Yesterday, today, tomorrow.

The new year is opened with an important study by Pietro Gaietto.
In it, it is traced synthetically, but with richness of data, generally little known also by who studies the Prehistory, a history of the discoveries of the art of the lower Paleolithic, beginning from 150 years ago, when Boucher de Perthes, today applauded like the father of the Prehistory, offered plentiful and clear evidences of the existence of tools and " antediluvian " art.
Then, that brilliant man did not have easy life, and only to the eve of his death the academic world began to recognize the existence of stones intentionally worked for making tools.
With the time, the hypothesis becomes absolute certainty, and the academic world made own the search on the chipped stone, which still continues, also if with more sophisticated and highly technological techniques of study and with objectives partially different from those initials.
Not the same for the art.
Nevertheless, both the tool and the art work presuppose a plan, therefore a mind.
The speech on the mind has always made fear to the investigator, especially if the inquiry on it is not of his directed competence.
Today, several disciplines interrogate themselves on the mysteries of this tight interlacing/identification body/mind.
No one reasons more in terms of dualism.
From Freud until now, psychological sciences, now flanked also from the neurosciences, that would want in some way " the monopoly " of the speech referring to the operation of the mind, have interrogated themselves and they are interrogated on the conscience, inquiring on the origin of the thought.

Epistemologic inquiry on the thought seems never to have end.
But when the speech is moved on the spirituality of the man, the official science places great resistances, like in front of all which is not measurable neither quantifiable.
Old, false problem that who, like me, works from longtime in the field of the psychoanalysis, knows very well.
Similar resistances, I believe, still act within the community of the scholars of Prehistory, for which the art, product of the thought but also expression of spirituality, or correlated to it, is still denied, to the beginnings of the Man.
Also the birds construct artistic nests, " more beautiful of the necessary ".
We will want to continue to deny for the man what we grant to other species of animals less evolued?
For how much time still we will want to continue to deny and to split the thought that subtends to the projectal creativity of a tool, always thought and calibrated for a precise scope, and then realized, at first roughly, then more and more perfectly, until arriving to the wonderful, diaphanous solutrean leaves of laurus, that nothing have to envy to the creativity and to the technique of an experienced and creative master glass-blower of Murano, in name of a conformation of the cranial vault, or the jaw, or the larinx, speculating on the ability to speak of our ancient ancestors, forgetting the numerous extraverbal media of communication that, not casually, often still today allow to communicate at more deep and complicated levels than an abused oral language allows?
We will want to still continue to along denying spirituality to the man since the beginnings? and therefore to deny to him the possibility to make art since the beginnings, of to have rituals, a conscience of self, with all that it involves?
The speech of Gaietto sounds hard and strong about the responsibilities of the Academics.
They are words on which it is worth to reflect. Especially in an age in which it seems that nothing is more important of the technological speech.
The man only technological is a man deprived of the vital part of himself.
The technology purposed to him is a great temptation, but also a dangerous illusion: like Icarus, we can risk to burn and melt our artificial wings, in the presumptuous attempt of approach too much to the sun of an autonomy without human roots, in an infinite, sterile competition.

Licia Filingeri (Editor)

Genova, february 2002



Copyrightę2000-2002 by Paleolithic Art Magazine, all rights reserved.