End of History Collection

If true, end of history, else, nuke

As the “end of history”, we understand those theories that predict a moment such that history has reached its culmination in terms of progress, and then History stops as a result. There are many failures from the end of history accumulated in that usual sense (Marxism, Fukuyama...). In another sense, the end of history would be a moment analogous to the beginning of history, but in reverse. If history began when the written records started to be saved and remained preserved, the end of history would occur when these written records ceased to exist for whatever reason (reliance on AI and subsequent collapse). The end of the world and humanity obviously entails the disappearance of history too. And then there is the idea of ​​the end of History in an analytical and logical sense. The description of such a scenario could guarantee to be the end of human history. This irreversible End of History, which would not come from the annihilation of humanity and the world (the goal would be precisely to avoid a situation like that), would be the result of a pact between the great nuclear powers that agreed to divide up the world, in order to achieve total governance over it, by reason of empire, before the global disorder escalated too much (and) catastrophically. 

Radioactive Utopia

Radioactive Utopia is a vision of the precious radioactive Utopia that we are leaving to our sons and daughters as the result of personal ambition and an irrational confrontation between empires, by lack of a truer reason to strengthen the empire. It is a deceptive beauty. There's nothing good where we're headed.

POSCRYPTUM (AC) MANIFESTO: Art After Crypto (.AAC).

«Post scriptum» etymologically means that something comes after what has been written. «Post cryptum» etymologically would mean that something has been encrypted and which remains cryptically hidden. «Poscryptum» means that something has been cryptically written (encrypted publicly), through the blockchain, or that it is the result of a script which follows a logic (that we do not understand, or which remains hidden) product from AI: because the AI ​​creates its own logic, unintelligible to Humanity.

PS is an abbreviation that means what comes after what is written: a text that follows another main text. AC stands for "After Crypto." Not to be confused with BC, or AD (Anno Domini: which means after the birth of Christ, in English).

'Post' can be what comes after something has died: the postmortem of something.

'Post' can also mean what comes after something has already arisen and still remains at its peak of vitality and vigour. For example, when talking about post-Internet art, it usually refers to art that exists from the Internet and on the Internet—even just on the Internet (which is net art).

'Post' can also be a Hegelian synthesis of something that is surpassed, but remains integrated and mixed without disappearing, being incorporated into a new transformed entity, but with an important trace of the original substance. For example, when talking about post-capitalism / post-communism, or Christianity with respect to Judaism, or the child's genome with respect to the parent’s one.

When talking about Poscryptum in general, it means that it comes after—but long after—writing emerged (which I explain in Art Poscryptum (AC): Art After Cryptos). But not only integrates writing, but from a quantitative and historical perspective, in this Poscryptum era, writing has only just begun. As if writing had just been born, as an entity more alive than ever: that which being capable of being immutable, takes life and vitality, showing the power of a mummified substance, which however contains faith and divinity. That just precisely when writing becomes dispensable for the generic human, for example, thanks to voice recognition technology (see «Confession regarding the writing of my texts and Manifesto for a non-illiterate Post-literacy»), writing is taking autonomy and own entity. Scripture in an intense sense.

Pure writing is born in the present third millennium after Christ (AD) from algorithms whose essence is introduced into the code, and whose maximum splendour and divinity (in terms of immutability and free of corruption in that sense) is shown within the blockchain; and the ultimate power and omniscience is achieved by the AAI (Autonomous Artificial Intelligence). A Postcryptum Era, an After Cryptos era, and an After AI era, come to mean the same thing. One era that we can place in the year 2022 AD. 2022 is the first year AC (After Cryptos), which is 33 years after the birth of the web (www) or the presumably false End of History made celeb by Francis Fukuyama, when the Berlin Wall was demolished, and which may also symbolize the post-alphabetic era (After Alphabet, which is also the name of the ex-Google).

If to date writing has been a mere power of permanence, predestined to die (with few exceptions), from the third millennium awards, Scripture has affirmed that it has come to live eternally, insofar as it has abandoned the crypt in where it was fossilized—like a dead holy scripture.

Writing is finally alive, and it will live much more, and in this sense, Poscryptum Art comes to record its vitality, fossilizing its traces in the blockchain, very residually, but also splendidly, seeking a symbolic beauty worthy enough of this new era. Poscryptum, in this more restricted sense, refers to Art After Crypto: specifically, to cryptoart. Scripture is dead, long live Scripture!

POSCRYPTUM (AC): Poscryptum Art, Art After Crypto (.AAC)

Post Scriptum is a Latin locution meaning "after what is written". Usually abbreviated PS, it is used to add something later to a text when it has already been concluded.

The Postcryptum Art, in a broad sense, is the one that refers to the idea of ​​the Poscryptum, which is a philosophical idea about a new historical era: the era After Cryptos (AC in English: After Crypto), which it will coincide quite closely in time, with the end of writing as we know it (therefore it would be an Art After Alphabetism, which coincides in its initials with Art After AI, Art After Artists or Art After America). And in a restricted sense, it means all that art which is only possible after the invention of writing: that is, through the use (exclusively or not) of writing. In that sense, most of the art contained in this work is Postcryptum in both the general and restricted senses.

It is «Art After Crypto» (Art AC: Art After Cryptos), because this technology represents a before and after to the idea of ​​writing (along with AI) and (especially) art after (after AI: if the fear of some artists about a gradual replacement becomes real). Because crypto implies divine properties, such as immutability, material incorruptibility, and we can even talk about immateriality, while maintaining its singularity and concrete entity, which seems like a solved paradox: because cryptos and NFTs achieve virtual scarcity, of what could be reproducible indefinitely… Crypto technology allows programming not to allow the duplication and reproduction of data and digital entities (while everything stays there transparent only once). And it also supposes a new revolutionary form of commercialization and distribution, of a decentralized nature.

In this sense, for consistency, each of the pieces shown in this work has its equivalent manifestation in blockchain through NFTs.

Revolution in Art Circles I

These three works represent a revolution for the world of institutional art (art galleries, fairs, museums, art critics, curators, historians, artists, collectors…).

Art Circles is a project that aims to incorporate the blockchain into the world of traditional Art and bring the world of Traditional Art closer to the crypto world in such a way that it is capable of validating some type of crypto-art, because not all crypto-art is trash (even if most of it, is).

In any case, it is a “color revolution”, which aims to generate movement (following the Manifesto for the Supremacy of Institutional Art against decentralized art, which is an artistic movement born in Barcelona, but with an universalist will), but always through fun, dance and poetry; and rejecting the red violence.

Institutional Art Supremacist Manifesto 

1. Many art movements in the past have sought to challenge institutional Art.

2. Most of these movements have claimed against the establishment and they challenge the status quo of the Artworld.

3. We are not against the History of Art as it has happened, and we do not deny nor oppose the artistic movements of the past. 

4. We are on the contrary, much in favor of the traditional Art World, as opposed to the current trends dominating the so-called cryptoart.

5. In our epoch, we are experiencing exceptional social changes and transformations at all levels, which generate absolute confusion about the future. 

6. A fascinating new technique has appeared into the Artworld, relying on the blockchain technology: NFTs.

7. We do not consider ourselves reactionary to the novelty, nor neo-Luddites against new technologies in general, nor particularly against the blockchains and the new opportunities for the artistic expression (and commercialization) that they imply. 

8. But we are skeptical about the kind of artistic trends which are predominant in this new field.

9. Blockchains (and the NFTs that are tied to them) are just a tool. Blocks can be used to build marvelous artworks, or to kidnap the Art and throw it into the deepest depths of the sea and into a period of darkness anchored with stainless chains. They can be both Pandora and her amphora. A power that is so good, but unfortunately scarce, that it inevitably generates misery.   

10. Without denying its possibility as an artistic category, we consider that most of NFTs do not have any appreciable artistic value. 

11. Without denying its categorization as Art, we believe that the institutional Artworld has a relevant role to play in discriminating and separating the wheat from the chaff in the wild Metaverse that has proliferated chaotically in a decentralized way without any aesthetic criteria nor artistic criticism. Precisely, ‘criticism’ comes from the Greek word ‘kritikos’ ("able to make judgments") and from ‘krinein’ ("to separate, distinguish"). A shared root with the word crisis: to judge, to analyze, when something is broken, and a decision is needed. The state of chaos and uncertainty is found in Latin as crisis, from the Greek krísis, related to the verb krínein, meaning ‘to judge’ and also implying ‘decision’ or ‘separation’, making its roots obvious in the Indo-European *krei-, ‘to cut’ in order ‘to choose’; complemented by the suffix -sis, that commonly appears in medical terminology to indicate a condition, being applied in this case in the sense of identifying a problematic situation. 

12. Despite a first impression of horizontality, the new channels commercializing "cryptoart" generate new hierarchies, but they govern without criteria —apart from the market power previously achieved, whatever was the cause of the success. This generates an absolute lack of real opportunities to new entrants. 

13. The inequality in real opportunities to new participants is not something new, but at least, in the old centralized Artworld, there was a possibility of amendment and rectification, allowing the implementation of corrective measures. In this new, supposedly decentralized model of distribution, there are no technical possibilities of guaranteeing real equal access. Only money can make some artworks to bright above the rest of thousands and millions of works. So, currently, this allegedly decentralized model has the worst of the two worlds: the blindness of the chaotic and random selection (incapable of appreciating the beauty of the real Art), the demonstration of power derived from the money, and the lack of real and fair opportunities for all. And, furthermore, sometimes artworks are banned to a greater extent in decentralized marketplaces than would be in art galleries. 

14. In addition, the new models of [allegedly] decentralized distribution are only partially decentralized: the way in which some collections stand out on the front pages of the portals is not transparent. Neither the collections are validated and verified (to avoid, for example, falling into scams that consist of making illegitimate reproductions of original collections) in a fair and transparent way. And almost all artworks that end up in the top of sales rankings have had to spend before a huge amount of money on advertising and marketing among specialized “cryptoart” influencers. Nothing new, but current influencers are absolutely 0 critical about the “art” they promote: there are zero art critics, but only fast tweets endorsing “artworks”. As Quevedo said, such a powerful gentleman is my Mister Money. This model has nothing to do with the emancipation of Humanity, but about perpetuating corruption.

15. Without acts of curation of the art that is exposed in the main NFT marketplaces, made by experts, academics, and art professionals who have a special sensitivity and openness to changes, there will be no possible fit of this new virtual world in the History of Art. 

16. The Art which will be part of the books of Art History is the kind of Art that will prevail, and the one that will have a chance to be appreciated in the future.

17. For all these reasons, today an artistic and political movement is beginning, which does not intend anything other than to reconcile the great novelty, revolutionary in many ways, of NFTs and the “cryptoart” with the institutional Artworld.

18. We say yes to blockchain entering to the Art system, or more precisely, the real art entering into the blockchain, but only if it makes the humanity more free, instead of creating new chains, even stronger than the old ones (which at least could be corrupted with the rust, which allowed them to break eventually after a long time; meanwhile blockchains rest immutable —which can be a strength very appreciated, but it can also perpetuate some injustices). 

19. A reconciliation that can only be achieved through the mutual recognition from the members of the Art system, whether they are more traditional and resulting from a certain historical trajectory (but open to change), or the totally contemporary ones (appearing out of nowhere, cryptically, thanks to this technical innovation, and as sons of the chaos of the social networks). 

20. Today, February 8, 2022, is the birthday of the Institutional Art Supremacist Movement and the Institutional Art Supremacy is proclaimed. 

21. Institutional Art Supremacists believe in the need for institutions, whether private or public, commercial or academic, theoretical or practical, for the possibility of the existence of Art (in capital letters). Without institutions there is no criteria, whether confronted or in harmony, that could allow to resolve the ontological status of Art.

22. The Supremacy of Institutional Art is not equivalent to a supremacy of traditional art, nor to a reactionary movement against NFTs. And it has even less to do with another type of racist or speciesist supremacism. On the contrary, the institutions have an important role in guaranteeing the inclusion of all the excluded and marginalized groups, something that cannot guarantee a “kind of art” so governed [currently] by the Market Power concentrated by few actors, without limits [other than the ones programmed by the algorithms: which can be modified]. 

23. This is not a mere symbolic declaration, but rather some first steps are taken to achieve an institutional transformation appropriate to our goals.

24. Steps like the constitution of the first DAO in the world of institutional art are taken. Art Galleries DAO and Art Museums DAO are founded today, in their respective founding acts. 

25. These are the first steps of many to come, which aim to build the future where Art will have the place that Humanity deserves, to cultivate and educate a postmaterialist society that needs the highest values ​​to guide its progression, and avoid the falling to the desperation and darkness, from where it’s very difficult to escape, as the black holes of History. 

26. Cryptography and blockchain can be tools that play in favor of achieving the emancipation of the Humanity, but it will only be the case if we are capable of thinking critically about the institutions to develop in order to live together with justice and empathy, something which the blind blockchains will never offer by themselves. 

27. Blockchains are blind, but a strong technology which can help culture and Art to escape from its way to the black hole of History. 

Manifesto for a new total and totalitarian Art

We have a historic mission: rescuing Art from its ashes caused by the avant-garde and postmodern authors, and from the marginalization it suffers by other more omnipresent media in our society.

It is always easier to destroy than building and yet the avant-garde and postmodern movements of the past have not been able to destroy Art (art objects), after persecuting it for more than a century, and reaching the point of physical aggression (or seeking a ghostly evanescence through conceptual art).

Faced with this proven inability, the time has come to positively vindicate Historical Art, but not as a collector's fetish, but as a tool for transforming the world.

Art (as an incarnating entity of acting History) is the closest thing to the deity in a world that no longer believes in God. Therefore, this sacred power must be used by Art to consecrate itself in History in a superior way to what it has achieved at any time in the past, alluding to a select minority that not merely knows the future, but builds and immobilizes it. Forever.

It is possible that she loses the fight and the revenge is going be very hard, but it is now or never, the moment to vindicate the place of Art in History.

The first writing about the artistic avant-garde, by Olinde Rodrigues ("L'artiste, le savant et l'industriel", from 1825) came to elevate the place of Art, placing it even above technique, for being capable of to advance faster than other disciplines. This degenerated progressively along with the rest of the pseudoradical avant-garde and the postmodern pastiche movements (including the futurist movement of the fascist Marinetti). But until the time has come for a final revival, achieving a reconciliation between radicalism and institutionality, which is necessary due to its form of Total Art (it would not be total with only one non-entire part). The avant-garde has a military origin (in French, "avantgarde"), and with such an ending we have to militate too (it’s really “total”).

It is all about generating a post-metacryptofascist aestheticizing Great Politics, in which the weapons are there only to be show like art pieces (not even in military parades, but only in museums), and not as is the case with the present global disorder, which does not stop to be used in entirely avoidable wars (if there were institutional mechanisms for the rational management of global conflicts).

It is time for a Movement that bets on the Supremacy of Institutional Art, that uses all the techniques at its disposal, to flood the contemporary world with high culture, taking the lead politically and economically.

Art After America. What was the being of America

What was the being of "America"?

America was what the North Americans of the United States say in English about America.

America was also the backyard of the United States.

America is also the last hegemonic empire to fall. Even if he tries to resist, he can't do anything anymore (something that even the manager of the largest Hedge Fund in the world, Bridgewater, Ray Dalio, admits). The consequence is to admit that it is preferable that they accept reality, than to fall into a trap that can lead us all ahead (preventing the Thucydides Trap, as a reminiscence from the Peloponnesian War).

America was the guardian of the 'Pax Americana': the guarantor of a certain order.

America was the closest thing to Bacon's New Atlantis (not the artist but the philosopher). The place where technique and science have advanced the most, also considering the mother England. America was an Anglican thing.

America was also a land of opportunity. The closest thing to Freedom that has ever existed on Earth. But it is about a freedom that was based on the domination and abuse (freedom of conquest) over indigenous people who were massacred. It is true that it was a different era and that, still, in many countries –and not precisely in the US– there is still a broad racism, a circumstance extended throughout history (the prejudice about what is different has been something universal, and not only attributable to those who were the winners in each historical period). And it must also be recognized that few countries do as much to integrate different ethnic groups in a democratic way, regardless of origin, which is not easy to achieve, despite the fact that there are still many deficiencies and pending challenges, as USA does.

That America no longer exists. That America is sinking, dragging with it the entire West. It seems that they tend to go on the same ocean liner (called NATO) just when the storm rages (the correlation rises almost to one, as when there is a panic in the stock markets). For this reason, America is now the tomb of Western culture, the cathedral of capitalism, and this work of Art called "Art After America", the spiritual representation of a land in a process of historical ashification.

America was the New World that ended up dominating the rest of the globe as the sole hegemon, the first time it was technically feasible to achieve it. America was the greatest symbol of the prosperity of free market capitalism. But the world is entering a new era where that will no longer be possible.

Art After America will be art in a larger America, beyond the Rio Grande. Or Bravo! And the US will no longer subsume the idea of ​​America: the extreme arrogance that once even sounded natural and unquestionable. A new future led by new powers is making its way.

Art After America COVER

«Art After America» is the second artist book written by Artssassin, released on September 11th of 2022. In it, the future of Humanity is explored through art, making hyperstition about the Art of the future. The author claims not to be "anti-American", but he is more a friend of the truth. He is not a revolutionary either (as much as this material may seem incendiary, or directly 235U): just the murderer of passive Art (but it was more properly euthanasia). 

Spain is consubstantial to its tearing

This is one of the 3 works by Artssassin that deals with the question of Spain: «HipanIA», «Spain, Empire of the Setting Sun», and «Spain is consubstantial to its tearing». Spain is, like France, Russia, the United Kingdom, Italy, Turkey, Japan... the residual nation of an Empire. An empire like the United Kingdom where the Sun did not sleep. But unlike the United Kingdom, Russia and France, it does not have nuclear weapons (although it tried for a short period of time), nor is a military power. And unlike the United Kingdom and Russia, its influence power in its sphere of influence is marginal. And the former Spanish colonies are not in the business of rebuilding a new supranational imperial area linked to a new Hispanicism under both the Spanish and Portuguese cultural influence. So, from the vestiges of that Empire, only a substance capable of being stable would remain if it accepts its geostrategic decadence, recognizing that it does not have the necessary strength: nor would if it tried to apply (to its internal cultural differences) Procrustean cuts at the feet and wings of the "patois" (it would only accelerate the spill). It is rather a question of covering the wound with culture, precisely basing its identity on the cultural claim of its plurality, and recognizing the fact that the Spanish language is so large and rich, that it does not need to annihilate other cultures threatened with extinction in the long term, given the present situation of diglossia. And also supporting cultural development, Arts and Humanities like never before. That is why "Spain is consubstantial to its tearing", and without this acceptance, it won’t be. Less (identity) politics, much more culture.

Spain, Empire of the setting sun

AirT

AirT in its primary meaning is all art that has to do with air. That means, without intending to be exhaustive, that kind of art which tries to represent the air, or inspired by it (that is, the use of air as a representative, expressive or symbolic material), or when the atmosphere is a main subject of the work, or that uses air or derivatives of air as physical matter.

AIrt 2 ART

Artssassin already presented a work made by live AI in a contest broadcasted on YouTube, in July 2022, to represent the Duchampian idea of ​​passing off a 'readymade' as a work: which was already done to the artist, within the framework of a contest. Later, other “artworks” made by other artists using Artificial Intelligence have been submitted —and even have won competitions by mistake—, but these submissions lack the conscious intention of claiming the generation of Art through the use of AI, which I call AIRT.

AIrtworks can be considered “art”, but that will rarely achieve the consideration of “Art” (in capital letter) because they lack sufficient artistic value. It’s an opinion, but if an AIrtwork seeks to achieve a plus of value (so that it could be considered “Art”), it is required that the airtwork introduces a disruptive and sophisticated concept, to such a level that the machines are (at the moment) incapable of producing that by their own. They will do it later (eventually).

If in the previous work I presented in a contest, the claimed concept was the exhibition context. In this contest, the concept shown is the transformative power of Artificial Intelligence, only comparable to the transformation that smartphones have produced in the cultural and techno-economic world, since they have been able to change our minds forever, but as a prolongation of the same system based on Big Data; and (as well) the act of explicit manifestation of its essential dependency (still) on human prompts (generally: except when an artist tries to questionnaire this creating a counterexample, as it usually happens in contemporary Art).

It implies a social transformation that can produce nostalgia for the past, but it is unstoppable, and it is useless to try to stop it. Thus, the ‘STOP’ sign (as a symbol) added to the image generated by the AI, is ironic, because Artssassin owes a lot to the AI: because without it, it would hardly have dared to produce and expose images as artworks.

And precisely this possibility of excess of production of images at a reduced cost is one of the most controversial and feared aspects of Artificial Intelligence. I could pretend and say that I have spent many hours editing and working on the native image of the AI, in order to justify Marxistly (according to Karl Marx's mistaken Labour Theory of Value) the value of this work… But it is not the case. The one presented is a pure image that the used interface of the Artificial Intelligence has offered to Artssassin, without adding anything more than the shown symbols. It reveals a limitation of the current state of Artificial Intelligence applied to the art, which is the fact that the instructions are given to AI exogenously: it is not yet AAI: Autonomous Artificial Intelligence). In other words, the work made by the artist Artssassin is nothing more than the instructions shown, provided to the Artificial Intelligence through a smartphone. The prompt reflects the pure work of Artssassin.

The product makes it clear that there is something artistic in the works carried out by the AI, ​​as something had to be put into work by an artist in the urinal of Duchamp: that is the ideation and several executed decisions, and of course, the institutional context of Art. Whether something is enough sophisticated to be socially valued or not, is another issue, and here is where the role of the concept enters. What else the AI cannot yet provide to the work is the abstract concept and its theoretical justification. The concept is what converts AIrt to Art (AIRT 2 ART), if Art Circles recognize it as Art.

This is how AIRT is delivered in exchange for (hopefully) more Art: that Master as Prize that Artssassin so desires: AIRT 2 ART, ART 4 ART, is the goal here. To be Art, or not to be Art: that is the question.

AI = capital / KI = K [Kapital] / IA = capital

The processes of reproduction and accumulation of Artificial Intelligence. 

1. Artificial Intelligence is based on an enormous accumulation of data which is not universally accessible and operable due to the huge amount of resources it requires.
2. Artificial Intelligence has reached a point where it has come to replace processes that until now were carried out by humans (practical indiscernibility at a negligible cost; and even improvement...), and in that sense, it has reached a point of self-reproduction beyond the basic research phases, so its growth is expected to accelerate. 
3. Artificial Intelligence requires capital in order to be developed and to function properly (in its most advanced and sophisticated versions), and this creates barriers of entry. Therefore, the investment in AI allows the reproduction of capital.
4. Artificial Intelligence in itself is based on learning by itself (“machine learning”), so in that basic sense, it reproduces itself. 
5. But now Artificial Intelligence in its form of capital is also reproducing by itself, because it does not need an exogenous injection of funds for its development: its own development is self-financing. The mere pass of time now accumulates its own interest almost passively.
6. Artificial Intelligence is a new "form of capital accumulation" that reproduces capital through the replacement of skilled labour (apart from more manual labour, typical from the first waves of the industrial revolutions). In itself this does not have to be necessarily bad, because as a mere instrument, if the benefit it generates to society [in the form of saving time] were redistributed in a fair way, it could free the society and produce welfare in greater measure. But if this equitable distribution is not guaranteed, it could generate great injustices, social exclusion, and an unemployment pool: or as Karl Marx called it, a reserve army of labour.
7. Perhaps forms similar to the Conditional (or Universal) Basic Income and a greater distribution of income will have to be provided so that the societies of the future can achieve a greater social harmony and a connection between people and technology, seeking a balance with the potential of machines and the AI own emancipatory dynamics.
8. Although it still cannot be argued that Artificial Intelligence has achieved technical autonomy, which allows it to generate its own will without dependence on Humanity and its technologies, the reality is that it has reached such a level of development in different areas and sectors that its growth is unstoppable, because even if its control were legislated –in order to prevent its power from growing too much–, the scope that such a ban would have would be insufficient to stop its progress. It advances beyond the human will: of any concrete human or nations. In that, it is very similar to international and global capitalism, which works beyond individual sovereignties, countries and rulers.
9. The main agents that would concentrate the capital-AI would be the technological multinationals, which would have a clear advantage over the new competitors.
10. Does the fact that they grow capitalistically mean that AI is incompatible with socialism and communism? On the contrary. Just like the socialist economy, nothing suits it as well as a previous capitalist phase in order to accumulate capital, for a later socialization of the economy, after carrying out the capitalist contradictions to their limits. The fact that AI grows in a capitalist way, it does not mean that the AI could not serve to a communist economy, including the socialization of access to the benefits of the AI in a more equitable way. In other words, AI has a prominent role in cybercommunism. A cybercommunism that would use AI as an assistant for economic planning.

The Metaverse is a cultural product, so any paradise in a Metaverse would be cultural. But if a characteristic cultural feature of the Metaverse must be highlighted, that would be the virtual exhibition of a museum displaying NFTs. The grace of this physical work is that, from a “real” museum/gallery, it opens a physical window towards the Metaverse, from which it was originated, thus breaking down virtual barriers (making virturrealism “real”). 

The «Metaverse» (in capital letter) is the superposition of particular «metaverses» (in lower case), as a conformation of a sum of realities parallel to the pre-existing one: the one which exists outside the technologies that generate the metaverses. A metaverse (lowercase) is a particular world generated in a virtual reality. In a restricted sense, a particular metaverse should simulate a virtual world and be lived purely through an immersive experience from special glasses or lenses that simulate a three-dimensional and interactive representation, responding to the orientation of the glasses or lenses, and to other gestures. 

I call "paraverses" those mixed realities that are generated from reciprocal interrelations (between virtuality and physicality). This produces an hybrid relation between the physical universe and the metaverses interacting between them and with the «ex-metaversial» reality. 

Hybridart - polyexpressionism

In a broad sense, hybridart is the hybridization of materials, techniques, supports and all kinds of mixtures that occur within the arts. 

In a more restricted sense, hybridart encompasses both the fusion of different materials, techniques, supports, formats and mediums in the same unitary work (the integration of different artistic entities), as well as "polyexpressionism", which is the manifestation of the same work (entity) in different materials, techniques, formats and mediums, as if the different versions were mere variations of a single essence, whether they have an integrated and coherent meaning (or a justification of the multiplication) between the different expressions, or not. Monotheisms are polyexpressionisms because God can have multiple representations, and even more manifestations, but it preserves the same entity; while polytheisms are the integration of different divine entities, usually with different materials and mediums. 

A specific case of hybridart are as well the "phygital" works, which combine physicality and digitality, either through the pictorial representation of an original .jpeg, or the use of virtual certificates of authenticity from physical products also represented in digital image (jewelry, watches, sculptures...), or other types of experiences. 

The collection of conceptual NFTs deals with the essence of NFTs, the blockchain and cryptocurrencies, and the limits of the crypto substance looking for its contradictions.

This is the 'Erased de Kooning' erased by me, but inside the metaverse and on the blockchain, where none action nor transaction can be reversed. Now you can see with your own eyes (it's public on the blockchain) how the original NFT has been "deleted" because it has been sent to the dead wallet, which is 0x0000000000000000000000000000000000000dEaD.

NFTs can also be erased if the image file is deleted from the servers (either in a centralized portal or in the IPFS if there are no more copies). But deleting an image file is not the same as deleting it (virtually) as Robert Rauschenberg did (physically). Deleting the main properties of an NFT has more to do with disarticulating its operability than with preserving any type of image or other non-essential or constitutive "accidents".

This NFT is in a wallet that whoever capable of decrypting the 12-word key (in English) can access to it and possess effectively the NFT. This wallet is no longer private and is potentially in the public domain.

Ghost-Books

Series Ready-Mades Series and Tokenization

This is the tokenization of a useless contemporary pair of small shoes. They are an undesired pair of shoes because they are 6 sizes smaller than my feet.  

If you buy the NFT and find out the redemption code that is in the unlockable content of the NFT, I will send you the physical shoes. Please note that the NFT will need to be “destroyed” (sending it to vertedero.eth), as the possession of this NFT entitles you to receive the physical copy in perpetuity.

These are the cover of prohibited books, where the author published some books (and all them have been censored). The company (the one that commercializes this book as well) didn't specify where exactly there was a problem in one of my books, and then the company censored all the remaining books that had been published since 2019. I have a few copies (at least 1) of each of the prohibited books shown here, and each NFT represents the right to receive 1 of these copies. I will allocate the funds received from the sales to republish the banned books.

The NFT of the official Registry entry of the «Last Artwork in the History» (in Catalan) deals with a paradox: the fact that blockchains like Ethereum, allow to register Intellectual Property in a decentralized way, but the authority by the State will remain and they are compatible, complementary, and they can be used together and reinforce the IP rights. 

TAMAGMAT is a fake God. It can be presented in multiple other manifestations and expressions, like TAMGAMAT, MATAMGAT, GATMATAM... But is the same false God. It means: Tesla Apple Microsoft Amazon Google Meta Alibaba Tencent. Sometimes Tesla or Tencent are replaced by TSMC. Or another T is added: TAMAGMATT, GATMATTAM, MATAMGATT. But it does not change the substance.

All the books of 2022