Vents MagaZine Music and Entertainment Magazine
Related Articles
Salar Bil the writer of “Freedom icon” of Iran’s 2022 protest that Diane Pernet turned that article into ”Dialectics of Design”
Salar Bil is the alter-ego of Salar Bilehsavarchian under the pen of Salar Bil. first Iranian feminist fashion designer. He did revolution online with his interview on his page and 2022 protest of Iran began.
Born on May 1, 1993 Godfather of conceptual fashion, as mentioned one of Iran’s pioneers in success of market in BoF and hottest Designer of 2015 by JSTOR he is working for his art-journal that is about art history to find the intersection between art and fashion or how fashion can be produced as work of art and his journal that is about interdisciplinary of fashion, that is fashion and culture, fashion and philosophy.
Nobel Prize winner Patti Smith also praised him as a master of punk literature icon and someone that his work encompasses all roots and special T-shirt of “People Have the Power” and her book with friendship and admiration.
In his podcast dedicated to Gholam-Hossein Sa’edi he talked about tribal ages, ancient times and liberal art history of different marriages and and human subjects. He says that even though I am a pseudo-cholera, I am also a pseudo-artist as saedi said but I have the approval of Patti Smith. She is very thoughtful in history and from the book Year of the Monkey of Patti Smith, He explained art as existence on his instagram page. Christina Aguilera chose Tom of Finland as a phalliic icon for Salar Bil, quoted for Salar Bil as Tom of Finland’s ambassador: “From the green palette being a take on the legendary & controversial artist Tom of Finland’s artwork and imagery.” He is still promoting + LQBTQIA like he did for a decade… he found out his first decade of work through his alter-ego; the term alter ego may be applied to the role or persona taken on by an actor or by other types of performers even like fashion icons, he was the freedom icon before the protest 2022 of Iran and stood for Gholam-Hossein Sa’edi, Fereydoun Farrokhzad and Ahmad Shamlou his Iranian idols, critic Diane Pernet made him the Freedom Icon, and after death of Mahsa turned it into the article ”Dialectics of Design” As a child who was interested in fashion from a young age, he worked enthusiastically and was engaged in filmmaking in adolescence, His painting teacher made him interested and introduced to Abbas Kiarostami and avant-garde documentary filmmaking. He has been introduced as a threat to the Islamic Republic of Iran and has launched unisex fashion as the first person in Iran with supporting the LGBTQIA community and the blackness of the hijab on Iran TV. as Sophie Fontanel, Tim Blanks and Diane Pernet mentioned Salar is the forerunner of concpetual fashion based in Tehran, because of Erykah Badu’s care for mothership and planet he did not accept Badu’s offer for Marni & Off-White™ and Kim Gordon for his No Wave avant-garde genre he did reject all commercials and Kim made his pillar of Salar Bil’s foundation, He did interact with each of these artists in their own style. He explained Gholam-Hossein Saedi spoke to him frankly at a young age and told him that you will never become an artist, you are obliged to carry all the human and national problems on your shoulders, and from the view I had of Saedi, a fashion actor is a clown, he does not say that artist is a teacher of moral, but he says that he is telling the truth. He called Googoosh the most popular figure of Iran a clown at that time but I don’t see it as hostility, I think that the movements help each other to move forward and taught me all the schools and the West from ancient times to the seventies and after globalization and diasporains, you should know all! I defended Saedi with elites who themselves, like Christina Aguilera, call herself a clown and like Saedi, she hates festivals and charts, or Patti Smith says, “Aren’t we stupid”? On the other hand Badu, Kim Gordon, I know many artists from history, these elites are very intelligent and knowledgeable in their own special style and are not pretentious in any way, so it was a good group to choose from the West to defend Western schools in the global world today from greats of fashion history of Western world. The world art of 2023 is not the art of previous generations that some of us are stuck in, he said the pseudo-artist is an uncultured being, but pretending to the cultured, the pseudo-artist is suffering from complete mental laziness, and at the level of life, he has such a mental laziness that he has not fully studied the works of 20 artists in order to experience it. The pseudo-artist is also a good hunter, for his survival and the credibility of his presence, he tries to deceive everyone that I am a good person and trust me, artists and writers, as is clear from their writings, only talk about themselves and their purity and innocence. Me, me, me, believe me, I am a good charlatan, who justifies himself and hides himself in another shadow and does not face the reality, the diasporians who sold their country and set bait in the west and live and serve other corrupt systems, He says that the subject is not relevant to them, because they have nothing to say. They fill the empty spaces with extravagance, in this way they resort to formalism, an artist creates an important work from nothing, but a pseudo-artist destroys everything completely. Not only in his work, but also by his behavior and statements, the work of his colleagues, and even by misrepresenting the works of original and real artists. And this is where you can measure their hatred and malice towards real art, they can’t stand real art. Sa’edi says that the pseudo-artist is only involved in festivals, to receive awards from this country and that country, and to participate in gatherings so that he does not fall behind, and uses others to survive, he says that the reason for the growth of this phenomenon is 100% related to social status It is as if a polluted environment can cause the spread of any kind of disease, the existing social situation has created the necessary conditions for the emergence of these pseudo-artists, the pseudo-artist is not a phenomenon of the last one or two years. It has become endemic like a pseudo-plague for years. The passage of time has made it possible for it to open a wider space for itself and to have various and impressive demonstrations and penetrate into all artistic and cultural branches and rot and suffocate every healthy bud and destroy the original art, My goal as a conceptual fashion designer was to properly understand the West and properly understand my country so that I could contribute to the social situation, Otherwise, I do not believe that I am an artist.
He made lots of dialectic collections, He wrote about the anthropocene age for Fashion Revolution which is a not-for-profit global movement represented by The Fashion Revolution Foundation and Fashion Revolution CIC with teams in over 100 countries around the world in a book published in Iran, Back in 2015 he made a line for The World Food Programme, he went from sustainable development from food like WFP to articles about sustainable fashion, he pictured a fast conceptual dialectic collections that affects Iranian fashion a-lot : androgynous GalmRock of Bandar abbas with limbo drag queens stage of Don Juan fight against tradition fashion campy global and futuristic burqas but the inspiration is a wasted cultured woman, in front Of Anti-Capitalism Bionic that is a cybernetic concept about pop art of 2010’s and internet age and simulation, 7zār Metaphysical, All kind of Muslims in front of Curtain Of 7zār that was the stage of ladies with the metaphysical concept, “Worse than cholera is Abaya” Shamlou and his fights against censorship, Bil throw out his abaya in streets in Dirrty as a good muslim for fight against tradition with reasons not a muslim who is poisoning schoolgirls but fight for them and LGBTQ, false dilemma that is accepting everyone’s truth and accepting grey colors in life and not thinking black and white ,In front of Bipolar that was about losing the desire to keep on going It was about ancient psychology and dialectics, Ecofeminist analysis explores the connections between women and nature in culture, economy, religion, politics, literature and iconography, and addresses the parallels between the oppression of nature and the oppression of women, Branch of feminism that examines the connections between women and nature and in front of it sheathing the sword of consumerism and after that he visioned individualism and collectivism in front of poetry of liberty about an anti-Iranian occupying regime this is his first body of work as a u***** , he’s doing his part for academic articles with important icons of the world after academic degrees for fashion and art, he wanna educate himself with the advices from icons of the world and interact with them til he can make something worthy for the culture. From filmmaking then he did not continue studying cinema and has a BA in Textiles and MA in Arts & Culture research, then Diane pernet as a film and fashion expert made his first decade stable.
Salar Bil explained about censorship: “The issue of censorship, taken strictly, seems to be of little interest if applied to the works of Spinoza in Germany. The reason is that the first book of Spinoza that was published in Germany, i.e. the German translation of the Ethics, came out as late as 1744. There was thus no opportunity for censorship of Spinoza’s works in Germany during the first ca. 75 years after the publication of the Tractatus theologico-politicus (hereafter TTP.)
If taken in a larger sense, i.e. comprising the reactions of the political authorities towards those books that were thought likely to spread the seeds of Spinozism in Germany, there is much more to say. One can, further, extend that study to the pre-censorship area, i.e. to the learned discourse on how to appropriately react to the flux of dangerous ideas (mainly those of Spinoza) coming into Germany from outside, especially from suspicious ‘Belgium’, i.e. the Netherlands.
This is a kind of public discourse on what the state should do—and it opens up a still larger field of study. I will therefore deal with three topics:
a) The debate in theology and philosophy on how to appropriately react to dangerous ideas from abroad, especially those of Spinoza, starting immediately after the publication of the TTP in 1670.
b) The State reactions to the publication of those books which were held to contain Spinozism or at least Spinozistic ideas. I will consider as examples the two authors who, for a long time in the German history of ideas, were held to be the first ‘German Spinozists’, i.e. Friedrich Wilhelm Stosch and Theodor Ludwig Lau.
c) The circumstances and the publishing strategy of the first book of Spinoza published in Germany, the German translation of the Ethics by Johann Lorenz Schmidt in 1744. This will be dealt with in the last section.
In a final remark, I will try to explain why censorship against Spinoza and Spinozism finally failed, and remind the reader of the crucial role of Spinoza, both the person and his philosophy, for the further development of philosophy in Germany.
The Historia vitae et obitus Ludovici Fabricii of 1698 was written by Johann Heinrich Heidegger, who studied at Heidelberg at the same time as Johann Ludwig Fabricius and later became a professor at Zurich. Heidegger reported how Fabricius who, in his letter to Spinoza, offered him the chair of philosophy at Heidelberg in February 1673, reacted to the TTP when he first read it.
The account proceeds by means of verbal quotes from Fabricius: “All of this culminates in a certain way in the death of the church as well, and especially, of the state, which cannot be dangerously threatened as long as religion is firmly anchored.”
Against the importation of such dangerous writings into Germany he maintains that it is “more advisable to suppress them than to refute them,” because the force of a refutation is rarely acknowledged. But, Heidegger comments, this holds indeed only “as long as these writings can remain hidden when they are suppressed and damned to darkness without any danger of rebellion.”
But “as soon as they run through many hands and begin to corrupt the discernment of the simple minds,” it is appropriate “to subdue them with the truncheon of right reason.” And this “running through many hands” had apparently already begun in Germany.11
If, on the one hand, Spinoza’s philosophy is judged to be the sum and summit of all heresies of all centuries (that is what the theologian Budde tried to show in his De Spinozismo ante Spinozam of 1701), undermining Church and State at the same time; and if, on the other hand, his pious language, especially in the TTP, is apt to mislead people who do not grasp the impact of its speculative foundations, then there is no alternative to refuting him.
As the TTP was already well known in Germany in 1671, the Dean of the philosophical faculty at Altdorf, Johann Conrad Dürr, saw “a new Hannibal threaten[ing] our Gates”. According to the Leipzig professor of philosophy, Jakob Thomasius, it is the duty “especially of those to whom the supervision of the academic youth is entrusted” to publicly reject that “pestiferous” booklet on the freedom to philosophize.
Thomasius speaks of an “academic youth that often sips the poison with eager desire”. In 1676, Gottlieb Spitzel is anxious that “that [. . .] impiety which is hostile to God and revealed truth tries to become rooted not only abroad but in our German soil” thus making “Italy, France and Belgium dwell very soon in our common fatherland.”That is why “all scholars have to care most diligently not to be corrupted themselves by criminal preceptors of this kind and by their books or by dissertations full of such great impiety, and [thereby] finally succumb to the danger of disbelief.”
To sum up: The TTP was known at the University of Altdorf as early as June 1670. Now, since (1) Spinoza’s ideas destroy the very foundation of any order in the Church as well as in the State; (2) it is clear that suppressing them would be the best response.
This is, however, not possible since (3) the diffusion of those ideas is not restricted to the notoriously impious countries (Italy, France, Belgium), but they have invaded the German fatherland as well, and (4) are dangerous (a) not only for simple minds, but (b) for the academic youth and (c) for the scholars themselves. That is why (5) the TTP should be publicly refuted.
Concerning the strategy of combat for the ‘hereditary Germanic freedom’ and against ‘licentiousness (licentia)’, Dürr says that one has to let ‘the man’ be heard “in order to give him no reason for complaint of having been suppressed, unheard and unquoted.” Then he quotes Spinoza: “According to the right of nature, nobody is held to live according to another man’s mind, but everybody is the tutor of his own liberty” (TTP, preface).
What follows makes it clear that Dürr is convinced (to say it with Spinoza’s words) “that to state his view is sufficient to refute it”. There is such a gap and absolute contrast between Spinoza’s doctrine and Christian and rational common sense that as soon as Spinoza’s real doctrine is unmasked, one cannot but shrink from it!
But due to the fact that even scholars may be impressed by Spinoza’s way of arguing, there were a great number of refutations, that of Johannes Musaeus of 1672 being the outstanding and much praised example.
Musaeus’ work first recapitulates, with greater or lesser fairness, Spinoza’s doctrines and arguments before refuting them. However, these critics find themselves in a serious dilemma, for careful recapitulation of Spinoza’s reasoning, often accompanied by long quotations from the TTP, makes his thought accessible to a greater public which had no access to the original, thereby contributing to the spreading of his original opinions.
That is why, later on, this form of serious academic discourse becomes subject to attack itself. Stosch’s father was one of the leading preachers in Berlin, and Stosch was twice married to women descended from influential and highly regarded families in Brandenburg.
He studied philosophy, theology and medicine at Frankfurt an der Oder and made his academic tour through Italy, France and the Netherlands. In 1676, he became ‘Geheimer Staatssekretär’ (Secret Secretary of State) at the court of Friedrich Wilhelm.
