasp the Truth of eternal Love and Life is to take back what has always been yours as savior of the world.