SARAH N. DIPPITY.

In terms of this given portmanteau, the obvious question to be asked is the substance to the middle initial N. What could it possibly stand for?

Possibilities:

* Narcissa
* Noblesse
* Nancy
* Nellie
* NoNoNahNah

Semantically, there are many ways that one can be an artist. That is to say, artist in the vague descriptive sense of the word, is a term applied to anyone who practices any skill deftly. But to be an Artist- that is Artist in the archetypal sense, in terms of one's given personality-is to belong to an eschelon of being whose life and art CANNOT BE SEPARATED, no matter how hard he or she attempts to do so.

If we are speaking in terms of Platonic Archetypes, a philosophical system that we have founded large portions of our Western Civilization upon, the above statement is Absolutely, Irrevocably True, within the semantic confines of the concrete man-made definition of the abstract concept of TRUE.

This being the case, ladies and gentleman, to know that one is an Artist (and if you truly are one, then you really know. I would bet that 75% of the “tortured artist” contingent is people who subconsciously know that they are another Archetype posing as an Artist, and hence they have great inner conflict from living an Archetypal falsehood), is to know that one is unable to truly separate one’s life from one’s art.

H E N C E ,

I offer, my dear friends, a proposal to my fellow Artists (though I am generally a modest person, I will proudly claim my status as a member of this Archetype, through both the good and the bad). To avoid what the French call Ennui, what Baudelaire calls spleen, what my mother called being dramatic, and what I call simply That FEELING, you must not only accept the above statements as fact, but you must embrace and foster that characteristic within you!

T H I S, my friends, is the perfect time to invoke the old adage, “If God gives you lemons, make lemonade.”

If God gives you yourself, make your self work for you!

The most extreme of Artists are immediately repulsed/shocked/dismayed by this proposal. Voicing cries of:

* Narcissism!
* Self-absorption!
* Over-indulgence!
* Questionable morality!

So here are my rebuttals to each of these points:

As for N a r c i s s i s m, I am not advocating one becomes entirely obsessed with one’s self to the point that one starts losing interest/failing in other areas of life. Merely I am suggesting that you let your life and your art merge. I do not mean in the recent sordid reality-television sort of way because, I am quick to point out, that is not Art. To exemplify what I mean very briefly, reality-television falls into the arena of art, that is to say any man-made creation. But only Artists create Art, which is a specifically defined term for something created by an archetypal Artist.

S e l f - A b s o r p t i o n is, well, exactly what I’m advocating here. HOWEVER, the term is usually given a negative connotation, because it directly implies Selfishness, if one considers the “self” to be one’s own singular person. MY POINT is that to live one’s art as one’s life and vice versa is to be both entirely self-absorbed and entirely free of the singular Self. As anyone who lives their art will tell you, your Self begins to contain not only yourself, but also the people, places, and things you love, be they real or imaginary.

The question of o v e r - i n d u l g e n c e frankly makes me laugh. What is Art if not Indulgence? It is the most supremely superfluous thing on this planet! Whoever said Ars Gratia Artis for the first time (and I know it wasn’t MGM, I just can’t remember who it actually was), had it right for sure. Art for Art’s sake. We’ve all already agreed upon that long ago, right? So we admit that Art serves no Purpose, other than to just BE Art. That means to make, peddle, buy, or even enjoy Art is to be taking part in the greatest Indulgence known to mankind.

And as far as I can tell, God hasn’t struck us dead yet, so I think he’s pretty cool with it, OK?

And of course, the mention of that guy (I use guy just because it fits my scheme of what “God” looks like in my head, when clearly “God” is just a genderless force that governs the Universe. Or at least, it keeps me sane to think that) brings me to my FINAL POINT on m o r a l q u e s t i o n a b i l i t y. All I can say to morality is *PPPPPPFFFFfffffftttttttt* (I’m blowing a raspberry, I hope you can tell). Of course, as a generally well-meaning person, I am all for “doing the right thing” in a vague sense. But morality, to me, is just a picayune system of taking the abstract (and hence undefinable) concepts of GOOD and BAD and compartmentalizing them into bureaucratic little cubbies of meaningless chitter chatter and argumentation. I say, why even concern yourself with morals? They are only good for defining how everyone should act. And if you are an Artist, you know perfectly well that your entire modus operandi in life is to not give a flying shit about what everyone should do.

And so, Artists of the world, I urge you to take up my cause, to exalt the Self, to lift up the Artist as the pinnacle of Art. I have given you my maxims, I have given you my thoughts. Please take them into consideration.

And if you don’t like them, well, to quote one of the greatest Artist’s of modern times, Kurt Vonnegut, you can take a flying fuck at a rolling donut. Take a flying fuck at the mooooooooooooooooooooon!

Signed most sincerely,