by naazira 150 Replies latest jw friends
Nice comments, OC and Xan!
I don't remember if it was during or after my tenure as nitpicking proofreader when m'habitais la caja bon Dieu.
In the beloved Life Everlasting in Freedom of the Sons of God, I found some egregious, unartistic art-renderings: 1) both present and missing railing of the synagogue podium where a beardless Jesus read 'today this scripture has been fulfilled'; 2) a little girl petting a lion with outsized head and diminutive body.
No one ever listened to me . . .
CC
“OrphanCrow”: “If someone sees a cross in the image, or whatever else they see, they should state what it is they see, what it means to them and why.”
True. And that is precisely what Charles Taze Russell did in his unique interpretation of the measurements of the great pyramid of Giza. Now, that fellow sure had a vivid imagination! His musings regarding the number of steps in the inner chamber of that pyramid were, in his mind, conclusive “evidence” for his end-times eschatology. Now that was one fellow who could keep a psychiatrist busy with the old Rorschach inkblot test.
Please respond to what I actually wrote. - cofty
I did, what did you think I was responding to?
Sigh! OK I'll play but not all evening, I have a low boredom threshold.
I was responding to this, which you actually wrote, believe it or not,
There is no comparison between intellectually analysing the beliefs of a religion and reading meanings into the shapes and shadows in a drawing.
One involves comparing their doctrines with objective evidence about reality. Uncovering lies and deceptions and exposing fallacies. The other involves screwing up your eyes and using your imagination. (Emphasis mine)
I am sure professors of the academic discipline of art history would have found that interesting. Then you said,
If you are looking for a dolt who can't appreciate the nuances or art I am not that man.
No comment.
I am sure professors of the academic discipline of art history would have found that interesting. - Xant
Do you think professors of "the academic discipline of art history" give credits to students who see imaginary demons and ape heads in a crap illustration? Really?
There are plenty interesting things to be said about this manipulative drawing without indulging in paranoid pareidolia.
Do you think professors of "the academic discipline of art history" give credits to students who see imaginary demons and ape heads in a crap illustration? Really?What's that got to do with me. I haven't mentioned demons. I don't believe in demons. Please respond to what I actually wrote.
Xant - It has been a very simple conversation.
I agreed with much of the conversation about the picture in question but criticised those were suggesting that the artist included hidden images of demons, ape heads and crosses.
You said I was embarassing myself and that this was a legitimate academic discipline.
I further explained my point just in case your reading comprehension had failed you.
Now I don't know if you are confused or dissembling.
you called reading the meaning of any art work 'screwing up your eyes and using your imagination
I didn't. I was very clear that I was talking about seeing hidden demons, ape heads and crosses.
Reading the meaning of art is interesting. Again look at my avatar for an example that impressed me.
Not sure how I can be any clearer than when I said the following...
"I agree totally with discussing the feelings and emotions and even subliminal messages that are communicated by artwork.
I am objecting to the nonsense about hidden demons and crosses and ape heads."
It's very disappointing when people deliberately misunderstand things. It makes conversation very tedious.
Do you think professors of "the academic discipline of art history" give credits to students who see imaginary demons and ape heads in a crap illustration? Really?
Yes.
