Planeta MOJ BLOG

Paganini

Jedan od najvecih kompozitora koji je komponovao dela za violinu  je Nicolo Paganini.

новембар 25th, 2006 Posted by | kompozitori | no comments

Download

Na internetu mozete naci mnoge sajtove koji su posveceni klasicnoj muzici i gde mozete skinuti veliki broj kompozicija. Jedan od sajtova koji je vrlo dobro sredjen i gde mozete skinuti veliki broj numera mozete posetiti ovde.

Note klasicnih dela mozete preuzeti pritiskom na sliku

новембар 25th, 2006 Posted by | zanimljivosti | no comments

Pocetak

Ovaj blog posvecujem klasicnoj muzici. Zeleo bih da ovim putem dam skromni doprinos promovisanju klasicne muzike, pogotovo kod mladje populacije.

Pozeleo bih puno uspeha Ani i Jeleni, mladim umetnicima, u njihovom muzickom usavrsavanju.

новембар 25th, 2006 Posted by | autor | no comments

Dobri i loši momci Dajana Džonston

Govorilo se - ?istorija ?e presuditi?. Ova optimisti?na ideja svodila se na to da ?e u nekom trenutku u budu?nosti istori?ari sve staviti na jedno mesto i prevazi?i dana?nju konfuziju, propagandu i la?i izno?enjem ?injenica i istine.

Vremena su se promenila. Danas je moderno ?to pre anga?ovati sudije koji procenjuju istoriju, a onda se donose zakoni da bi budu?e istori?are spre?ili da se petljaju u zvani?nu verziju. Tu?ba za ?genocid? koju je muslimanska strana podnela protiv Srbije i Crne Gore dobar je primer za to. Kako ka?e bosanski advokat Sakib Softi?, cilj tu?be je da ubije ?falsifikovanje istorije?. Namera je, tako?e, da se formira zakonska osnova i da se od srpske dr?ave na ime ratne od?tete tra?i 100 milijardi dolara. O istoriji ?e se odlu?ivati u sudnici, u slu?aju u kome su u igri veliki ulozi.

Model za ovaj trend je holokaust. Kao pokajanje za genocid i masakr nad evropskim Jevrejima, Savezna Republika Nema?ka donela je zakone koji za krivi?no delo smatraju poricanje holokausta i platila je zna?ajnu ratnu od?tetu Izraelu i pojedincima Jevrejima koji su pre?iveli rat. Ostale zemlje tako?e su usvojile zakone protiv ?negacionizma?, odnosno delimi?nog negiranja nacisti?kog genocida (prvenstveno gasnih komora) ili negiranja u celini. U Francuskoj je takozvani Zakon Gajso od 13. jula 1990. proglasio zlo?inom osporavanje postojanja ?zlo?ina protiv ?ove?nosti?, onako kako ga je definisao tribunal u Nirnbergu, za ?ta su ?lanovi zlo?ina?kih organizacija osu?eni od strane francuskih ili me?unarodnih sudova.

Intenzitet nacisti?kih zlo?ina zaslu?an je za svesrdno prihvatanje ovih mera. Zakoni su smatrani opravdanim zbog jedinstvene prirode holokausta.

Tokom proteklih nekoliko godina, predstavnici raznih delova stanovni?tva tra?e, me?utim, sli?no zvani?no priznavanje svog statusa kao ?rtava.

U Francuskoj su zakonodavci doneli zakon koji turski masakr Jermena 1915. godine kvalifikuje kao genocid. Ubudu?e, svaki neoprezan Tur?in koji ga na francuskoj teritoriji bude osporavao zavr?i?e u zatvoru. Ukoliko Turska bude popustila pod pritiskom EU da prizna genocid, moglo bi se o?ekivati da potomci ?rtava budu du?ni za kompenzacije.

Francuski zakonodavci nedavno su se uhvatili uko?tac sa zakonom donesenim u ime jo? jedne ??rtve? ? biv?ih francuskih stanovnika iz nezavisnog Al?ira. Ovaj zakon, kasnije povu?en, upu?ivao je da se u ?kolskim programima predaje o ?pozitivnoj ulozi? francuskog kolonijalizma.

Ova eskalacija zahteva za status grupnih ?rtava podstakla je 19 istaknutih francuskih istori?ara da pro?log decembra zahtevaju ?slobodu za istoriju? i ukidanje svih zakona koji se ti?u ?pro?lih doga?aja?. ?Istorija nije religija i ne prihvata nikakve dogme?, tvrde istori?ari. ?U jednoj slobodnoj zemlji ni parlament ni pravosudne vlasti ne bi trebalo da defini?u istorijsku istinu?.

Od tada se pojavila jo? jedna grupa koja je sebe proglasila ?rtvom. Potomci izgnanika iz Ukrajine, ?estokih protivnika komunista, zahtevaju od francuskog ministarstva obrazovanja da preduzme mere protiv istori?ara marksizma Ani Lakroa-Riz, zbog njenog osporavanje opisa gladi, koja je u Ukrajini vladala 1932/33. - kao ?genocida?.

Neki za?titnici bosanskih muslimana jasno stavljaju do znanja da ?ele da se donesu zakoni i presude koji ?e im pomo?i da u?utkaju, pa ?ak po?alju u zatvor svakog pisca (kao ?to sam ja) koji se protivi da se masakr u Srebrenici naziva ?genocidom?. Ukoliko Sarajevo dobije parnicu pred Me?unarodnim sudom pravde, u Francuskoj bi javno neslaganje s presudom moglo da se smatra zlo?inom!

U me?uvremenu, austrijski sud osudio je ekscentri?nog britanskog istori?ara Dejvida Irvinga na tri godine zatvora za primedbe koje je izneo pre 15 godina, a kasnije porekao, kojima je doveo u pitanje obim holokausta. Kao reakciju na muslimanske proteste zbog danskih karikatura kojima se vre?a prorok Muhamed, evropski mediji s ponosom su sebi ?estitali na nepokolebljivoj odanosti slobodi ?tampe.

Mi koji smo ?eleli da predstavimo alternativno vi?enje krize raspada Jugoslavije devedesetih, ubrzo smo otkrili granice te slobode u medijima. ?tavi?e, ako se bolje pogleda, vidi se da su tabui u zapadnoj Evropi sa tradicionalne religije pre?li na svetovnija pitanja.

Univerzalna vrednost objektivne istine sada je zamenjena subjektivnim stvaranjem razlike izme?u dobrih ljudi ? ?rtava ? i lo?ih ljudi, koji moraju da plate na ovaj ili onaj na?in. Oni koji su na vlasti u vladama ili medijima Sjedinjenih Dr?ava i njihovi saveznici odlu?uju o tome ko su lo?i momci, a ko ?rtve. Ovo je posebno uo?ljivo na Balkanu.

One koji ?ele da ?istorijsku istinu? odre?uju sudije treba podsetiti da mnoge od naj?uvenijih presuda ? od Isusa do Jovanke Orleanke, od inkvizicije do kapetana Drajfusa i Nikolaja Buharina ? za svoje trajno mesto u istoriji treba da zahvale tome ?to su, kako je op?te poznato, bile pogre?ne.

(Autorka je politi?ki analiti?ar iz Pariza, autor knjige ?Suludi krsta?i ? Jugoslavija, NATO i obmane Zapada? (IGAM, Beograd 2005). )





?arko Puhovski

Naši nikad nisu na vlasti


Ono ?to je pouka iz dvije tisu?ite u Hrvatskoj i dvije hiljadite u Srbiji, a prije toga iz devedesete godine u svim republikama, ?to civilni sektor nije shvatio, jest da ?na?i? nisu do?li na vlast, jer ?na?i? ne mogu do?i na vlast, jer oni koji do?u na vlast vi?e nisu ?na?i?.


To ne?to ?to jednostavno civilni sektor uvijek iznova propu?ta razumjeti.

Oni na vlasti nisu na?i.


Mi, primjerice Sonja (Liht, prim. red) i ja, sjedili smo sa desetak dana?njih ?efova dr?ava, onih koji su u me?uvremenu bili ?efovi dr?ava, koji su bili sli?ni nama tada. Kad su postali ?efovi dr?ava, vi?e to nisu bili. I tu razliku treba razumjeti. To su dva razli?ita sporta u kojima ne va?e ista pravila.

Ali, u Srbiji se ? nek nam bude dopu?teno ? dogodilo ne?to veoma neugodno zbog toga. Nevladine organizacije koje se bave ljudskim pravima ?utjele su za vrijeme brojnih povreda ljudskih prava za vrijeme akcije ?Sablja?, jer su imale simpatija za potrebu da se stvari ra??iste. Ali zada?e organizacijama koje se bave ljudskim pravima jest idiotizam ljudskih prava.

Dakle, ljudska prava i ljudska prava i ljudska prava.

Poma?e li to ovima ili onima, to nije na? problem. Na? problem jest da se ni?ija prava ne smiju kr?iti ako se bavimo ljudskim pravima. To se nije dogodilo. Ne samo u Srbiji. Dogodilo se da jedan na? nekada?nji prijatelj pobijedi na izborima u Gruziji sa rezultatom kakav je nekada imao samo Enver Hod?a, a da niko nema pitanje kako se u demokratskim uvjetima dobijalo 95 posto glasova, pa ni nevladine organizacije.

Nevladine organizacije mogu ?ivjeti ovako ili onako, ali umiru uvijek na jedan na?in ? gubitkom kriti?nosti.

Taj gubitak kriti?nosti ? to je moja druga to?ka ? vidi se sada kad se pojavljuje takozvana Evropa kao panaceja. Kad se u Evropi govori kao ?to se govorilo u Sovjetskom Savezu 1946. godine i kad se tre?erazredne polupismene evropske birokrate do?ivljavaju kao nekada?nje komesare Sovjetske komunisti?ke partije u Jugoslaviji.


Ljudi koji se nisu bojali usta?a i Nijemaca, bojali su se ruskih komesara.

Ljudi koji se nisu bojali Tu?mana i Milo?evi?a,

stoje u stavu mirno pred tre?erazrednim evropskim birokratama.

I to je sramota. To je ?alosno.

Imamo sate i sate rasprave o Ha?kom sudi?tu ili Evropskoj uniji, a da ni jedne jedine rije?i kritike nema, jer je implikacija: ako ih kritizirate, poma?ete nacionalistima. Dakle, uvijek se onaj najpopularniji i najgluplji na?in interpretacije politike prihvata ? neprijatelj mojih neprijatelja je moj prijatelj i obrnuto. To ne mo?e i?i.

Hrvatska je ju?er, no?as u pola dva do?ivjela veliki uspjeh, meni jako drag, ali ga nije do?ivjela zato ?to je Hrvatska bolja, nego zato ?to je Evropska unija lo?ija. Srbija ?e u?i u Evropsku uniju zato ?to je ona lo?ija, a ne zato ?to je Srbija bolja. I to treba jasno re?i. Dapa?e, u nekim bitnim elementima ljudskih prava, Hrvatska je danas lo?ija nego pro?le godine. Gotovina nije hap?en, ali Hrvatska je u?la zbog trokuta Austrija ? Hrvatska ? Turska.

(ne, tadilo se o “cetvorokutu: AUSTRIJA-HRVATSKA-USA-TURSKA!”)

I sad bismo trebali, kao navodno ljevi?ari, slaviti ulazak Turske, ?ija vojska je ubila nakon Drugog svjetskog rata dvostruko vi?e civila nego sve ostale vojske u Evropi zajedno. (Glas iz publike: Kurda!) Da, nisu civili nego Kurdi, ka?e Zaga. To?no.

Ali, to nije stvar muslimana, to nije stvar postotka teritorija. To je stvar ljudskih prava. Za mene je nezamislivo da je Rumunjska kandidat za Evropsku uniju. Bosni i Hercegovini su rekli: ovako razjedinjeni ne mo?ete u Evropsku uniju, a uzeli su Cipar koji je dublje i du?e podijeljen nego Bosna i Hercegovina. Uzeli su ?etiri dr?ave kojima je per capita ni?i dohodak nego u Hrvatskoj, uzeli su balti?ke dr?ave sa katastrofalnom politikom spram manjina.(citaj: Prema Rusima!) Dakle, odustali su od toga da budu communitd? off values ? zajednica vrijednosti.

Pona?aju se geostrategijski, ?to je njihovo potpuno pravo, ali to nije Evropa kao simbol vrijednosti nego ne?to drugo. Nota bene, ta Evropa koja s pravom prigovara ovoj Solaniji, ili kako se ova dr?ava sad ovde zove, da ne zna gdje su joj granice, a sama nema pojma o tomu dokle je Evropa.


Ona se zove Evropska zajednica, a nema pojma da l’, primjerice, Moskva ili Sankt Peterburg pripadaju Evropi ili ne, pa makar i za 40 godina.

Ali znaju nama re?i gdje je Balkan.

To je paradoks u kojem smo se na?li. Ne radi se da nam Evropska unija nije nu?na. Svima nama jest, ali kad ?ujem da nevladin sektor uzima evroatlantske integracije kao program, meni se ovo malo kose ?to imam digne na glavi. Ja nisam uvjeren da su vojne integracije ne?to smisleno. Uskoro ?e ?itav svijet biti u NATO-u i u SEATO paktu. I ko ?e biti neprijatelj? Mali zeleni s Marsa. Protiv koga postoji NATO danas? Protiv Al kaide koja je policijski problem, a ne vojni. I to svatko zna. Za?to bismo mi trebali NATO-u kao modeli? Zato ?to navodno postoji civilna kontrola nad vojskom. Pa dr?ava koja ima jednu od najboljih civilnih kontrola ? gospodin Vinkler je tu ? ?vicarska, nema nikakvu vezu s NATO-om, a ima superiornu civilnu kontrolu nad vojskom. Stvari nisu tako jednostavne.

Ja ovo ne govorim ?to sam protiv Europske unije, dapa?e, ?to sam protiv Ha?koga sudi?ta, dapa?e, ali ako Ha?ko sudi?te ne mo?e do dana dana?njeg Karad?i?evo ime napisati korektno, ako je objavilo imena dvadeset sedam navodnih ?rtava koje su ?ive u razli?itim optu?nicama, ako su dvoje od ?ezdeset dvoje ljudi u pritvoru Ha?kog sudi?ta umrli u sumnjivim okolnostima, onda postavljamo slijede?e pitanje: da su u Po?arevcu, u Karlovcu ili u Biha?u dvoje od ?ezdeset dvoje ljudi u pritvoru lokalnog suda umrli, svi bi ?end?ioi? urlali tako da bi se ?itav svijet tresao.

A da je umrlo dvoje Srba u Lepoglavi ili dvoje Hrvata, ne znam u Beogradu, na Be?anijskoj kosi ili negdje, do?le bi interpelarne interpretacije i intervencije da se vidi ?to se doga?a.

Ali, ?eveningenu se to ne uzima tako ozbiljno.

Ako je istina da je Ha?ko sudi?te ? to ja kao Hrvat mogu re?i ? za 28 radnih dana moglo odlu?iti da nije bilo ratnih zlo?ina i povreda me?unarodnog prava u bombardiranju Jugoslavije, onda je to o?ito politi?ka odluka.

Ako su optu?ili Karad?i?a i Mladi?a prije ?ljivan?anina, iako se to dogodilo godinu dana ranije, to je zato ?to je njih dvojicu trebalo sprije?iti da sudjeluju u Dejtonu. Opet iz politi?kih razloga.

I o tim stvarima treba govoriti, podr?avaju?i Ha?ko sudi?te zato ?to sudovi u Hrvatskoj, Srbiji i Bosni i Hercegovini ne znaju doma?u zada?u i ne ?ele obaviti svoju doma?u zada?u.

Ja plediram da se nevladine organizacije i civilni sektor pona?aju vrlo skepti?ki. Imamo eurofile i eurofobe. To su po mom sudu vi?e-manje paranormalne pozicije. Normalna pozicija je euroskepti?ka, ?to zna?i ona koja pita kakvog to smisla ima i koja ? da zavr?im time ? postavlja uvijek jedno temeljno pitanje: kako se ocjenjuje politi?ki uspjeh, kako da se uspjeh uzme u neto formi, dakle uspjeh minus tro?kovi.

O tro?kovima se nikad ne govori.

Tro?kovi ovdje nisu mi?ljeni samo finansijski nego u smislu gubitka neke vrijednosti. Ili ?emo imati, da druk?ije to izrazim, neku vrstu marksisti?kog pristupa koja ne polazi od Karla Marksa nego od najuglednijeg od bra?e Marks, koji je rekao onu poznatu formulu: ne bih ?elio biti ?lanom kluba koji bi me ?elio prihvatiti za ?lana. Hvala lijepo.

(Diskusija na me?unarodnoj konferenciji ?Srbija ? pet godina posle?, Beograd, 4. i 5. oktobra 2005)



Prenosimo NIN, br. 2859.

Biljana Kova?evi? ? Vu?o


Šta Žarko Puhovski nije shvatio

(?Na?i nikad nisu na vlasti?, NIN br. 2858)



Povodom diskusije ?arka Puhovskog na me?unarodnoj konferenciji ?Srbija pet godina posle?, odr?anoj u Beogradu 4. i 5. oktobra 2005. godine, a koja je objavljena i u NIN-u pod nadnaslovom ?Prava uloga nevladinog sektora?, ose?amo potrebu da uka?emo na slede?e:

- ?arko Puhovski demonstrira zabrinjavaju?e neznanje

kad konstatuje da ?civilni sektor nije shvatio?.

?ta god da civilni sektor nije shvatio (a u ovom slu?aju se misli da civilni sektor nije shvatio da ?na?i? nisu do?li na vlast), o?igledno je samo da ?arko Puhovski ovim iskazom pokazuje da nije shvatio ?ta je civilni sektor, njegovu heterogenost i slojevitost, kao i zna?aj nevladinih organizacija kao va?nog ? ali ne i jedinog ? segmenta civilnog sektora.

Ovakav paternalisti?ki i pau?alan stav

vi?e ukazuje na projektovani totalitarizam ?arka Puhovskog,

nego ?to predstavlja poku?aj ozbiljne kritike problema

koji nesumnjivo postoji u odre?ivanju nevladinih organizacija

(na koje ?arko Puhovski o?igledno misli kad govori o civilnom sektoru) prema bitnim pojavama u dr?avi i dru?tvu.

- Olako kvalifikovanje civilnog sektora kao takvog neodoljivo podse?a na ne tako davno dominantan i sada veoma prisutan stav o homogenosti odre?enih entiteta, najbolje izra?en u stavu prema tzv. me?unarodnoj zajednici kao homogenoj celini: ?jedno telo, jedan duh, a svi protiv nas?.

- Odakle ?arku Puhovskom podaci da su nevladine organizacije koje se bave ljudskim pravima ?utale o povredama ljudskih prava za vreme akcije Sablja? Drskost da se tako ne?to izjavi je razumljiva kada je u pitanju ?arko Puhovski, ali ono ?to nas konkretno zanima jeste: kakvim ?injenicama misli da potkrepi tvrdnju koja diskvalifikuje sve nevladine organizacije koje se bave ljudskim pravima? Ukoliko je hteo da pru?i ozbiljan doprinos raspravi na temu da li je vanredno stanje bilo potrebno radi za?tite bezbednosti i ljudskih prava (i u skladu sa standardima Evropske povelje i Pakta o gra?anskim i politi?kim pravima) i da li su NVO adekvatno reagovale na pojedina?na prekora?enja mera vanrednog stanja, a ne da ponudi veselu po?tapalicu povr?nim i nedotupavim ?ar?ijskim naklapanjima, ?arko Puhovski je mogao makar na trenutak da pogleda veb sajtove nevladinih organizacija koje se bave ljudskim pravima i da na bazi proverenih (i proverljivih) podataka i izve?taja zaklju?i ?ta su nevladine organizacije radile za vreme vanrednog stanja.

Potpuno se sla?emo sa stavom da nevladine organizacije umiru gubitkom kriti?nosti. Zato izra?avamo bojazan da i skup koji je organizovala Sonja Liht ? a na koji, naglasimo i to, nisu pozvane prozvane organizacije koje se bave ljudskim pravima ? predstavlja svojevrsnu odu nevladinim organizacijama koje, umesto da budu kriti?ne u odnosu na dr?avu kad ona ne po?tuje ljudska prava, sebe progla?avaju partnerima dr?ave, a opelo onim NVO koje postavljaju standarde, vr?e pritisak na vlast i zahtevaju civilnu i demokratsku kontrolu vlasti.

Kriti?nost ovih NVO u odnosu na vlast je ve?tom kampanjom i podmetanjem sada?nje vlasti, bliskih im medija i partnerskih NVO progla?ena za ekstremizam.

I na kraju i, naravno, najva?nije: ne mo?emo se oteti utisku da napad na prepoznatljive NVO koje su predmet nevi?ene medijske harange u prili?noj meri korespondira sa stavom ?arka Puhovskog, kome, valjda zbog ?idiotizma? ljudskih prava, nije palo na pamet da se osvrne na proskripciju kojoj je izlo?ena predsednica Helsin?kog odbora za ljudska prava u Srbiji ? Sonja Biserko.

O?igledno je da nama, kao predstavnicima NVO koji su ube?eni da su ljudska prava vrednost a ne idiotizam, predstoji dug i te?ak period.

Autor je predsednica Komiteta pravnika za ljudska prava




puhovski.jpg (3 KB) [ Download ]

 
 

новембар 25th, 2006 Posted by Sasa Markovic | Uncategorized | no comments

Shooting an Elephant by George Orwell

New Writing, Autumn 1936) 



IN Moulmein, in lower Burma, I was hated by large numbers of people—the only time in my life that I have been important enough for this to happen to me. I was sub-divisional police officer of the town, and in an aimless, petty kind of way anti-European feeling was very bitter. No one had the guts to raise a riot, but if a European woman went through the bazaars alone somebody would probably spit betel juice over her dress. As a police officer I was an obvious target and was baited whenever it seemed safe to do so. When a nimble Burman tripped me up on the football field and the referee (another Burman) looked the other way, the crowd yelled with hideous laughter. This happened more than once. In the end the sneering yellow faces of young men that met me everywhere, the insults hooted after me when I was at a safe distance, got badly on my nerves. The young Buddhist priests were the worst of all. There were several thousands of them in the town and none of them seemed to have anything to do except stand on street corners and jeer at Europeans.

All this was perplexing and upsetting. For at that time I had already made up my mind that imperialism was an evil thing and the sooner I chucked up my job and got out of it the better. Theoretically—and secretly, of course—I was all for the Burmese and all against their oppressors, the British. As for the job I was doing, I hated it more bitterly than I can perhaps make clear. In a job like that you see the dirty work of Empire at close quarters. The wretched prisoners huddling in the stinking cages of the lock-ups, the grey, cowed faces of the long-term convicts, the scarred buttocks of the men who had been flogged with bamboos—all these oppressed me with an intolerable sense of guilt. But I could get nothing into perspective. I was young and ill-educated and I had had to think out my problems in the utter silence that is imposed on every Englishman in the East. I did not even know that the British Empire is dying, still less did I know that it is a great deal better than the younger empires that are going to supplant it. All I knew was that I was stuck between my hatred of the empire I served and my rage against the evil-spirited little beasts who tried to make my job impossible. With one part of my mind I thought of the British Raj as an unbreakable tyranny, as something clamped down, in sæcula sæculorum, upon the will of prostrate peoples; with another part I thought that the greatest joy in the world would be to drive a bayonet into a Buddhist priest’s guts. Feelings like these are the normal by-products of imperialism; ask any Anglo-Indian official, if you can catch him off duty.

One day something happened which in a roundabout way was enlightening. It was a tiny incident in itself, but it gave me a better glimpse than I had had before of the real nature of imperialism—the real motives for which despotic governments act. Early one morning the sub-inspector at a police station the other end of the town rang me up on the phone and said that an elephant was ravaging the bazaar. Would I please come and do something about it? I did not know what I could do, but I wanted to see what was happening and I got on to a pony and started out. I took my rifle, an old .44 Winchester and much too small to kill an elephant, but I thought the noise might be useful in terrorem. Various Burmans stopped me on the way and told me about the elephant’s doings. It was not, of course, a wild elephant, but a tame one which had gone “must.” It had been chained up, as tame elephants always are when their attack of “must” is due, but on the previous night it had broken its chain and escaped. Its mahout, the only person who could manage it when it was in that state, had set out in pursuit, but had taken the wrong direction and was now twelve hours’ journey away, and in the morning the elephant had suddenly reappeared in the town. The Burmese population had no weapons and were quite helpless against it. It had already destroyed somebody’s bamboo hut, killed a cow and raided some fruit-stalls and devoured the stock; also it had met the municipal rubbish van and, when the driver jumped out and took to his heels, had turned the van over and inflicted violences upon it.

The Burmese sub-inspector and some Indian constables were waiting for me in the quarter where the elephant had been seen. It was a very poor quarter, a labyrinth of squalid bamboo huts, thatched with palmleaf, winding all over a steep hillside. I remember that it was a cloudy, stuffy morning at the beginning of the rains. We began questioning the people as to where the elephant had gone and, as usual, failed to get any definite information. That is invariably the case in the East; a story always sounds clear enough at a distance, but the nearer you get to the scene of events the vaguer it becomes. Some of the people said that the elephant had gone in one direction, some said that he had gone in another, some professed not even to have heard of any elephant. I had almost made up my mind that the whole story was a pack of lies, when we heard yells a little distance away. There was a loud, scandalized cry of “Go away, child! Go away this instant!” and an old woman with a switch in her hand came round the corner of a hut, violently shooing away a crowd of naked children. Some more women followed, clicking their tongues and exclaiming; evidently there was something that the children ought not to have seen. I rounded the hut and saw a man’s dead body sprawling in the mud. He was an Indian, a black Dravidian coolie, almost naked, and he could not have been dead many minutes. The people said that the elephant had come suddenly upon him round the corner of the hut, caught him with its trunk, put its foot on his back and ground him into the earth. This was the rainy season and the ground was soft, and his face had scored a trench a foot deep and a couple of yards long. He was lying on his belly with arms crucified and head sharply twisted to one side. His face was coated with mud, the eyes wide open, the teeth bared and grinning with an expression of unendurable agony. (Never tell me, by the way, that the dead look peaceful. Most of the corpses I have seen looked devilish.) The friction of the great beast’s foot had stripped the skin from his back as neatly as one skins a rabbit. As soon as I saw the dead man I sent an orderly to a friend’s house nearby to borrow an elephant rifle. I had already sent back the pony, not wanting it to go mad with fright and throw me if it smelt the elephant.

The orderly came back in a few minutes with a rifle and five cartridges, and meanwhile some Burmans had arrived and told us that the elephant was in the paddy fields below, only a few hundred yards away. As I started forward practically the whole population of the quarter flocked out of the houses and followed me. They had seen the rifle and were all shouting excitedly that I was going to shoot the elephant. They had not shown much interest in the elephant when he was merely ravaging their homes, but it was different now that he was going to be shot. It was a bit of fun to them, as it would be to an English crowd; besides they wanted the meat. It made me vaguely uneasy. I had no intention of shooting the elephant—I had merely sent for the rifle to defend myself if necessary—and it is always unnerving to have a crowd following you. I marched down the hill, looking and feeling a fool, with the rifle over my shoulder and an ever-growing army of people jostling at my heels. At the bottom, when you got away from the huts, there was a metalled road and beyond that a miry waste of paddy fields a thousand yards across, not yet ploughed but soggy from the first rains and dotted with coarse grass. The elephant was standing eight yards from the road, his left side towards us. He took not the slightest notice of the crowd’s approach. He was tearing up bunches of grass, beating them against his knees to clean them and stuffing them into his mouth.

I had halted on the road. As soon as I saw the elephant I knew with perfect certainty that I ought not to shoot him. It is a serious matter to shoot a working elephant—it is comparable to destroying a huge and costly piece of machinery—and obviously one ought not to do it if it can possibly be avoided. And at that distance, peacefully eating, the elephant looked no more dangerous than a cow. I thought then and I think now that his attack of “must” was already passing off; in which case he would merely wander harmlessly about until the mahout came back and caught him. Moreover, I did not in the least want to shoot him. I decided that I would watch him for a little while to make sure that he did not turn savage again, and then go home.

But at that moment I glanced round at the crowd that had followed me. It was an immense crowd, two thousand at the least and growing every minute. It blocked the road for a long distance on either side. I looked at the sea of yellow faces above the garish clothes-faces all happy and excited over this bit of fun, all certain that the elephant was going to be shot. They were watching me as they would watch a conjurer about to perform a trick. They did not like me, but with the magical rifle in my hands I was momentarily worth watching. And suddenly I realized that I should have to shoot the elephant after all. The people expected it of me and I had got to do it; I could feel their two thousand wills pressing me forward, irresistibly. And it was at this moment, as I stood there with the rifle in my hands, that I first grasped the hollowness, the futility of the white man’s dominion in the East. Here was I, the white man with his gun, standing in front of the unarmed native crowd—seemingly the leading actor of the piece; but in reality I was only an absurd puppet pushed to and fro by the will of those yellow faces behind. I perceived in this moment that when the white man turns tyrant it is his own freedom that he destroys. He becomes a sort of hollow, posing dummy, the conventionalized figure of a sahib. For it is the condition of his rule that he shall spend his life in trying to impress the “natives,” and so in every crisis he has got to do what the “natives” expect of him. He wears a mask, and his face grows to fit it. I had got to shoot the elephant. I had committed myself to doing it when I sent for the rifle. A sahib has got to act like a sahib; he has got to appear resolute, to know his own mind and do definite things. To come all that way, rifle in hand, with two thousand people marching at my heels, and then to trail feebly away, having done nothing—no, that was impossible. The crowd would laugh at me. And my whole life, every white man’s life in the East, was one long struggle not to be laughed at.

But I did not want to shoot the elephant. I watched him beating his bunch of grass against his knees, with that preoccupied grandmotherly air that elephants have. It seemed to me that it would be murder to shoot him. At that age I was not squeamish about killing animals, but I had never shot an elephant and never wanted to. (Somehow it always seems worse to kill a large animal.) Besides, there was the beast’s owner to be considered. Alive, the elephant was worth at least a hundred pounds; dead, he would only be worth the value of his tusks, five pounds, possibly. But I had got to act quickly. I turned to some experienced-looking Burmans who had been there when we arrived, and asked them how the elephant had been behaving. They all said the same thing: he took no notice of you if you left him alone, but he might charge if you went too close to him.

It was perfectly clear to me what I ought to do. I ought to walk up to within, say, twenty-five yards of the elephant and test his behavior. If he charged, I could shoot; if he took no notice of me, it would be safe to leave him until the mahout came back. But also I knew that I was going to do no such thing. I was a poor shot with a rifle and the ground was soft mud into which one would sink at every step. If the elephant charged and I missed him, I should have about as much chance as a toad under a steam-roller. But even then I was not thinking particularly of my own skin, only of the watchful yellow faces behind. For at that moment, with the crowd watching me, I was not afraid in the ordinary sense, as I would have been if I had been alone. A white man mustn’t be frightened in front of “natives”; and so, in general, he isn’t frightened. The sole thought in my mind was that if anything went wrong those two thousand Burmans would see me pursued, caught, trampled on and reduced to a grinning corpse like that Indian up the hill. And if that happened it was quite probable that some of them would laugh. That would never do.

There was only one alternative. I shoved the cartridges into the magazine and lay down on the road to get a better aim. The crowd grew very still, and a deep, low, happy sigh, as of people who see the theatre curtain go up at last, breathed from innumerable throats. They were going to have their bit of fun after all. The rifle was a beautiful German thing with cross-hair sights. I did not then know that in shooting an elephant one would shoot to cut an imaginary bar running from ear-hole to ear-hole. I ought, therefore, as the elephant was sideways on, to have aimed straight at his ear-hole, actually I aimed several inches in front of this, thinking the brain would be further forward.

When I pulled the trigger I did not hear the bang or feel the kick—one never does when a shot goes home—but I heard the devilish roar of glee that went up from the crowd. In that instant, in too short a time, one would have thought, even for the bullet to get there, a mysterious, terrible change had come over the elephant. He neither stirred nor fell, but every line of his body had altered. He looked suddenly stricken, shrunken, immensely old, as though the frighfful impact of the bullet had paralysed him without knocking him down. At last, after what seemed a long time—it might have been five seconds, I dare say—he sagged flabbily to his knees. His mouth slobbered. An enormous senility seemed to have settled upon him. One could have imagined him thousands of years old. I fired again into the same spot. At the second shot he did not collapse but climbed with desperate slowness to his feet and stood weakly upright, with legs sagging and head drooping. I fired a third time. That was the shot that did for him. You could see the agony of it jolt his whole body and knock the last remnant of strength from his legs. But in falling he seemed for a moment to rise, for as his hind legs collapsed beneath him he seemed to tower upward like a huge rock toppling, his trunk reaching skyward like a tree. He trumpeted, for the first and only time. And then down he came, his belly towards me, with a crash that seemed to shake the ground even where I lay.

I got up. The Burmans were already racing past me across the mud. It was obvious that the elephant would never rise again, but he was not dead. He was breathing very rhythmically with long rattling gasps, his great mound of a side painfully rising and falling. His mouth was wide open—I could see far down into caverns of pale pink throat. I waited a long time for him to die, but his breathing did not weaken. Finally I fired my two remaining shots into the spot where I thought his heart must be. The thick blood welled out of him like red velvet, but still he did not die. His body did not even jerk when the shots hit him, the tortured breathing continued without a pause. He was dying, very slowly and in great agony, but in some world remote from me where not even a bullet could damage him further. I felt that I had got to put an end to that dreadful noise. It seemed dreadful to see the great beast Lying there, powerless to move and yet powerless to die, and not even to be able to finish him. I sent back for my small rifle and poured shot after shot into his heart and down his throat. They seemed to make no impression. The tortured gasps continued as steadily as the ticking of a clock.


новембар 25th, 2006 Posted by Sasa Markovic | BIBLIOTEKA | no comments

Otpocinjemo avanturu

Mit o pećini

Platonova akademijaLjudi živeci u pećinama privezani okovima, tako da imaju mogućnost da vide samo njihovu unutrašnjost, nisu mogli da spoznaju ništa drugo osim senki raznih stvari. Međutim, ako bi se neko oslobodio I izašao iz pećine video bi iste stvari u svetlu sunca, što bi potpuno promenilo njegovu sliku sveta.
Platon nas kroz ovu parabolu poziva da izađemo iz sveta senki i pojmova, koji su samo čulima dostupini I da se uzdignemo do Sveta Ideja. Te ideje, pošto su nevidljive, ne mogu se spoznati čulima, vec samo umom. Taj put je trnovit, ali dijalektika je svakako jedna od dobrih prečica za početak.
Namera ovog bloga je da traga za neuhvatljivim Svetom Ideja, da nas na polju umetnosti i nauke kroz multidisciplinaran pristup oslobodi posmatranja varljivih senki. Možda ovo pretenciozno žvuci, ali ako se prihvatimo zajedničkog traganja verujem da ćemo pravi put do izlaska na sunce pronaći, a kakve ćemo puteve na svetlosti dana odabrati zavisi od nas samih.
Praćenjem kreativnih procesa, kao I sagledavanjem I analiziranjem njihovih produkata na ovom blogu biće prezentovan pokušaj traganja za nečim novim I naizgled neuhvatljivim.

новембар 25th, 2006 Posted by Fedar | uvod | no comments

SATANISTICKI ZVUK U BEOGRADU

WHITE RABBIT CULT
multi-culture * multi-discipline * transcendental artDetriot , Michigan

BreathScapes

THE ULTIMATE PSYCHEDELIC EXPERIENCE

>>>>#X@X#<<<<>>>>#X@X#<<<<>>>>#X@X#<<<<>>>>#X@X#<<<<

Dah, vokali procesovani kroz efekte, mirisi, dim svetih biljaka, vatra,

liquid svetlo, boja, meditacija, vedske mantre, shamanska putovanja;

kombinovano u jedan savremeni transcendentalni-duhovni ritual.

Slavljenje

Trenutka. Psihodelicno iskustvo sa zatvorenim ili otvorenim ocima.

Dozivljaj bez granica: spiritualnost 21. veka.

* BreathScapes

Predeo slikan dahom

Trajanje: oko 20 min.

* ShamanTronics

Putovanje u Srediste Svesti, potpomognuto dvojicom meksickih shamana

Trajanje: oko 15 min.

28. novembar 2006

u 21h

(vrata se otvaraju u 20h)

ulaz besplatan

DAH Theatre Research Centre

Maruliceva 8

(ulaz iz dvorista iza skole)

11000 Beograd

http://www.WhiteRabbitCult.org/

info@WhiteRabbitCult.org

новембар 25th, 2006 Posted by Sasa Markovic | NAJAVE | no comments