Resonance
what appears in Delauney's work is the way he creates figures,
figures formed by light, figures of light.
He painted figures of light.
What matters is to eliminate the object, to replace rigid figures,
geometric figures, with figures of pure light.
For philosophy,
for painting, for everything...
for art,
aswell as for pop music
or anything else....
or sport - which we will see when we discuss sport -
it is all the same : is there anything new going on?
If we interpet this in terms of fashion, no !
Because it is quite the opposite, what's new is not something that is fashionable,
maybe one day it will be fashionable, but not for the moment,
because we aren't expecting it.
By definition it is unexpected.
It is something that surprises people...leaving them speechless. 
It is one and the same thing, bring something new and look for something.
A language is in fact...
...a system... 
physicists would say : a system that is  by nature out of balance.
This is a system in perpetual disequilibrium. 
This kind of unstable system in which we try to keep one's balance is,
it seems to me, the case of every form of style.
I know that I cannot achieve
the desired conceptual flow
if it isn't conveyed by style.
a Japanese line, it is truly a Japanese drawing, a line,
a pure Japanese line.
The proof of a style is its variability,
and it usually becomes increasingly sober,
but becoming more sober does not mean that it is any less complex.
Sport is very interesting because that is the question of body's attitudes,
there is a variation in the body's attitudes,
occurring in spaces, for long spa...for spaces of varying length.
But sport would be a domain of varying  attitudes' that are quite fundamental.
But style is sound, not visual, 
and at this level, only sound is interesting.
The style is pure aural, purely acoustic.
A great stylist does not employ a conservative syntax, 
he is a syntax creator.
Masterpieces are always written in a kind of foreign language.
A stylist is someone who creates in his own language a foreign language.
We deform syntax, subjecting it to necessary contortions.
And at the same time, the second point is this :
we push the entire language to a kind of limit...
the border…to the edge that separates it from music,
and thus produce a kind of music.
Well, if one succeeds in these two things
and if there’s a need to do it, then it's a style !
As Nietzsche said : a philosophy which does not harm idiocy,
hurts idiocy, resists the idiotic.
But if there were no philosophy
- people act as if philosophy is only useful as after dinner conversation -
but if there were no philosophy, one would not question the degree of idiocy.
Philosophy prevents the idiotic from being as great as it might become
if there weren't any philosophy...that's the beauty of philosophy.
One does not suspect what it would be like.
So when one says : it is a resistance, to create is to resist,
it is effectively so.
The world would not be what it is without art.
Because people would do anything,
it's not that they read philosophy,
but it is it's very existence which prevents people from
being completely stupid and ignorant.
