Yes to Indian optimism!

We're so acustomed to it, we don't even notice it anymore: we keep complaining all the time.

(Well, at least in my country - but that's true on CNN as well). Unemployment, security, education, health... on all topics, we're always looking at new or old things that are negative, and lengthily discuss them again and again.

A lesson comes from India.

Again hit by terrorism at the Taj Mahal hotel in Bombay, we heard of this one more than usual because the scale is bigger and western tourists were hit. But on the day of the attack, a friend of us living "about 500 meters from the TAJ" sent us an email: "I have heard bomb blasts & gun shots and the most eerie thing has been bats swirling outside my window all through the night." But "we are resilient people, living through terror on a daily basis. We will not succumb to economic terrorism and I hear Tata has already said he will have a new signature hotel built in 6 months." [Rajat if you read this, I hope you don't mind me quoting you].

And yesterday night, the owner of a blasted restaurant reopened it as quickly as possible, saying too that they would not let the terrorists claim they have won; instead, "we [the peaceful and resilient guys] have won".

So please, western media: give the biggest slice of the publication pie to the optimistics.

Oh, by the way: Rajat was in New York on September 11, 2001.

NO to SPECULATION in the world of ARTS

Times are changing: some investors having paid obscene amounts of money for a piece of art can not sell it for a still higher price anymore; the market is shrinking!
(Well, even if that's only temporary, let's contemplate the situation.)

Good!

Art belongs to mankind, and should not be monetized. Art is not meant to be useful, but only to generate emotions to the public. There's no room for Money here.

Fine; now I can hear your criticism: "Then how does the artist make a living? Do you mean we should kill Art?" No! Of course not, this is not the point. There IS a solution to this dilemma: the artist should be paid the first time he sells his creation, so that s/he can indeed make a living out of it. At this stage, we can say that the buyer follows his emotions, rather than speculative goals, even if the action of buying does give a measure of those emotions on the big scale of Money (sic).

BUT THEN it should not be possible to sell this creation a second time following speculative goals.