The society has no color phrase. No, genatsvale

We are from Soviet Union, arrived on cultural exchange. Our people know where we are. They are looking. [mp3]

Well, the gravitsappa is something without which the pepelats can only fly [horizontally]. And with a gravitsappa - to any point in the Universe - blow! - in five seconds. [mp3]

How do you roll the Pepelats out of the garage without a gravitsap? This is a mess... [mp3]

No, you can’t... You need to know!
- Yes you can... [mp3]

What do you see? A?
- Sand…
- So this damn thing worked... [mp3]

So... The sun is in the west... That means Ashgabat is there! [mp3]

Hello! We, our tourists, fell behind the group. Give us a lift to the city, and then we’ll somehow be on our own... [mp3]

A patsak doesn’t deceive a patsak, it’s ugly, dear! [mp3]

Patsak! What idiots will take my smuggled CC here, in front of witnesses, when for it you get a life sentence with nails? Do you have brains or kyu in your head?! [mp3]

Who are you?! I ask, who are you? A?!
- Alien foreman.
- No. You're a kid. And who are you?
- I am Georgian.
- No, you’re a kid too. You are a boy, you are a boy and he is a boy. And I am a Chatlanian, and they are Chatlanians! So put on your tsak and sit in your pepelats, okay?! [mp3]

Plyuk is a Chatlan planet, so we, patsaki, must wear tsaki... [mp3]

Vladimir Nikolaevich, you have a wife at home, a son who is a poor student, the rent for a cooperative apartment has not been paid, and here you are... fooling around... It will end badly, dear... [mp3]

Excuse me, but are Chatlans and Patsaks a nationality?
- No.
- Biological factor?
- No.
- Persons from other planets?
- No.
- How do they differ from each other?
- Are you color blind, Violinist, - green color Can’t tell the difference from orange? Tourist... [mp3]

Well, what's new on Plyuk? [mp3]

Put the KC and you'll get a gravitsappa. [mp3]

Actually, I’m not an expert... on these gravitational devices... [mp3]

Is there food?
- Porridge…
- Which?
- Plastic... [mp3]

I am a representative of a civilized planet, and I demand that you watch your vocabulary! [mp3]

I told him a thousand times that he had to fly to the center. And he... is greedy, like all chatlans: “Two chatlans cheaper!..” Kyu... [mp3]

Is this your back word?
- There's no such thing as backwards! [mp3]

Where are the seas on Plyuk from? They were made into lutz a long time ago. [mp3]

Violinist, instead of always thinking that you are the first Georgian cosmonaut, and what should you Nobel Prize If they give it to you, return the spoon you stole from the poor artists. [mp3]

Heaven... heaven has never seen such a shameful kid like you, Violinist!..[mp3]

Well, here on Earth, how do you determine who should sit down in front of whom for how long?
- Well, this is by eye...
- Savages! [mp3]

If I have a little CC, I have the right to wear yellow pants, and the guy in front of me must squat not once, but twice. If I have a lot of CC, I have the right to wear crimson pants, and in front of me, the boy must squat twice, and Chatlanin must do “ku”, and Etsilop has no right to beat me at night... Never!.. [mp3]

Well, you’re an infection, dear...
- He's worse. He's just kyu. [mp3]

What fool on Plyuk thinks the truth?.. Absurd... [mp3]

It’s because you say what you don’t mean and think what you don’t think, that’s why you’re sitting in cages. And in general, this whole bitter cataclysm that I am observing here... and Vladimir Nikolaevich too... [mp3]

Look for another ensemble, uncle! [mp3]

I will tell everyone what this buffoon PJ has brought the planet to! The boys sat on the heads of the chatlans! Kyu!!! [mp3]

Excuse me, Violinist, but this is elementary! [mp3]

Uncle Vova. You have to turn the tsapu, tsa-poo.
- On the! Do it yourself!
- I can’t, I’m a Chatlanian.
- Get out of here!!! How to advise, so everyone chatlan, how to work, so... [mp3]

Foul play! You deliberately thought badly about my moves! [mp3]

Uef, have you ever seen such a little guy be such a mercantile kyu?! [mp3]

This is not an airship, you idiot! This is Mr. PJ's Last Exhalation. [mp3]

Fear the sky! PJ is alive - and I'm happy.
- And I’m even happier!

I love PJ very much!
- And I’ll eat it even more! [mp3]

Yellow pants! "Ku" twice! [mp3]

There was a Presentation Crystal! Where is the View Crystal, huh?!!
- Violinist! Put it on it's place!..
- I thought it lay like this... Glass... [mp3]

Astronauts! Which zappa is here?
- There... a rusty nut, dear.
- Everything here is rusty...
- And this one is the rustiest. [mp3]

Oh-oh-oh, mom-mom, Lyuska and Manokhin have moved... wow... [mp3]

What are you staring at? What are you staring at?! Right now, as soon as I inform your superiors that you knew and did nothing, you will be fucking transcribed! Clear?!
- I was not idle. I immediately pressed the mouth guard. The violinist is a witness! All posts! The viper with wheels is here, ku! [mp3]

Both are sentenced to life without nails. Before payment. Payment - 500 chatls, 250 per piece.

Color differentiation of pants

In the film “Kin-dza-dza! "The following classification of pants was used:

In addition to the listed varieties of colored pants, the characters in the film also wear pants of some other colors, but whether these pants are a symbol of status and whether they give any privileges to their owners is unknown.

Quotes from the movie “Kin-dza-dza!”

• - "Yes simple game. I give you half a chat, you give me three matches on Earth. Never mind, son." - “Thank you, I don’t want to.” - “Okay, you give me one match, I’ll give you three chatlas, yellow pants and this kind of head start. Let's!" - “No...” - “Blue pants...” - “Mr. Wef, I will not do it under any circumstances.”
• “Savages! Listen, I love you, I will teach you. If I have a little CC, I have the right to wear yellow pants. And the guy in front of me must squat not once, but twice. If I have a lot of CC, I have the right to wear crimson pants, and the boy in front of me must squat twice and do chatlanin ku. And Ecilop has no right to beat me at night! Never!"
• - “I have this proposal, dear. You give us the match now, and then we’ll bring you yellow pants, okay?” - “Thank you, I already have it, maybe Violinist needs it? Violinist! Here the aliens are farting with their pants... Do you need the yellow ones?”
• “Me to a planet where they don’t know who should curtsy in front of whom? Nonsense!"
• “Such a proposal. We find Fiddler, fly to the local government... We say who we are, where we are from... They give us a gravitappa, and we organize mutually beneficial trade - you give us yellow pants, and we give you as much CC as you want.”
• “Yellow pants - two times ku!”
• "Hey! Patsak! Anyway, you’ll kick off your hooves now. Tell the truth at least once in your life. Why didn’t you move with that goat when you could? What did you want? Raspberry pants? Swimming pool PJ? Tell what?"
• "When society does not have color differentiation pants - there is no purpose! And when there is no goal..."
• “How do you roll a pepelats out of the garage without a gravitsappa?”
• “How do you on Earth determine who should squat in front of whom how many times?” - “Well, it’s just by eye” - “Savages!”
• “Without color differentiation of pants, society is without purpose.”

Similar systems

see also

Links

• Sokolov B. G. Color differentiation of pants (system analysis) // Anecdote as a cultural phenomenon. Materials of the round table November 16, 2002. St. Petersburg: St. Petersburg Philosophical Society, 2002. P.109-116.

Color differentiation of pants

In the film “Kin-dza-dza! "The following classification of pants was used:

In addition to the listed varieties of colored pants, the characters in the film also wear pants of some other colors, but whether these pants are a symbol of status and whether they give any privileges to their owners is unknown.

see also

Links

• Sokolov B. G. Color differentiation of pants (system analysis) // Anecdote as a cultural phenomenon. Materials of the round table November 16, 2002. St. Petersburg: St. Petersburg Philosophical Society, 2002. P.109-116.

I have the urge to rewatch Kin-dza-dzu. And then, 25 years later, it dawned on me what this film was actually about. ...it’s interesting to watch these pre-perestroika films. It was incomprehensible then and was perceived as a satire on the USSR. Although the meaning in this case does not quite add up, the situation at that time was such that it was possible to scatter blank pieces of paper - “and so everything is clear to everyone,” since it’s bad, it means about the USSR.

And the film is actually prophetic (not to say installation) it worked out. Key phrase there is a phrase from Patsak Bi: “A society where there is no color differentiation of pants has no purpose.”

Uncle Vova and Gedevan at that time seemed ordinary people, contemporaries, funny, wretched scoops , although not devoid of nobility.
Now I understand that they are like aliens from a bright future. I can’t even believe that such people exist. Open and beautiful. Conduct themselves with dignity. To make them “do ku”, to behave outwardly like plukanas, requires harsh and long-term suggestion. But internally they don’t become such bigots; they behave nobly to the end. Uncle Vova openly ridicules the Plukan's passion for money - but nevertheless does not abandon Bee and Uef in trouble, who have more than once cruelly abandoned earthlings, right up to their probable physical destruction.

Completely devoid of nationalism towards each other; Gedevan’s “rabid racism” is deeply indignant. They behave like brothers - the elder and the younger, and this brotherhood and responsibility for each other arise instantly as soon as the two of them find themselves in trouble. Gedevan is worried about the future of science - stealing things, of course, is not good, but he is not going to put these things on the market, but to transfer them to UNESCO!
That is, from our point of view today, compared to the Plyukans, Soviet people are simply representatives of the Bright Future. But these are normal, real people that time. Average, not the best and not the worst.

At the same time, Bee and Uef repeat several times, persistently - that is, clearly not by chance - what a backward planet you have! Savages! And the water has not yet been transferred to Lutz, and there are still forests, and decent people. Savages! And they passionately explain the meaning of their life - about the differentiation of pants. It is important!
We laughed at this at the time, but in fact this is a completely accurate prediction of the future.

In a few years they will begin to explain to us that we are savages. The entire civilized world, living according to market laws, knows by very clear signs who to bow to - exactly the one who has a lot of chats. And we still determine it by eye! And haven’t we heard - “we have no goal, only in a market society does a person have a goal”?

And we now have “color differentiation of pants.” It’s not that in Soviet society there was no hierarchy and demands to “bow” to someone - there was, the hero of the film does not deny. But then everything became completely civilized - those to whom one should bow, “who have many chatls” - began to differ from ordinary patsak people in their clothes, cars, homes, habitat, habits... The society has found a goal - to acquire and increase chatls.
At the same time, other signs of “savagery” gradually disappeared - internationalism, friendship, nobility, honor... And the responsibility of society to take care of each of its members has been replaced by charity marathons - send an SMS for 80 rubles. and feel like a benefactor. Hello, Plyuk! By the way, Mr. Pe, whatever his name is , also appeared.

Now the most interesting thing is about the material and technological level of the Kin-dza-dza galaxy. At that time, all this squalor was perceived as a parody of “our squalor.” Ragged walls, stinking wells, rusty creaking mechanisms... But this version of “satire on our reality” was missing something. Now I understand why.

In reality, the Kin-Dza-Dza civilization is not at all wretched. This is a post-industrial, incredibly technologically advanced society. It's so post-punk. Rusty bolts and a toilet full of sand - in a starship that can cover light distances in a second. Today you are a poor artist, and tomorrow you get a match and you buy the whole planet. Moreover, the planet costs only 60 chatls, and the air to it costs 90 chatls. Market paradoxes, like a beggar with a mobile phone.

In principle, any Plyukanin could organize local communism if he has a little money or a little brains. Buy water, fill the planet with oceans, grow forests, re-educate idiots, in general, create Alpha 2.0. But who needs it? Uef accurately expresses the highest desire of any Plyukanin: “they will all bow to us, and we will enjoy.” Like Mr. Pe Zhe: sit in a pool of water and pull the bell of your boy. It will not be boring. The whole life of a plyukanin is a game. Today you are in lifelong ecstasy, and tomorrow you are at the top. But the day after tomorrow you can be transglued, so enjoying even the most wretched joys will not be boring.

This is ideally developed, utopian capitalism - it will look exactly like this (in a good situation, of course, if people survive at all, and if all these technologies arise!). The same thing is, in fact, assumed Western writers- for example, Neal Stevenson in "The Diamond Age" - limitless material possibilities, complete freedom, and indescribable squalor of personality.
These semi-monkeys can, in their own way, technical capabilities transform the whole world, explore the Universe, become immortal. But why do they need this? Their meaning of life is the fight for chatli, for the color of pants and the highest idea - “so that everyone bows to me.” Their society is not “savage”, it has purpose and meaning!


Happy with family worries and studying in music school Residents of the USSR peer at a dog-man and a man in lingerie...

And Uncle Vova and Gedevan return back to their everyday world, where the son is a poor student, he hasn’t paid for a cooperative apartment, he can’t get into MGIMO... In the bright one, it turns out - and we didn’t know this, but everything is learned by comparison - beautiful world, which has so little time left to exist. Ku.

Yesterday they showed the cartoon "Kin-dza-dza". What do the film's characters have to do with their cartoon reincarnation? None. As, indeed, Danelia. The USSR left, and with it its skill. It turned out that, without the concept of “man being a friend, comrade and brother” actually put into practice, attempts to simulate it in a work of art are flawed. Flawed, but still subject to a few - such as Cervantes or Leo Tolstoy. In their works of art they breathed life into their dream. We lived in it. Now it has been destroyed.


And these are aliens from the planet Plyuk in December 1942.

Original taken from

Strictly speaking, the problem of color differentiation of pants vital only worried about the characters in the film “Kin-dza-dza”. Me - not really. And because I am not included in this issue, I can judge it objectively. To what extent, of course, is it possible to talk about objectivity at all (for the author of these lines, for he is a philosopher by diploma, and “according to the staff” since the time of R. Descartes, he has been charged with the duty to doubt everything, especially reality and objectivity).

Let me remind you for those who have forgotten the essence of the problem, and for those who have not seen the film, I will tell you a little about it. One of the characters in the film (played by Evgeny Leonov) makes something like this: “I will not live in a society where there is no color differentiation of pants.” If we say this “in Russian,” then the phrase could be translated as follows: “There is no point in living in that underdeveloped and primitive society where there are no “foundations of foundations” and “values ​​of values”, which are personified in the color differentiation of pants.” The fact is that the society of the planet to which the above-quoted character belonged had its own values ​​and goals. And it must be said that these values ​​and goals are quite far from the values ​​of both socialist society (the time to which the film was created) and modern democracy and civil society. These values ​​were personified in the hierarchical system of differentiation of pants. Those. a certain color of pants (say, purple [hereinafter we take colors arbitrarily, because we don’t quite remember the exact differentiation in the movie]) reflected the social status of the wearer and was the object of coveted desire for those whose pants were cast in a lower social color (for example, blue).

So, before us is quite social organized world: caste and hierarchical system of relations. The role of the indicator social status in this world they perform color differentiated pants.

Before we move on to the actual problematization of the color differentiation of pants, it is necessary to clarify the very context of this differentiation, i.e. the world in which it takes place. This world is enough amazing world, for it is an unreal world, but the world is fictional, i.e. constructed. As a constructed world, it is a world of the mind, i.e. nous and nowhere except this nous not localized. In other words, the world of this fantastic world is a noumenal world, and in the Kantian sense of the word. Let us explain what was stated. The world of “Kin-dza-dza” is a utopia (or a dystopia, what difference does it make to us?), but a utopia built by the mind of its creator. It is unreal, although its forms - like everything else in any movie - are visibly represented. But their visibility refers only to the givens of reason, the givens of our consciousness. At the same time, the world is quite stable for our consciousness, since it does not “fall apart”, again, for our consciousness. Thus, the objects (if one can speak allegorically about non-existent objects and worlds) of this film (as well as any other film, especially fantasy) have amazing properties - their identity in itself And for us, i.e. their representation and intelligibility coincide, since both are equally unreal. In other words, their representation is their noumenality. Those. the world that we see is no different from the world itself, since both are creations of the mind. The world of the film “Kin-dza-dza” in this regard is both phenomenal and noumenal. Those. we have unique opportunity to see a phenomenon that is no different from a noumenon. And in this sense, we see that the world of “Kin-dza-dza” is a noumenal world, which does not lose any of its noumenality from the fact that it becomes an object for our vision. Let us recall that for I. Kant, noumenon is an “intelligible object.” By the way, as a noumenal world, the world of color differentiation of pants cannot become the subject of possible experience and be considered human mind. According to the same Kant, the noumenal world can become the subject of possible experience for another, say, for angelic understanding, and reasoning about it can become the subject of angelic patience on the part of those listening to this reasoning about it. In other words, what we are talking about now is the problem of color differentiation of pants - discussions about the angelic and, therefore, about the divine, i.e. theology par excellence.

Now let's return to the very issue of color differentiation of pants. The very title of the article “Color differentiation of pants (system analysis)” is not accidental. We will talk about how to systematically consider the color differentiation of pants. At the same time, it is assumed - and quite strongly - that color differentiation itself is an indisputable given. This is a given of the social and ethical planes, which we, since we are not Marxists, must not change, but explore. Let's face it, we have a dead end in front of us, from which, in theory, systemic analysis should find a way out. Here we consider system analysis not as is sometimes customary in certain types of systems, but as an analysis that provides an understanding of an interconnected whole. Even if it’s not a dead end, it’s a labyrinth (consisting of different colors of pants), and the system is that Ariadne’s thread that will help us not only get out of our pants, but also intelligently and scientifically rank and coordinate these pants.

To begin with, let us take for granted the following differentiation of pants: lilac (L) color of pants is the color of the highest rank, the color of the pants of rulers; orange (O) is the color of, as they would now say, the middle class; and blue (C) is, excuse me, the color of the commoner. For the convenience of further analysis, we will take only three colors, and as Aristotle used to say, they are sufficient for our analysis. We need to analyze this given and identify certain patterns in it that will allow us to evaluate the integrity of the blue (S), orange (O) and purple (L) pants and comprehend the ethical foundations of the society of the film “Kin-dza-dza”. What strategy should we choose? That is the question (quoted from the memory of “Hamlet” by W. Shakespeare). It’s difficult to immediately choose an analysis strategy that would allow us to systematically approach the problem of color differentiation of pants without thinking about it (there are 19 volumes, no less), so let’s turn to the most well-known strategies and apply them in practice (pants).

Of course, if we are to choose a methodology that will provide us with genuine and objective comprehension (in our case it coincides, let me remind you, with the noumenal), then we should, first of all, turn to those methods that are promoted and used not without success (one nuclear bomb what is it worth!!) natural sciences. So, scientific methodology. I lay out my pants on the table. What should natural science do in this case? Dismember, disassemble into atoms, and having described the structure of the pants, the structure and frequency of the color wave, approach the desired solution to the problem. Let’s do it (it’s hard to decide on this if there aren’t that many pants). We dissect the pants, describe their structure, compare them with other pants, etc. Well!? Never mind. Nothing, believe me, works out. If you don’t believe me, then dismember the pants yourself and - I guarantee - you won’t understand a damn thing about how what color pants correspond to the various lines of the “table of ranks” of the “planet Kin-dza-dza”. The result that can be achieved in a similar experimental way is the transformation of pants into rags for wiping a car...

Maybe, then, we’ll turn to humanitarian methodologies and try to find in their ranks the desired method that will provide us with the systemic integrity of this phenomenon, especially since the color differentiation of pants “in theory” should relate to social, ethical, political... in short, to humanitarian spheres.

Let's take at random (this is at random for the reader, but not for me) several methodologies. First, the method of speculation. For it is clear that knowledge about the color differentiation of pants does not apply to private, but to the most general issues human society and it is impossible to obtain this knowledge inductively, as Bacon would have liked, but it inherently belongs to the sphere that is subject to the Aristotelian mind, i.e. speculation about the very first principles.

So we speculate on the pants. Let me remind you: about pants S, O, L. We speculate, we speculate... we cannot speculate anything except the objective (may Husserl forgive me) given. No matter how much you stare (either with your eyes or with your mind), you do not comprehend the eternal and imperishable reality of color differentiation. Doesn't fit... Let's move on... And we'll get to Aristotle.

Our appeal to Aristotle (or rather to his ethics) is not accidental, because the differentiation of pants is an ethical problem, and Aristotle himself is a fairly wise thinker. What would he do if he were in our place? He would probably use his achievements in this area and apply what he successfully tested in his ethics, namely, that the most important thing is to find justice, which is the driving principle of any human communication. Color differentiation, of course, consolidates and fixes existing social connections and therefore its comprehension and preservation is a matter of the greatest scientific and political importance (in particular, this would be important for Aristotle from the “planet Kin-dza-dza,” if there is such a thing). As the basis of order (and for Aristotle, order is “something”) the system of differentiation must maintain justice and avoid extremes, for justice is the mean between two extremes. If we “translate” what is stated to the colors of the pants, it turns out that the O pants are such because they are equidistant from the two extremes, from the C pants and the L pants. By the way, you can, with the help of Aristotle, determine the topos of the pants, i.e. their natural place, to which they necessarily strive. And their natural place is the legs and loins, and where these legs and loins go, the natural top of the pants migrates to the same place... Beauty? Something doesn't work out with Aristotle's pants. Let's take something newer.

For example, Hegel. From the point of view of Hegelian dialectics, what should we do with pants? Probably you need to choose a beginning (just as Hegel chooses being for himself) and “untwist the chosen trousers dialectically. Let's say pants C are the beginning. They have an internal contradiction that drives them along the path of development to their other - pants O. Pants O not only their otherness of pants C, they deny them and preserve them in their truth. So, pants C undergo a process of Aufhebung (removal, i.e., pants are taken off) and pass into pants O. But this does not end there, for everything goes to a higher unity, which is then personified by pants A, containing both the removed pants C, so are the pants O, removed in truth. At the same time, it should also be noted that since we have a dialectical process here, we can say the same thing that Hegel said about each stage of development of the absolute idea - it is an absolute idea: pants C are pants A , just like pants O are pants L. Honestly, except for taking off your pants, everything is complete rubbish, so maybe we’ll take an even newer system?

Well, for example, M. Heidegger. Probably he would have said this about pants in the Black Forest house: “Pants are pants in the gap of pants, declaring the oblivion of pants.” And from the said profundity of the singer of the 3rd Reich, we would not have felt any better and we would not have advanced at all in understanding the color differentiation of pants.

Then maybe the “scourge of the twentieth century” and hysterical women, S. Freud, will help us here. Probably the problem of pants would have found his sympathy, because pants are so “erotic”, because they are adjacent to two erogenous zones - the anus and the phallus. How this appeal to the problem of color differentiation of pants in psychoanalysis would end is not so difficult to predict - everything would ultimately come down to eros and thanatos, and if Freud’s follower Jung had taken up the matter, then it would be archishtans floating on the surface of the unconscious. But this would not make us or the pants any better: unconsciousness would be inaccessible to rationality and would be honorably consigned to a psychiatric hospital.

And the list of methodologies and systems goes on...

What should we do if they can’t give us anything worthwhile?

So, what do we get from the systematic application of any methodology to the problem of color differentiation of pants? Yes, in general, nothing. She didn’t give us anything and didn’t explain anything. Maybe the point is that the human mind is weak for divine affairs, for we saw from the very beginning that the talk about the noumenality-phenomenality of the world “Kin-dza-dza” is a matter of the angelic understanding?

At its core, the color differentiation of pants, as a visible manifestation, crystallization of human connections, the structure of society, is no better and no worse than any other. And the impossibility of systematically comprehending it, which was, of course, presented in this text in an exaggerated form, in principle demonstrates the impossibility of giving an “exhaustive” and “final” explanation in the humanitarian sphere. Why is this happening?

Yes, for various reasons. Let's take just two. The mind strives for understanding, which, by the way, does not have the properties of statics, but acts based on equality, on statics. Even A. Bergson pointed out the fact that rationality is focused on the inanimate, and in the sphere of life and development it cannot achieve anything “outstanding.” We “kill” in order to know, but we shouldn’t treat the living like that...

Let us point out one more reason that goes against any “reason”. Trying to understand the world, society, people, we strive to find something constant, rhythmic, predictable. But such a desire is not entirely adequate to the real state of affairs. There is a reason that was pointed out by the ancients. For example, Aristotle said in the Nicomachean Ethics that virtue alone is not enough for happiness, but luck is also needed. The reality of human existence is that chance (luck), surprise is something that does not play last role in our lives (we are born by chance and leave this world by chance), However, it is precisely chance in to a lesser extent has the “right of citizenship” in science, and one can regret it along with Fr. Nietzsche, that the most ancient aristocracy of this world (His Majesty the case) is undeservedly ignored.

And there are many, many such reasons... But science simply ignores them... Every time it gets hit in the pants...

Once again: what to do?

It’s very simple: think, give birth to a thought...

Think contrary to someone else’s thought, because if a thought is not born in spite of it, then it simply does not exist. Thought must kill thought, in the same sense as the Buddhists called “Kill the Buddha.” And there seems to be no other way.

What about color differentiation of pants? But who cares... She played her part, led us to other horizons of thought and, like Othello, must retire.

And one last thing. The collection is dedicated to an anecdote, but here I am with my pants... What should I do? But no way. The joke is that no way. As I. Kant used to say, humor (and if a joke is not humor, then I am not me) consists in turning expectation into nothing. And in this regard, all the nonsense that I just had the honor of presenting to your attention precisely and “insidiously” turns your expectations into nothing. And that’s why, it seems to me, this is where he belongs. And finally, as the already mentioned Aristotle would say many times, it must be said that this enough has already been said...